Learning through Collaborative Research: The Six Nation Education Research Project

Learning through Collaborative Research REFERENCE BOOKS IN INTERNATIONAL EDUCATION Edward R.Beauchamp, Series Editor ...

Author: Noel F. McGinn

58 downloads 1173 Views 2MB Size Report

This content was uploaded by our users and we assume good faith they have the permission to share this book. If you own the copyright to this book and it is wrongfully on our website, we offer a simple DMCA procedure to remove your content from our site. Start by pressing the button below!
Report copyright / DMCA form

DOWNLOAD PDF

Learning through Collaborative Research

REFERENCE BOOKS IN INTERNATIONAL EDUCATION Edward R.Beauchamp, Series Editor EDUCATION, CULTURES, AND ECONOMICS Dilemmas for Development edited by Fiona E.Leach and Angela W.Little SCHOOLING IN SUB-SAHARAN AFRICA Contemporary Issues and Future Concerns edited by Cynthia Szymanski Sunal GENDER ISSUES IN INTERNATIONAL EDUCATION Beyond Policy and Practice edited by Maggie Wilson and Sheena Erskine CHINA’S NATIONAL MINORITY EDUCATION Culture, Schooling, and Development edited by Gerard A.Postiglione THIRD WORLD EDUCATION Quality and Equality edited by Anthony R.Welch THE ETHNOGRAPHIC EYE Interpretive Studies of Education in China edited by Judith Liu, Heidi Ross, and Donald P.Kelly TEACHER EDUCATION IN THE ASIA-PACIFIC REGION A Comparative Study edited by Paul Morris and John Williamson DISTANT ALLIANCES Promoting Education for Girls and Women in Latin America edited by Regina Cortina and Nelly P.Stromquist INTENSE YEARS How Japanese Adolescents Balance School, Family, and Friends by Gerald K.LeTendre and Rebecca Erwin Fukuzawa JAPANESE MODEL OF SCHOOLING Comparisons with the U.S. by Ryoko Tsuneyoshi

COMPETITOR OR ALLY? Japan’s Role in American Educational Debates edited by Gerald K.LeTendre POLITICS OF EDUCATIONAL INNOVATIONS IN DEVELOPING COUNTRIES An Analysis of Knowledge and Power edited by Nelly P.Stromquist and Michael L.Basile EDUCATIONAL RESTRUCTURING IN THE CONTEXT OF GLOBALIZATION AND NATIONAL POLICY edited by Holger Daun TEACHING IN JAPAN A Cultural Perspective by Nobuo K.Shimahara CIVIC EDUCATION IN THE ASIA-PACIFIC REGION Case Studies across Six Societies edited by John J.Cogan, Paul Morris, and Murray Print HEGEMONIES COMPARED State Formation and Chinese School Politics in Postwar Singapore and Hong Kong by Ting-Hong Wong PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT OF SCIENCE TEACHERS Local Insights with Lessons for the Global Community edited by Pamela Fraser-Abder CONSTRUCTING EDUCATION FOR DEVELOPMENT International Organizations and Education for All by Colette Chabbott SCHOOL LEADERSHIP AND ADMINISTRATION Adopting a Cultural Perspective edited by Allan Walker and Clive Dimmock DEVELOPMENT EDUCATION IN JAPAN A Comparative Analysis of the Contexts for its Emergence, and Its Introduction into the Japanese School System by Yuri Ishii DAUGHTERS OF THE THARU Gender, Ethnicity, Religion, and the Education of Nepali Girls by Mary Ann Maslak

CRISIS AND HOPE The Educational Hopscotch of Latin America edited by Stephen J.Ball, Gustavo E.Fischman, and Silvina Gvirtz INSIDE JAPANESE CLASSROOMS The Heart of Education by Nancy E.Sato RE-IMAGINING COMPARATIVE EDUCATION Postfoundational Ideas and Applications for Critical Times edited by Peter Ninnes and Sonia Mehta

Learning through Collaborative Research The Six Nation Education Research Project

Edited by Noel F.McGinn

RoutledgeFalmer NEW YORK AND LONDON

Published in 2004 by RoutledgeFalmer 270 Madison Avenue New York, NY 10016 http://www.routledgefalmer.com/ Published in Great Britain by RoutledgeFalmer 2 Park Square Milton Park, Abingdon, Oxon OX14 4RN U.K. RoutledgeFalmer is an imprint of the Taylor and Francis Group. This edition published in the Taylor & Francis e-Library, 2005. “To purchase your own copy of this or any of Taylor & Francis or Routledge’s collection of thousands of eBooks please go to http://www.ebookstore.tandf.co.uk/. Copyright © 2004 RoutledgeFalmer All rights reserved. No part of this book may be printed or utilized in any form or by any electronic, mechanical or other means, now know or hereafter invented, including photocopying and recording, or any other information storage or retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher. Library of Congress Cataloging-In-Publication Data Learning through collaborative research: The Six Nation Education Research Project/ edited by Noel F.McGinn. p. cm.—(Reference books in international education) Includes bibliographical references and index. ISBN 0-415-94933-5 (hardback: alk. paper) 1. Education and state—Crosscultural studies. 2. Education—Research—Cross-cultural studies. 3. Politics and education— Cross-cultural studies. I. McGinn, Noel F., 1934– II. Series. LC71.L34 2004 370′ .72–dc22 2004000262 ISBN 0-203-32753-5 Master e-book ISBN

ISBN 0-415-94933-5 (Print Edition)

Contents Foreword Susan Fuhrman, Dean, Graduate School of Education, the University of Pennsylvania Glossary of Abbreviations

1 International Cooperation in Comparative Education Research Noel F.McGinn 2 Predictors of National Differences in Mathematics and Science Achievement of Eighth-Grade Students: Data from TIMSS Erling E.Boe, Henry May, Gema Barkanic, and Robert F.Boruch 3 Pedagogical Practices in English Language Education Rita Skuja-Steele and Rita Silver 4 Vocational Training and Education Christoph Metzger, Hidenori Fujita, Song-Seng Law, Robert Zemsky, JeanEtienne Berset, and Marcus Iannozzi 5 Higher Education Reforms: Determinants and Directions Akira Arimoto 6 Education Evaluation and Indicators in the People’s Republic of China, Singapore, and the United States Zhang Li 7 The Six Nation Project as an Experience in Collaborative Research Noel F.McGinn

viii

xi

1 19

52 86

133 157

178

Contributors

209

Topics Index

212

Persons, Places, Institutions

217

Foreword This volume represents the culmination of the Six Nation Education Research Project, a groundbreaking seven-year effort to invigorate education research by applying a crossnational, cross-disciplinary approach to the relationship between education and economic growth. The Six Nation Project brought together education researchers and high-level education policymakers from the People’s Republic of China, Germany, Japan, Singapore, Switzerland, and the United States. Mutually concerned about how best to organize their education systems to meet the increasingly diverse and pressing needs of the twenty-first century, they agreed to share ideas and join in cooperative research. The results of this fruitful and rewarding collaboration are presented here. The Six Nation Project originated with a five-day conference entitled “Global Education for the 21st Century,” which the University of Pennsylvania’s Graduate School of Education hosted in Philadelphia in December 1993. The goal of that conference was to initiate an international dialogue among researchers and policymakers concerning mutual challenges in education reform, and particularly to facilitate communication between Eastern and Western nations. At that conference and at a subsequent conference in 1995, delegates from the six nations formed a steering committee, which I have been pleased to chair. Under the guidance of the Steering Committee, which held its first meeting in Singapore in February 1996, teams were established to conduct research projects headed by each participating nation, and research agendas were developed. The Higher Education project, led by Japan, looked at many key aspects of contemporary higher education management and leadership. The Vocational and Technical Education project, under the leadership of the Swiss team, evaluated the role of and trends in vocational education. The U.S.-led Math and Science project addressed factors and policies related to student achievement in mathematics and science, an area of universal concern. Under the direction of the Singaporean representatives, the Language and Literacy project explored English language instruction. Finally, the Evaluation and Indicators study, led by People’s Republic of China, examined the differences between and use of indictors in evaluating and reforming educational systems. Throughout the next five years, project participants engaged in rigorous research and fertile cross-national communication. The research teams shared encouraging progress at the second meeting of the Steering Committee in Zurich, Switzerland, in September 1997 and at the third committee meeting in Shanghai, the People’s Republic of China, in June 1999. At the latter meeting, we were honored to welcome Dr. Noel McGinn, Emeritus Professor of Education from the Harvard Graduate School of Education, as senior advisor to the project. Dr. McGinn’s invaluable insights and assistance are reflected in the introductory and concluding chapters of this volume. After seven years of hard work, mutual commitment, and constant exchange, participants gathered again at the University of Pennsylvania in October 2001 for the conclusion of the Six Nation Project. At this final conference, the participants not only

presented their findings before numerous observers and esteemed guests, but they also shared their observations regarding their experiences within the project. Since its inception, the Six Nation Project sought to promote educational excellence by taking a cross-national approach that would permit the participants to share their respective nations’ successes and challenges, in the hope that this sharing would bring mutual advantage and spur greater creativity. As demonstrated in the following chapters, these expectations were met and exceeded. Beyond the valuable research findings presented here, the project’s many unprecedented characteristics produced a number of additional benefits, expected and unexpected. The Six Nation Project can be distinguished from other cross-national research endeavors in terms of both composition and methodology. With respect to composition, the project took the critical step of actively including high-ranking education policymakers alongside researchers. From the beginning, the Six Nation Project involved the participation of top members of the U.S. Department of Education, including then-Secretary of Education Richard Riley, who opened the 1995 conference, and his successor, Secretary of Education Roderick Paige, who spoke at the 2001 final conference. This cross-disciplinary cooperation not only greatly enriched the perspective of the academics and contributed enormously to the research, but it also significantly increased the likelihood that the findings and the policy recommendations extrapolated therefrom would see direct implementation. Indeed, some of the project’s findings have already informed policy changes, as the findings of the Evaluation and Indicators study have assisted the People’s Republic of China in its current effort to redesign its national system of indicators and map new education strategies based on those indicators. Furthermore, the involvement of policymakers was of great assistance in securing financial support for the Six Nation Project, as much of the funding for the project was provided directly by the governments of the participating nations. Similarly, the demands of the various national projects required the formation of new and innovative methodologies in order to accommodate cultural and contextual differences among the participants and their respective nations in addressing various topics of mutual interest. For example, the various contextual and cultural differences demanded the creation of new communication strategies for accommodating crosscultural exchange, and the multinational approach of the project necessitated the development of broader, more informed integrative approaches to education policy. The lessons learned from the process of creating and applying these unique methodologies, and their relevance to future cross-national research efforts, are discussed in the various chapters here. An additional but no less important advantage of the Six Nation Project was the establishment of strong and lasting professional and personal relationships among the project participants. These relationships not only strengthened the project itself, but they also produced the unexpected benefit of a number of collateral efforts. In 1999, the project spawned an impressive Ten Nation Higher Education Presidents’ Summit in Shanghai, the successor to an earlier conference hosted in Hiroshima in 1997 by the leaders of the Higher Education project. Attended by more than 190 participants, the summit brought together university presidents, government officials, researchers, and

business leaders from around the world to discuss higher education reform and the economic, technological, social, and political forces that shape it. The University of Pennsylvania has established the Benjamin Franklin International Science Teachers Project. This has brought science teachers from Singapore, Thailand, Hong Kong, and Shanghai to the United States to learn about hands-on and experimental approaches to the teaching of science; in addition, it has built a community, linked through technology, for sharing teaching experiences and research. Thanks to the continued enthusiasm of the project’s participants and the enduring relationships formed since 1993, more such collaborations are expected. Indeed, although the Six Nation Project has drawn to a close, plans are currently under way to continue and expand the work of the project by establishing an Eight Nation Project. This will introduce participants from Thailand and South Korea to the existing membership and will develop three new research projects, to be completed over a period of three years. With a firm foundation in the lessons learned and networks created through the Six Nation Project, we expect the Eight Nation Project to be even more productive and successful than its predecessor. Those of us who participated in the Six Nation Education Research Project are convinced of the value of collaborative, multinational, interdisciplinary approaches to education research, and we are gratified to see the work continue. It is our hope that the results and insights presented here will inform many more such efforts. The success of the Six Nation Project is due entirely to the diligence and commitment of the many participants. In particular, I would like to thank John Yip and the directors of the national projects. These are Professor Akira Arimoto of Hiroshima University, director of the Higher Education project; Professor Zhang Li of the Chinese Ministry of Education, director of the Education Evaluation and Indicators project; Dean Saravanan Gopinathan of the National Institute of Education, Singapore, director of the Language Education project; Professor Christoph Metzger of the University of St. Gallen, Switzerland, director of the Vocational and Technical Education project; and Professor Ed Boe of the University of Pennsylvania Graduate School of Education, director of the Math and Science Education Project. In addition, special thanks must be given to Cheng Yan Davis, our vice dean and executive director of International Programs and Development at the University of Pennsylvania Graduate School of Education, for her years of dedication to the Six Nation Project and her remarkable ability to facilitate multinational work. Finally, we must acknowledge Morgan Stanley, IBM, CIGNA, UPS, and the ministries of education of the participating countries for their generous financial support of the Six Nation Project. Susan Fuhrman, Dean Graduate School of Education The University of Pennsylvania

Glossary of Abbreviations APEC

Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation

BEDS

Basic Education Data System (United States)

CAP

California Assessment of Progress

CD-ROM

Compact Disk read-only memory

CERNET

China Education and Research Net

COE

Council on Education

DP

Department of Planning (China)

EEMI

Education Evaluation and Monitoring Indicators

EFL

English as a foreign language

ELA

English learning activity

ELT

English language teaching

EMIC

Educational Management Information Center

EMIS

Education Management Information System

ESI

Education Statistical Indicators

ESL

English as a second language

ETS

Educational Testing Service (United States)

GCE

General Certificate of Education

GDP

Gross Domestic Product

GNP

Gross National Product

GRE

Graduate Record Examination

HLM

Hierarchical Linear Modeling

IEA

International Association for the Evaluation of Educational Achievement

IT

Information Technology

ITE

Institute of Technical Education

JC

Junior Colleges

MEXT

Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology (Japan)

MOE

Ministry of Education

NAEP

National Assessment of Educational Progress (United States)

NAS

National Assessment System

NCEDR

National Center for Education Development Research

(China) NCES

National Center for Education Statistics

NEI

National Education Indicators; National Education Information

NGO

Nongovernmental Organization

NIER

National Institute of Education Research (China)

OECD

Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development

OLS

Ordinary Least Squares

PPELE

Pedagogical Practices in English Language Education

PRC

People’s Republic of China

PRISM

Performance Indicators for School Management

PSLE

Primary School Leaving Examination

R&D

Research and Development

RIHE

Research Institute for Higher Education (Hiroshima University)

SASS

Schools and Staffing Survey

SAT

Scholastic Aptitude Test

SNERP

Six Nation Education Research Project

SSB

State Statistics Bureau (China)

TIMSS

Third International Mathematics and Science Study

TL

Teacher Log

TOEFL

Test of English as a Foreign Language

UAS

University of Applied Sciences

UI

University Identity

UNDP

United Nations Development Programme

UNESCO

United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization

UNICEF

United Nations Children’s Fund

USDE

United States Department of Education

VO-tech

Vocational/technical

VTE

Vocational Training and Education

Chapter 1 International Cooperation in Comparative Education Research NOEL F.MCGINN We measure learning, whether in a large corporation or in the classroom, by comparing current performance with that of an earlier stage. Changes in performance, attributable to some difference in the operation of the company or the understanding of the student, are evidence of some greater knowledge or ability. Comparison is essential to these advances, just as it has been in the development of modern science and in the development of modern education systems. Comparison is the basis for two kinds of learning: so-called imitative learning, in which lessons are taken from others’ successes and failures, and experiential learning, or learning by doing. In the first approach, a learner copies or models the symbols and behaviors of someone else. For example, education systems sometimes apply structures, contents, and practices of other systems that are considered more successful. The other system’s attributes are labeled “best practices” or “what works” and are used as a manual for improvement. Although one system learns, no new knowledge is created. In the second approach, an unfavorable comparison motivates a less successful system to experiment without copying. Innovations that result in success are adopted as standard practice, and the system arrives at a new understanding of how best to operate in its own context. The two systems continue to have dissimilar (and contextually relevant) practices, but now both are successful. The total amount of knowledge is increased and, furthermore, reflection on the contrasts can result in construction of higher-order explanations for the disparate phenomena. Knowledge gained through experience is superior, not only for its fit to context but also because it facilitates further innovation (March 1999). The production of new knowledge about how to organize and operate education systems can be greater, therefore, if the purpose of comparison is to maintain or enhance differences, rather than to eliminate them. Belief in this dialectical approach to learning is a major reason for concern about the apparent trend toward global standardization and uniformity in education. Over the past 100 years, countries have increasingly adopted similar goals, curriculum content, and organizational structures for their systems (Benavot and Kamens 1989; Meyer, Kamens, and Benavot 1992; Meyer, Ramirez, and Soysal 1992; Ramirez and Boli 1987). If these changes are the result of imitative learning, rather than self-referenced invention, we may have lost a unique opportunity to expand our understanding of education. Although the reality of standardization across national boundaries should not be ignored, considerable diversity still exists across national education systems. Perhaps we should not yet conclude that there is one best way to educate. For example, many

Learning through collaborative research

2

countries continue to zealously guard their control over curriculum content and instructional practices. Awareness of the importance of national uniqueness is seen, too, in how countries offer to help others. Some countries are so protective of others’ sovereignty that they have limited their cooperation to nonsensitive areas such as school construction (King 1997). Many argue that education should, and does, respond to the unique culture, economy, and polity of each culture and country (Cummings 1999). Significantly, those countries arguing for maintenance of cultural uniqueness also perform very well in international comparisons. The defense of national and cultural uniqueness, however, raises several questions. By definition, can truly unique education systems be compared? If education were everywhere culturally unique, could countries work together to improve education? Under what circumstances can cooperation result in benefits for each of the partners, without loss of cultural uniqueness? Are there benefits to cooperation over and above changes in education systems? Finally, in an era of economic globalization, aren’t all countries subject to the same economic laws that dictate how best to educate? This book reflects on these questions, using as data for analysis the experiences of a unique, comparative international education research project. The focus is the Six Nation Education Research Project (SNERP), a seven-year effort involving six countries selected to represent the East and West (China, Germany, Japan, Singapore, Switzerland, and the United States), in comparative research on education. SNERP began with a week-long organizational meeting in early December 1993. The participants’ ambition was to improve relationships among industrialized countries through cooperation in comparative research on education and economic development. Along the way, the project developed organizational features that distinguished it from most other cross-national research. The objective of this book is to examine the effects of these features in both national and cross-national processes and in outcomes of SNERP. How This Book Is Organized This chapter has two major sections. The first introduces the concept of cooperation in education between countries. Two forms are identified: one-directional assistance of one country by another, and collaboration and exchange between countries. The studies carried out during the Six Nation Project were all of the second form, but they varied in terms of the extent of collaboration achieved. The second section of this chapter summarizes the results of those studies. Chapters 2 through 6 detail the collaborative process followed in each study, as well as methods for data collection and analysis. Specific attention is given to cooperation between researchers and policymakers and to the policy implications of the study’s findings. Chapter 7 opens with a conceptual analysis of collaboration in research. Collaborative research is relatively uncommon: this section offers by way of explanation a description of major obstacles to collaboration. As will be seen, some of the activities carried out as part of SNERP were collaborative while others were not. A final section of Chapter 7 attempts to answer several questions: 1. To what extent was SNERP a uniquely collaborative project? 2. How did the research designs differ from those of more conventional comparative studies?

International cooperation in comparative education research

3

3. Did collaboration generate unique findings and outcomes? 4. Did collaboration affect relationships across countries? 5. Should countries develop culturally unique solutions to their national education problems, or should they adopt universal “best practices”?

Cooperation in Comparative International Research Countries, institutions, and individuals cooperate for a variety of purposes, generally organized under rubrics of altruism and self-interest. In general, cooperative projects pursue one or more of three objectives. Remedial projects attempt to fix something that is not working well for one or both of the partners. These projects typically are limited in time and have the least impact on the values of the partners. Most training and capacitybuilding projects are of this type. Product projects involve two or more parties in efforts to produce something. This may be infrastructure, curriculum, textbooks, or research reports. Each party provides some of the resources required, and each may take on special functions. The product may benefit the participants or their clients but it does not result in fundamental change. If this kind of project continues, however, it may eventually become an organizational project with a mission, objectives, and resources that transcend the original product. Forms of Cooperation Cooperation can take three forms: aid or assistance, exchange, and collaboration. When cooperation implies an unequal relationship, it is called aid or assistance. Cooperation in the form of assistance, as gifts or lending, often is seen as a moral obligation, an expression of solidarity, a fulfillment of our humanity (Riddell 1987). Foreign aid, on the other hand, also is pursued to expand markets, extend political hegemony, and protect national security (Smith 1990). In either case, one party decides what is good for the other. Exchange involves trading or borrowing of resources, information, or ideas with no assumption of inferiority on the part of the receiver. This form of cooperation is sometimes called “horizontal,” as it is distinct from one-direction-of-influence or “vertical” relationships associated with bilateral and multilateral aid projects (Balan 1993; Farrell 1994). In horizontal projects, cooperation is not a zero-sum game: both parties can experience losses or gains. The total amount of knowledge after scientific exchanges, for example, can be greater than the sum of knowledge actually exchanged (Lipsett, Holbrook, and Lipsey 1995). Horizontal cooperation, in which partners work together toward a common objective, is called collaboration. Distinct from exchange, collaborative research involves joint efforts in research design, data collection, analysis, and interpretation. Under certain conditions collaboration is the most powerful form of cooperation for producing new knowledge.


4

International Experiences in Cooperation in Education The eighteenth and nineteenth centuries were characterized by relationships involving exchanges of ideas and practices about education. For example, the Prussians asked the Swiss educator Johann Pestalozzi, following the disastrous Battle of Jena in 1806, to construct a system of primary education. Victor Cousin of France borrowed the Prussian experience with teacher education to design the first “normal school” in France. Andres Bello of Venezuela studied European reforms while serving in the diplomatic corps in England and was invited by Chile to establish their national university. Following his visit to Prussia and France, Horace Mann of the United States instituted the American “common school.” Domingo Sarmiento’s travels included Europe and the United States and, when president of Argentina, he began an education system borrowing from each. Following the Meiji restoration, the Japanese scoured the world for models of education and borrowed heavily from Johann Friedrich Herbart, a German philosopher influenced by Pestalozzi. A conceptual framework for comparing education systems first appeared in 1817 with the publication of Marc-Antoine Jullien’s Plan and Preliminary Views for a Work on Comparative Education (Fraser 1964). Jullien, head of Public Instruction during the French Revolution, was in 1817 at Pestalozzi’s Yverdon Institute. His work was expanded in 1900 by Sadler’s “What Can We Learn of Practical Value from the Study of Foreign Systems of Education?” (Sadler 1900). The Emergence of Aid as the Principal Form of International Cooperation. The transfer of educational ideas and practices in the nineteenth century included not just “borrowing” or exchanging ideas between industrializing countries, but also “lending” (as assistance) by economically more advanced and politically more powerful countries to their colonies or “spheres of influence.” The first people to carry education abroad were missionaries. These were followed by colonial governments who used schools as an instrument of “civilization” and also as a tool for social and economic development. All regions of the world were the recipients of educational forms and practices invented in France, Great Britain, Japan, Prussia, Russia, and, to a limited extent, the United States (Cummings 1999). Representatives of these governments carried versions of three models of education: an academic model intended to prepare elites for commerce, industry, government, and the Church; an industrial model oriented toward training for employment; and an agricultural education model (Yates 1984). The transfer or imposition of education was defended in two ways. First, it was in the national interest of the colonizer to educate people in language, methods, and values that facilitated the domination of the colonizer (Carnoy 1974). In addition, many colonizers believed that their country’s education was truly the best for all peoples of the world. This belief was strongest in those countries deeply immersed in the new dominant paradigm for scientific research. This paradigm argued that the universe is governed by a set of immutable laws that, scientists argued, could best be discovered by experiments showing relationships of cause and effect. The comparison of expected results with actual results provided a means to test the validity of explanations of reality. Experimentation is not possible or feasible, of course, in many human endeavors. The paradigm was altered over time to claim that the laws of reality could be approximated through dispassionate observation, collection, and classification of “objective facts.”


5

Comparison was central to inductive and correlative (as distinct from experimental) methods of inquiry, resulting ultimately in the large-sample methods of today. We might keep in mind that few of the “laws” of the social sciences, including those derived from research done on education, are based on the controlled experiments called for by the deductive method of physical science. With the emergence of nationalism, many saw education as an instrument to ensure national (rather than local community) identity; by the 1920s, comparative education had become one more way by which nation-states could prove themselves superior to others. Whereas comparative education in the nineteenth century had focused on practice at the level of schools, now the national education system was the unit of analysis. [I]n one field alone it can be claimed without contradiction that competition is wholesome and that is in education…. If it is true that rivalries are due to misunderstanding, the study of national education systems furnishes one of the most all-embracing approaches to the comprehension of national aims and ideals. (Kandel 1925, p. ix) Emphasis on competition required the identification of common dimensions on which national systems could be compared. Earlier comparisons had highlighted unique features of each nation’s education; now emphasis was on which was better according to universal criteria. Comparative Research as a Source of Universal Policy Beginning in the late 1950s, comparative research on educational systems began to identify those education factors that distinguished “more developed” from “less developed” countries (Coleman 1965; Harbison and Myers 1964). Development was explained as a universal process of “modernization” (Black 1966); from this the conclusion was drawn that lagging countries could become more modern by replicating the amount and kinds of education found in the more developed countries. Poor, backward countries would develop by creating the kinds of schools and universities found in modern, progressive nations. Illustrative of this perspective was the imposition by the occupation government in post-World War II Japan of the American system of locally elected school boards. Researchers located in one of a small number of “modernized” countries did most comparative research in education. Consistent with their desire to contribute to a universal science, most researchers focused on how systems vary along a given set of dimensions, rather than on the unique features of national systems. Policy research from this perspective has sought to identify “what works” as a set of universal “best practices” that, if implemented, would result in improvement of education. The “best practices” approach has been promoted strongly by supranational organizations such as UNESCO and the World Bank (McGinn 1994). The effect has been uniformitization—in ideology, at least, if not in actual practice (McNeely 1995). Not all cooperation has been one directional, however. Among the early industrialized nations, most cooperative agreements involve either exchange or collaboration. Collaboration has also occurred between developing countries with common colonial


6

histories or membership in common markets. Cooperation between institutions (particularly universities) and between individuals engaged in research is often collaborative. The next section discusses major dimensions of these relationships and how they differ from cooperation as aid or assistance. Collaboration in Physical Science Research. Collaboration and exchange among physical scientists is a well-researched topic. See, for example, Frame and Carpenter (1979) and Luukonen and colleagues (1993). Wagner (1997) reviewed the experience of more than 3,000 cooperative physical-science projects financed in part by the U.S. government. In addition, patterns of international cooperation in science have been studied using the Science Citation Index to measure linkages of researchers in different countries (Okubo et al. 1992). Collaboration and exchange in research in physical science have pursued several objectives: • Carry out projects too large for a single institution or country • Study phenomena that involve a regional or global system; that is, what effects do events in one country have on another • Take advantage of unique knowledge, skills, or theory found in other countries • Fulfill a country or institution’s mission of international cooperation The various activities done to achieve those objectives include: • Joint participation in design, data collection, and analysis • Conferences, symposia, workshops, and other meetings in which ideas, methods, and findings are shared • Resource sharing; that is, resources located in one institution are used by other institutions • Database development, compiling and organizing secondary data, including bibliography • Reciprocal physical resource transfers; providing support for equipment and personnel in other institutions • Reciprocal human resource transfers; lending personnel to other institutions • Reciprocal technology transfers in the form of computer software and hardware Table 1.1 shows both the indicators of these forms of exchange and collaboration and some of the benefits that have been experienced. The left-hand column of the table lists various kinds of collaboration and exchange activities. Across the top of the table are listed the four major objectives or reasons for exchange and collaboration. The text in the cells of the table describes procedures and benefits of each relationship. Collaboration and Exchange in Research on Education. Only a modest body of research exists on cooperation in research in health and social sciences and in education (Easterby-Smith and Malina 1999; Yoder 1997). The latter includes assessments of the benefits and costs of collaboration (Hafernik, Messerschmitt, and Vandrick 1997); collaboration across disciplines (Nichols 1998); and collaboration across national boundaries (Nedwek and Neal 1994).

TABLE 1.1 Indicators and Benefits of Activities of Collaborative and Exchange Research Projects


Activity

Reason for Cooperation Large Global Others’ Mission of Problem Problem Knowledge Institution

Joint Topics not Discussions Citation of Internal participation previously of crossothers’ attention to attempted; national contributions; activities of division of linkages; improved project; labor across use of data conceptual dissemination countries; from other and of Findings total spending countries to informational on project explain quality of across national research institutions; phenomena; evidence of papers coeconomies of authored scale (e.g., across unit of data) countries Meetings Discussion of Attention to Level of Links with problem flows, attendance other transcending interactions, and quality of activities of national mutual participation institution; idiosyncrasies influences in meetings impact on institutional life; participation in other international education activities Resource Use of Location of sharing institution’s projects facilities by where other expertise institutions greatest

7


Activity

8

Reason for Cooperation Large Global Others’ Mission of Problem Problem Knowledge Institution

Database Use of Combination Access to data Contributions development international of databases from of databases (quantitative databases from individual to and too individual countries institution’s bibliographic) expensive countries in library, or too large ways that research for show centers individual linkages countries Physical Grants or Grants Access to Expansion in resources other specifically equipment or an institution funding not for facilities of of physical resources for available for transnational others’ small (e.g., studies institutions international national) education projects Human Assignment Assignment Sending of Expansion of personnel in resources of personnel of personnel personnel in quality or with from other international quantity international, institutions education greater than global other interests projects Technology Improved Improved Range of Attention to transfer ability, ability to methodologies international software, or study global used developments hardware to issues in research carry out and large education research projects Source: Based on Wagner (1997).

In education, the International Association for the Evaluation of Educational Achievement (IEA) stands out as an example of a collaborative research organization. The IEA studies, which began in 1959, examine the factors contributing to achievement in seven primary and secondary school subjects. Participation of a variety of countries using common instruments has permitted comparison of the performance of each system with respect to others. Initially, research instruments were completely equivalent except for language; in recent years, however, participant countries have been allowed to add questions to the common instruments. The IEA studies do continue, though, to use a common research design and common data-collection procedures. In addition, most countries (initially) used sample sizes that were too small to study subnational variations in their education systems (Theisen, Achola, and Boakari 1983). The IEA studies do, however, provide high-quality information about the comparative performance of education systems, using one model of schooling. As such, they are useful for


9

policymakers who seek to improve their schools by imitating what is being done in other countries. This strength is also their limitation. These studies were not designed to improve our understanding of the unique features of national education systems and how those features are a part of the cultural, political, and economic context of the country. The IEA researchers understood that contextual variables cannot be ignored; instead, they sought to define them as predictors of student achievement rather than as something to be understood in themselves (Purves 1987). Because their main concern was comparison along common dimensions, they were limited in their ability to describe unique aspects and range of variety in systems. From them we can learn little about what education could be in the future. As currently designed, the IEA studies cannot tell us how countries influence each other, or the extent to which the effectiveness of their systems depends on events in other parts of the world. Although the IEA studies have involved researchers from many different countries, relatively little attention has been paid to the process of international cooperation and collaboration. Worthy of remark for its uniqueness is a study on the process that IEA used to negotiate common instruments and procedures (Schwille and Burstein 1987), and a recent unpublished paper on conceptualization of cultural effects (LeTendre 2001). LeTendre calls for the description of national (and subnational) cultural patterns. These could be used as parallel data for the quantitative explanatory models of student achievement: Such analyses, when joined with various types of national quantitative assessments, would more clearly identify the overall similarity or dissimilarity of basic cultural patterns around schooling and would increase understanding of what kinds of reforms or innovations would or would not transfer from one nation to another. (p. 38) Comparative education research can be carried out to explain fundamental differences between institutions and systems. This requires a willingness to use either a loosely structured research design or to work with more than one design. To do either increases the difficulties of doing research but can yield unexpected insights. This approach seems especially warranted where the objective is to develop new theory rather than to test existing models (Teichler 1996). Major Results of the Five Studies Chapters 2 through 6 of this book present the results of the five studies carried out as part of the Six Nation Project. These chapters differ in three major ways from most comparative education research reports. First, they contain extensive descriptions of the methods of cooperation used during the course of the project. Second, the “results” reported here include not just the empirical findings of the studies but also observations on changes in the understandings of the participants in the research. Third, the studies make an explicit effort to draw out the education policy implications of their research.


10

The following is a brief summary of the findings of the studies. The summaries do not do justice to the wealth of information contained in Chapters 2 through 6, especially to the rich observations of policies and practices in the participating countries. The volume of material is so great that the discussion here is limited solely to some of the comparisons across countries. A General Model for Studying Education and the Economy To focus our analysis, we use a well-known model for studying the relationship between education and the economy: Context→Inputs→Process→Outputs→Outcomes In this model, contextual factors include economic, political, and cultural characteristics of the community or nation. Inputs can include physical facilities, curriculum, teachers, and student attributes. Process generally refers to organizational and instructional practices. Outputs refers to the immediate effects of the educational process, that is, changes in values, skills, or knowledge attributable to schooling. Outcomes refers to the longer-term consequences of education; to adult behaviors in family, economic, and political life; and to rewards such as income. The model can include several feedback loops. The Six Nation Project pursued two competing objectives. The first was to increase understanding of those aspects of the general model that were not yet well researched. The second was to do research that would inform immediate policy needs in the participating countries. The topics chosen and the consequent findings contribute to both elaboration of our global understanding of education and economic development and policy recommendations in national contexts. The Six Nation Project did not intend, of course, to answer all possible questions about the link between education and economic development. Only a historical or longitudinal method is appropriate for working with the model as a whole. After all, in many societies most children receive twelve years of schooling before their entry into adult society. By the time they start their careers the economy may be quite different than that which shaped inputs and process when they started. The easier alternative has been to ask two questions: • How are variations in context, inputs, and process associated with educational outputs? Here a shorter time period can be studied. This question is concerned, first, with the relative impact on learning outcomes of different kinds of instruction and administration, and, second, with cultural factors that enhance learning in school. • How are variations in amount and types of educational outputs related to social and economic outcomes? This question asks whether what students learn in school makes a difference in the economy. As we will see, the first question, just as in most research in education, received the most attention in the Six Nation Project. The following are a few of the major findings for each of the studies.


11

Achievement in Mathematics and Science The study in Chapter 2 carried out analyses using data from the Third International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS), a comparative collaborative research involving an association of forty-one countries. The TIMSS collaborators studied determinants of knowledge of mathematics and science of students at several grade levels (e.g., fourth, eighth, and twelfth graders). The tests were designed as fair and comparable measures of what each country included in their national curricula. Achievement scores and other data were collected from nationally representative samples of students in each country; the scores used in the analysis are the average scores for each country. China did not participate in TIMSS; the scores for Hong Kong were used to represent China (even though they are not representative of the latter). The national scores presented in Table 1.2 show significant differences between the SNERP countries; the national scores from all forty-one countries participating in TIMSS differ even more.

TABLE 1.2 Approximate Mean Scores on TIMSS Math and Science Tests for Five SNERP Countries and Hong Kong Country

Math

Science

Singapore Japan Hong Kong Switzerland Germany United States

643 605 588 545 509 500

610 575 535 535 535 540

The Six Nation study team asked the following question: what differences among countries in the areas of context, inputs, and process account for the differences in these national mean test scores? The analysis examined the effects of about 170 variables of five types: • Student characteristics, including time spent on homework • Student responses to a variety of attitudinal questions • Teacher characteristics, including training • School characteristics, including length of school year • National data, including life expectancy and gross domestic product (GDP) per capita The statistical method employed looked for those variables that best explained differences among countries, taking into account all other variables. The analysis was carried out separately for mathematics and for science achievement. Mathematics. Three variables account for 84 percent of the achievement score differences among the forty-one countries. These are: 1. National percentage of students who strongly agreed that they usually do well in mathematics 2. National percentage who strongly agreed that their mother thinks it is important to do well at sports


12

3. National percentage who strongly agreed that luck is required to do well in math Each of these, when analyzed across countries, was related negatively to achievement. Conspicuous by their absence in the final result were variables usually thought to explain differences in student learning. For example, taking into account the predictive power of these three variables, the average level of teacher training was unrelated to country differences. Differences in GDP per capita made no difference, nor did the length of the school year. The study went on to explore the meaning of these findings. As we might expect, in each country the more students said they do well at math, the higher are average math scores. That is, students know how well they do. What students do not know, however, is how well they do compared to students in other countries. Students in Germany, Switzerland, and the United States are more likely to say they do well than are students in Hong Kong, Japan, and Singapore; in fact, compared to students in those countries, those in Germany, Switzerland, and the United States do less well. The researchers concluded that believing that math is easy reflects low national standards for achievement. Countries that set high standards for learning and that encourage their youth to put time into learning mathematics (rather than excelling in other activities such as sports) will see improvements in mathematics achievement. Science. For achievement in science, four variables account for 85 percent of differences across the forty-one countries. Once again, inferred high standards are important. The researchers infer that the variable of time spent on a paid job indicates how much time is available for learning. A low amount of time spent on an outside job is linked with high levels of achievement. Science learning is further enhanced by increasing activities in science and by providing adequate laboratory facilities. Both the math and science findings elaborate only part of the general model examined earlier. That is, they illustrate this model: Context→Educational Inputs→Process→Outputs Outputs in mathematics and science are enhanced by policies that encourage greater time spent on learning. Providing opportunities for active rather than passive learning enhances science achievement further. Any country that can implement these policies, no matter its income level, culture, or ethnic diversity, may improve achievement in mathematics and science. Pedagogical Practices in English Language Education The findings of the study in Chapter 3 expand our understanding of the educational process and how it might be influenced by policy. The objectives and methods of English language education vary across countries. These variations are shown to be a function of economic requirements, the linguistic or ethnic composition of the student and labor force, and teacher beliefs about how children learn languages. Policymakers may find three uses for the data: • As a source of effective English language instruction practices in other countries


13

• To determine for their own country which options for English instruction and policy implementation are preferable • To broaden their understanding of the factors that influence English language instruction The researchers distinguish between the English as a foreign language approach used in Japan and Switzerland, and the English as a second language approach of Singapore and the United States. English is still of relatively minor importance in Japan, with its homogenous population. In Switzerland, the importance of learning at least two of the three national languages (French, German, and Italian) reduces attention to English. In Singapore and the United States, on the other hand, high proficiency in English is seen as vital to social integration and economic development. Singapore and the United States (the findings in this chapter are for the city of Philadelphia) devote twice as many hours per week to English language instruction as do the other countries. The findings for China are for the city of Shanghai, which has more reasons for teaching English than do most other regions of China, but even so it devotes half as many hours to English as does Singapore. The countries and their teachers varied also in terms of whether they taught English as an academic subject, as a literary subject, or as a communicative skill. Emphasis on the academic aspects of English means attention to grammar and vocabulary. Reading and exposure to written works in English characterize the literary approach. In the communicative approach, the objective is that students learn to express themselves in written and spoken English and to understand others. Which approach should be chosen depends on social and cultural contexts, job opportunities related to language proficiency, and national priorities. The United States and Singapore seek a labor force in which workers communicate in a common language, English. The other countries, at least at this point, have policies that favor a smaller proportion of workers with proficiencies in communication and interpretation. The study shows, however, that teachers in all countries would like to improve their capacity to teach students to communicate well in English. Not all countries have a national syllabus; even when one exists, teachers deviate from the official curriculum and adapt to local circumstances. In all countries, most teachers make little use of current theories of how best to teach English. Teaching practices respond more to what they see as student requirements than to official policy. Formal policy reforms in English language instruction could, therefore, have limited impact on classroom practices. This is especially likely in the case of reforms that employ instructional technology (mass media, computers) in language instruction. Many teachers will incorporate the new devices into their old methods of teaching, even though they have been taught how to make best use of the technology. Failure to incorporate teacher views and classroom contexts into policy design will limit the impact of reforms. Teacher reliance on methods of instruction that maximize learning of predetermined contents (a “product” approach), as distinct from methods that teach students how to learn more (“process” approach), is reinforced by the pervasive use of high-stake examinations. Policy reforms in English language teaching, therefore, have to change assessment practices as well as instructional content and methods.


14

Vocational Training and Education Changes in the structure and strategy of national economies were a major determinant of the approach of the study discussed in Chapter 4. In 1995 each of the participating countries—Japan, Singapore, Switzerland, and the United States—had experienced an economic downturn that called into question existing policies with respect to labor force education and training. Japan was beginning to doubt whether it should continue its tradition of lifetime employment and in-plant training. Singapore was seeking to compete in a knowledge-based globalization. Some in Switzerland believed that its famous apprenticeship system was failing. The United States was finishing the second wave of reforms to improve the educational quality of its labor force. As this study argues, the claim that educational quality was declining was false. Ample evidence suggests that, applying a variety of indicators, academic and vocational education alike had steadily improved over the decade previous to the economic decline. The factors contributing to the economic slowdown were located in the economy itself, in the normal cycle of boom and bust associated with market economies, and in the economic restructuring linked with progressive globalization. Each country has a unique system for vocational training and education (VTE). Similarly, poor labor market conditions cannot be attributed to differences in VTE. The authors suggest that, while the quality of VTE might be related to economic growth, the evidence to support that conclusion is insufficient. In each country, employers, parents, and students saw VTE as providing an inferior education. Students scoring higher on academic achievement tests preferred the academic track in secondary schools, although little evidence suggests that scores on these tests in themselves predict job performance or eventual income levels. The shift was fed in part by media emphasis on the “knowledge-based” economy, and the mistaken conclusion that VTE provided training only in low-level skills. As public opinion about the value of VTE declined in favor of academic education, demand for postsecondary education increased. In most cases the demand was for more education of any kind, with no clear idea of the kinds of skills and knowledge that would be required in a knowledge society. Public and business attitudes toward education have evolved without a clear understanding of the structure of labor forces and the mix of skills and knowledge required. The authors of the study suggest that it is important to recognize that general or academic preparation is appropriate for some but not all employment. Many jobs, even in a technologically advanced economy, will continue to require the knowledge and performance skills taught in VTE but not in general education programs. Many university programs offer no content relevant to employment in the new economy. Expansion of university enrollments could, therefore, result in reduced productivity although levels of education attainment increase. The authors propose two major policy strategies. The first would seek to enhance public acceptance of VTE by linking it more closely with general education institution and by changing its content to emphasize preparation for a knowledge-based economy. The second strategy is to change attitudes toward VTE held by three key stakeholders— employers, teachers, and representatives of the media.


15

Higher Education The Higher Education study in Chapter 5 also focused on educational process, but its concern was for organization and administration rather than pedagogical practices. The study focused on how universities in China, Germany, Japan, Switzerland, and the United States have changed as enrollments have become an increasingly larger proportion of the 18–22 age group. The study began with a linear model in which higher education begins as an elite institution, but moves through a massification phase, eventually reaching a universal enrollment or post-massification stage. Countries would differ in their university governance primarily as a function of what proportion of the age group enrolled in the university. The study shows that, in all countries, increased demand for postsecondary education has had at least three effects: 1. Increased size of institutions 2. Increased heterogeneity or diversity of student population 3. Increased unit and total costs All three of these changes generate pressures for change in the structure and governance of universities. Increased diversity of students forces universities to offer a broader range of academic programs and nonacademic services. Increased size weakens the cohesion of institutions, especially those with decentralized governance structures such as autonomous faculties. Increased academic and extracurricular services require more administrators, which increases costs per student. Multiplied by increased enrollments, the costs of higher education skyrocket. This alarms legislatures and other funding bodies. These call for greater efficiency, which requires changes in structure and governance toward more centralized leadership. In all countries the trend is toward reduced participation of professors in governance. In some countries (for example, Japan and the United States) power has shifted to deans, while in others (for example, Switzerland) it has been shifted upward to the rector. The traditional task definition of a rector, as first among equals, is changing to that of corporate president or chief executive officer. The importation of management models from the corporate sector is clearest in the United States, in which private and public universities compete for students in a market situation. In countries with weak markets, national governments play a stronger role in university reform. Although the pressures and changes are most intense in countries in the postmassification stage, they appear in all the countries, even in China and Switzerland. Pressures for management and governance reform are carried on the winds of globalization, embodied in the concept of the knowledge society. The study calls attention to two kinds of higher education: one essential for efficient application of existing knowledge and the other, research training, essential for production of the new knowledge required for continued economic growth. The former is handled at the undergraduate level, the latter at the graduate level. Continued economic growth in a globalized world will require massification of graduate education.


16

National Education Indicators The primary finding of this study, discussed in Chapter 6, is that China, Singapore, and the United States lack systematic methods for examining the relationships between education and economic development. All countries collect a wide range of statistical and evaluative information about their education systems, and this information is useful in several ways. It helps inform clients about educational opportunities and requirements, it is essential for annual and longer-term facilities and financial planning, and it provides an assessment of the outputs of individuals and institutions in the system. In Singapore, which maintains individual records for all students, it is possible to link information about inputs and process to learning outputs at the student or school level. China and the United States, with more decentralized systems, have to carry out special studies in order to assess how inputs and process affect outputs. On the other hand, education systems have no indicators of the outcomes of education; there is no systematic effort to determine whether what is taught and what is learned contribute to economic growth. All countries rely on special studies to assess how outputs of education contribute to various kinds of economic outcomes, generally employment rates and earning streams of graduates rather than productivity of the enterprises in which those graduates work. As acknowledged earlier, the problem of studying the educationeconomy link is difficult. For example, attempts to assess long-term contributions of education have been limited to indicators of the quantity of education. Little evidence supports a claim that how much or what is actually learned in school makes any difference to economic performance. Special studies often require translation before they can be used by policy-makers and therefore seldom provide “real time” information. The policy value of the studies is further constrained by the requirements of rigor that restricts the range of phenomena studied. Information from indicators and national assessment studies is therefore used primarily to highlight problems rather than to detect possible solutions. Real and quasiexperiments are used to test out the effectiveness of new policies and practices, but these are restricted to relatively small samples of institutions that may ignore important contextual factors. Comment The five studies required cooperation between researchers and policymakers in six countries. To what extent did the process of cooperation shape the results? To what extent did the particular countries involved determine the results? What was the effect of mixing policymakers and researchers? Chapters 2 through 6 provide detailed accounts of the studies, including difficulties in collaboration. Chapter 7 provides a conceptual framework for understanding the factors that influence the kinds and consequences of cooperation in comparative research.


17

References Balan, J. 1993. A new phase for co-operative research and higher education efforts between Europe and Latin America. European Journal of Education 28(1):35–47. Benavot, A., and D.Kamens. 1989. The curricular content of primary education in developing countries. Washington, D.C.: World Bank. Black, C.E. 1966. The dynamics of modernization. New York: Harper & Row. Carnoy, M. 1974. Education as cultural imperialism. New York: McKay. Coleman, J.S., ed. 1965. Education and political development. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press. Cummings, W.K. 1999. The institutions of education: Compare, compare, compare. Comparative Education Review 43(4):413–37. Easterby-Smith, M., and D.Malina. 1999. Cross-cultural collaborative research: Toward reflexivity. Academy of Management Journal 42(1):11. Farrell, J.P. 1994. Educational cooperation in the Americas: A review. In Education, equity and economic competitiveness in the Americas: An inter-American dialogue project, edited by J.M. Puryear and J.J.Brunner. Washington, D.C.: Organization of American States. Frame, J.D., and M.P.Carpenter. 1979. International research collaboration. Social Studies of Science 9:482–97. Fraser, S. 1964. Jullien’s plan for comparative education, 1816–1817. New York: Bureau of Publications, Teachers College, Columbia University. Hafernik, J.J., D.S.Messerschmitt, and S.Vandrick. 1997. Collaborative research: Why and how? Educational Researcher 26(9):31–35. Harbison, F., and C.Myers. 1964. Education, manpower, and economic growth: Strategies in human resource development. New York: McGraw-Hill. Kandel, I.L. 1925. Educational yearbook of the International Institute of Teachers College, Columbia University. Vol. 1. New York: Macmillan. King, K. 1997. Aid for development or for change? A discussion of education and training policies of development assistance agencies, with particular reference to Japan. In Educational dilemmas: Debate and diversity. Vol. 3, Power and responsibility in education, edited by K.Watson, C.Modgil, and S.Modgil. London: Cassell. LeTendre, G.K. 2001. Advancements in conceptualizing and analyzing cultural effects in crossnational studies of educational achievement. University Park: Pennsylvania State University, Department of Education Policy Studies. Lipsett, M.S., J.A.D.Holbrook, and R.G.Lipsey. 1995. R&D and innovation at the firm level: Improving the S&T policy information base. Research Evaluation 5(2):123–29. Luukonen, T., R.J.W.Tijssen, O.Persson, and G.Sivertsen. 1993. The measurement of international scientific collaboration. Scientometrics 28(1):15–36. March, J.G. 1999. The pursuit of organizational intelligence. Malden, Mass.: Blackwell. McGinn, N. 1994. The impact of supranational organizations on public education. International Journal of Educational Development 14(3):289–98. McNeely, C.L. 1995. Prescribing national education policies: The role of the international organizations. Comparative Education Review 39(4):483–507. Meyer, J.W., D.H.Kamens, and A.Benavot. 1992. School knowledge for the masses: World models and national primary curricular categories in the twentieth century. Washington, D.C. and London: Falmer Press. Meyer, W., F.O.Ramirez, and Y.N.Soysal. 1992. World expansion of mass education, 1870–1980. Sociology of Education 65(2):128–49.


18

Nedwek, B.P, and J.E.Neal. 1994. Informational cultures: Facing challenges of institutional research within cross-continental settings. Research in Higher Education 35(4):429–42. Nichols, J.D. 1998. Multiple perspectives of collaborative research. International Journal of Educational Reform 7(2):150–57. Okubo, Y., J.Miquel, L.Frigoletto, and J.Dore. 1992. Structure of international collaboration in science—Typology of countries through multivariate techniques using a link indicator. Scientometrics 25(2):31. Purves, A. 1987. IEA: Agenda for the future. International Review of Education 33:103–107. Ramirez, F.O., and J.Boli. 1987. The political construction of mass schooling: European origins and worldwide institutionalization. Sociology of Education 6(1):2–17. Riddell, R. 1987. Foreign Aid Reconsidered. Baltimore, Md.: Johns Hopkins University Press. Sadler, P. 1900. What can we learn of practical value from the study of foreign systems of education? Comparative Education Review 7(February):307–14. Schwille, J., and L.Burstein. 1987. The necessity of trade-offs and coalition building in crossnational research: A critique of Theisen, Achola, and Boakari. Comparative Education Review 31(4):602–11. Smith, B.H. 1990. More than altruism: The politics of private foreign aid. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press. Teichler, U. 1996. Comparative higher education: Potentials and limits. Higher Education 32 (4):35. Theisen, G.L., P.P.W.Achola, and F.M.Boakari. 1983. The underachievement of cross-national studies of achievement. Comparative Education Review 27(1):46–68. Wagner, C.S. 1997. International cooperation in research and development: An inventory of U.S. government spending and a framework for measuring benefits. Santa Monica, Calif.: RAND. Yates, B.A. 1984. Comparative education and the Third World: The nineteenth century revisited. Comparative Education Review 28(4):533–49. Yoder, P.S. 1997. Negotiating relevance: Belief, knowledge, and practice in international health projects. Medical Anthropology Quarterly 11(2):131–46.

Chapter 2 Predictors of National Differences in Mathematics and Science Achievement of Eighth-Grade Students: Data from TIMSS ERLING E.BOE, HENRY MAY, GEMA BARKANIC, AND ROBERT F.BORUCH Each nation participating in the Six Nation Education Research Project (SNERP) agreed to assume leadership for one of six projects and to collaborate in the other projects.1 The University of Pennsylvania (Penn), representing the United States, was selected to lead the Mathematics and Science Education project. Researchers at Penn explored various topics including mathematics and science achievement. Data from the Third International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS), collected in 1995, had just become available in 1997. To facilitate the potential development of research with TIMSS, the Penn Graduate School of Education hosted an organizational meeting in Philadelphia in September 1997, inviting TIMSS researchers from China, Germany, Singapore, Switzerland, and the United States. The outcome of this meeting was the formation of the Multinational Confederation for Research, with TIMSS, and the adoption of a set of Principles of Collaboration. The objective was to foster comparative and international education research with TIMSS. As with those participating in the other SNERP projects, each nation participating in the TIMSS confederation was responsible for securing its own research funding. The TIMSS confederation was distinctive among the SNERP projects, however, in that no fieldwork was required because all nations had full access to the TIMSS international database. Therefore, no collaboration in data collection or analysis was required for the research with TIMSS. SNERP’s mathematics and science focus became a “confederation” of independent national projects instead of collaborative, comparative education research. Accordingly, independent national projects for analyzing TIMSS data were initated in Germany, Singapore, Switzerland, and the United States. In addition to the cross-national fertilization fostered by SNERP and a review of relevant research literature, the U.S. TIMSS research team consulted with various U.S. policymakers, as well as with representatives of federal funding agencies, about critical educational research questions that could be addressed by analyses of TIMSS data. The outcome was the development of a research plan and grant application to the U.S. National Science Foundation and the U.S. Department of Education. We proposed a large-scale comparative education research project using TIMSS data from forty-one nations (including all six nations participating in SNERP). The U.S. team would lead the project. The broader role of SNERP’s Multinational Confederation for Research with TIMSS is described and assessed in the final section of this chapter.


20

Introduction Policy Issue Many people believe that national economic productivity is related to student performance in mathematics and science. This is, for example, the view of the U.S. Department of Education (Peak 1996). Rita R.Colwell, (Gonzales et al. 2000, p. vii), director of the U.S. National Science Foundation, states that it is critical that students in the United States achieve at high levels in mathematics and science. High levels of achievement in mathematics and science contribute to the position of the United States in the world economy. In addition, the demand continues for well-trained mathematicians and scientists and the need for an informed citizenry able to make intelligent publicpolicy decisions about important economic, medical, and environmental issues. With the advent, in the 1960s, of international surveys of student achievement in math and science, cross-national comparisons have become possible, and nations have aspired to become “world class” in this respect. For example, U.S. public policymakers (state governors, the president, and later the Congress) adopted a policy goal of American students becoming “first in the world in mathematics and science achievement by the year 2000” (National Education Goals Panel 1996, p. xvi). A major national policy objective in the United States and elsewhere is to identify and implement actions to attain and maintain a high level of student achievement in math and science as compared to that of other countries. To achieve this, policymakers seek the best research available on the determinants of student achievement in math and science. When the available research is inadequate, policymakers also seek to expand the research base, such as supporting SNERP (of which this project is part) and the extensive research on math, science, and engineering education supported by the U.S. National Science Foundation. It is quite possible that some of the most useful research for this purpose will be obtained from conducting cross-national analyses of educational systems, processes, and student background, and then examining how these differences relate to variation in student achievement. TIMSS is a prime source of cross-national data to support such research. Project Background The Math and Science project reported here was designed to capitalize on the potential of research with TIMSS to inform educational policymaking. Using TIMSS, research on math and science achievement can be conducted at two levels: • Student-level research conducted within nations, with students as the unit of analysis • National-level research conducted across nations, with nations as the unit of analysis In pursuing national-level research with TIMSS, three different strategies can be followed: 1. Cross-national comparisons of educational inputs (e.g., characteristics of educational systems such as centralization of decision-making authority, level of educational funding per student, curriculum content, family background of students, etc.) based on univariate analyses

Predictors of national differences in mathematics and science

21

2. Cross-national comparisons of educational outcomes (e.g., general achievement scores in math, subscale scores in algebra, scores in higher-order thinking, school completion rates, etc.) based on univariate analyses 3. Cross-national relationships between educational inputs and outcomes based on bivariate and multivariate analyses This project focused on the third strategy; that is, identifying national-level input variables that are associated with national differences in average student achievement scores in math and science. In view of the technical refinement that went into its design and the subsequent quality of its data collection, TIMSS has been widely recognized as the largest and most sophisticated comparative education study accomplished to date. Among its many components are questionnaire surveys of various educational inputs (administered to schools, teachers, and students) and outcome measures of student achievement in mathematics and science. Reports of analyses of TIMSS data (Beaton et al. 1996a; Beaton et al. 1996b) reveal a major interest in the relative standing of participating nations in terms of average student achievement scores in mathematics and science. The standings are shown in Figures 2.1 and 2.2,2 respectively (the six nations participating in SNERP are highlighted). In addition, these and other official TIMSS reports have reported


22

Fig. 2.1 Mean Math Achievement Scores for Eighth Graders by Nation extensive cross-national data on educational input and student background variables (e.g., teacher certification requirements, class size, homework assigned, educational level of students’ parents, etc.).


23

Fig. 2.2 Mean Science Achievement Scores for Eighth Graders by Nation In spite of the great interest in understanding the causes of national differences in student achievement in math and in science, none of the official reports of TIMSS issued to date have provided quantification of the cross-national relationships between educational input and achievement outcome variables. This observation applies to the numerous reports issued by the TIMSS International Study Center (Beaton et al. 1996a; Martin et al. 2000), the U.S. National Research Center for TIMSS (Schmidt et al. 1999), and the National Center for Education Statistics [NCES] (2000).


24

Woessmann (2001), in contrast with these official TIMSS reports, carried out a microeconomic study of TIMSS. In his analysis Woessmann included several nationallevel variables and found that nationally centralized examinations and national levels of private school enrollment were positively related to national differences in mean math scores, after controlling for multiple input variables. He examined a few national-level relationships, but the emphasis of his study was at the student level. The capacity of the largest and most sophisticated comparative education survey (i.e., TIMSS) to provide quantitative evidence about sources of national differences in achievement has yet to be exploited. Research Problem Figures 2.1 and 2.2 show national means for mathematics and for science achievement, respectively. The nations in the lightly shaded top sections of the figures scored significantly higher than the international mean, while the nations in the lightly shaded bottom sections scored significantly lower. Dark shading identifies the participants in SNERP. The mean scores of the nations in the unshaded center section are not statistically different from the international mean. The People’s Republic of China did not participate in TIMSS. For our purposes, we use the Hong Kong data, although, of course, the Hong Kong TIMSS sample is not representative of China in any respect. Large national differences exist in average student knowledge of math and of science. How can we explain the sources of these differences in national average? That is, what are the national-level variables that are the strongest predictors of variation among nations in average achievement scores? This question should be distinguished from that asked by within-nation studies that attempt to explain variation in math and science achievement at the student level. The current research was designed to exploit the ability of TIMSS to yield new information about national differences in achievement. We did this by performing a cross-national analysis, expanding knowledge relevant to the policy issue of how to “attain and maintain a high level of student achievement in math and science in international comparisons.” Research Methods Data Sources A more detailed presentation of the methods used in this research is found in the work of Boe, Barkanic, Leow, and colleagues (2001) and in that of Boe, May, Barkanic, and Boruch, 2001. The primary data source for this research was nationally representative TIMSS data for eighth-grade students (approximately age 13) from the forty-one nations that participated fully at this grade level in 1995. Most of the educational and student input data were collected by extensive questionnaires administered to schools, teachers, and students. In addition, TIMSS (Beaton et al. 1996b, Table 4) and other data sources were used to provide national-level economic, social, demographic, and educational variables.


25

National-Level Outcome Variables. The outcome (or dependent) variables were student achievement measures, specifically, national average student achievement scores in math and in science at the eighth-grade level, as shown in Figures 2.1 and 2.2, respectively. The comprehensive (i.e., full-scale) scores for math and science (as distinguished from subscale scores for algebra, geometry, physics, biology, etc.) were used in these analyses. National-Level Input Variables. The input (or independent) variables included a large number of potential predictors of the national average achievement scores in math and science. Five main types of predictor variables were analyzed: student background and behavior; student attitudes, beliefs, and perceptions; instructional factors; school factors; and national demographic and economic factors. Student Background and Behavior Examples of the twenty-seven predictor variables of this type include student age, possession of a computer at home, hours per week worked at a paying job, and time spent on homework. Student Attitudes, Beliefs, and Perceptions Examples of the fifty-one predictor variables of this type include student agreement with statements about (1) the need to memorize math in order to do well, (2) liking math, and (3) having a mother who thinks it is important to do well in sports. Instructional Factors Examples of the fifty-five predictor variables of this type include years of teacher experience, teacher professional development, and the breadth of curriculum prescribed. School Factors Examples of the twenty-five predictor variables of this type include the number of instructional days in the school year, average class size, and shortage of instructional equipment. National Demographic and Economic Factors Examples of the thirteen predictor variables of this type are national levels of life expectancy and gross domestic product (GDP) per capita. The complete list of the 171 predictor variables included in the analysis is found in Boe, Barkanic, Leow, and colleagues (2001). To obtain the overall national average for each predictor variable in the first four categories, questionnaire responses to items were aggregated within each nation. Analysis Design. All analyses were performed cross-nationally (separately for math achievement and for science achievement), to examine the relationships among (a) nationally-aggregated educational and student input variables and (b) variation in the national mean student achievement outcomes. Accordingly, the unit of analysis was the 41 nations in TIMSS (rather than students, classrooms, or schools). Given that TIMSS data were obtained through a large-scale survey (as distinguished from field experimentation or other methods), the input-outcome relationships were most appropriately analyzed with advanced correlational techniques that provided for the quantification of such relationships at the national level. The methods of analysis used included bivariate correlation and multivariate regression, using both ordinary least squares (OLS) (Neter et al. 1996) and hierarchical linear modeling (HLM) (Bryk and Raudenbush 1992).


26

Using these multivariate methods of analysis, it is possible to identify the main national-level input variables that emerge as the best predictors of national differences in average math and science scores, while other potential predictors are shown simultaneously to be less powerful. Because such analyses of TIMSS had not been performed before and were therefore exploratory, these analyses with eighth-grade students were replicated with independent national samples of seventh-grade students from TIMSS. A comparison of the eighth-grade results with the seventh-grade results was made to determine whether the results were similar in independent samples of students (i.e., were replicated across samples). Results and Discussion of Mathematics Achievement As seen in Figure 2.1, there are large national differences in mean math scores. The frequency distributions of math achievement scores for individual students, along with their means and standard deviations, within each of the six nations participating in SNERP, are presented in Figure 2.3. As reported by Beaton and colleagues (1996b), the mean math scores for the United States and Germany are not significantly below the international average, while the mean scores for Switzerland, Hong Kong, Japan, and Singapore are all significantly above the international average. The mean score for Singapore is higher, at a statistically significant level, than that of all nations participating in TIMSS. Thus, on average, the SNERP group of nations performed from average to a high level in math achievement.


27

Fig. 2.3 Frequency Distributions of Eighth-Grade Student Scores for each of Six Nations, along with the 95% Confidence Intervals (|-|) for Each National Mean Score. The Multivariate Model for Mathematics Achievement Although these differences among nations in average math achievement are of interest in their own right, the main purpose of this research was to explain the sources of these national differences in math achievement. We wanted to identify the national-level input variables that are the strongest predictors of variation among nations in average achievement scores. Using multivariate analysis to quantify the simultaneous association of input predictor variables with math achievement, predictor variables with the largest effects were identified. The best multivariate model (as generated by the OLS method) is shown in the top panel of Figure 2.4. The “best multivariate model” is defined


28

Fig. 2.4 Best Prediction Multivariate Models of National Mean Mathematics and Science Achievement Scores by three criteria. These are a R2 higher than the R2 of any competing model, statistically significant parameter estimates for each variable in the model, and parsimony (i.e., a model composed of the fewest predictor variables, such that the addition of one more predictor variable would not substantially increase R2). The regression coefficients for each variable are reported in achievement test score units and represent the change in achievement for each standard deviation of a predictor variable. The adjusted R2 for the mathematics model is 0.84, whereas the adjusted R2 for the science model is 0.85. When this three-variable prediction model was recomputed with independent national samples at the seventh-grade level, it accounted for 83 percent of the national-level variability in mean math achievement scores. The OLS and HLM methods produced virtually identical estimates (about 84 percent) of national-level differences accounted for by the threevariable math model shown in Figure 2.4. Thus, the powerful three-variable math model, as shown in Figure 2.4, is very stable across national samples (seventh and eighth grades) and analytic methods (OLS and HLM). The three predictor variables were: • National percentage of students who strongly agreed that they usually do well in math (referred to here as the “usually do well in math” variable) • National percentage of students who strongly agreed that their mother thought it was important for them to be good at sports (referred to as the “mother encourages sports” variable) • National percentage of students who strongly agreed that to do well in math they need good luck (referred to as the “need luck in math” variable)


29

The power of this three-variable model to predict national mean math scores with little error is illustrated in Figure 2.5, as indicated by the close relationship between the national mean math scores that were observed and the national mean math scores that were predicted by the model. Note also that the three Western nations are arrayed in order along the regression line, whereas the high-scoring three Eastern nations are bunched at the high end of the predicted national scores. In interpreting the results of these analyses at the national level, it is important to recognize that they are likely to be quite different from results of analyses that could be conducted at the student level. Therefore, generalizations between levels should not be made without clear evidence of their validity. To do so without such evidence is to commit the “ecological fallacy” (May, Boe, and Boruch 2003). The results of this cross-national multivariate analysis of math achievement may seem surprising and even counterintuitive, considering that none of the educational variables (e.g., as average instructional days per year) or national wealth variables (e.g., GDP per capita) emerged as major predictors. Accordingly, we performed additional analyses to explore further each of the three predictor variables just listed that emerged as main effects in the best model of national mean achievement in math. Additional Analyses of the Predictor Variables “Usually Do Well in Math.” The observed inverse relationship between the variable “usually do well in math” and mean math achievement at the national level (as seen in Figures 2.5 and 2.6) indicates that the stronger the perception of doing well by students of a particular nation, the lower the nation’s mean achievement scores. To investigate this puzzling cross-national finding, we performed within-nation analyses at the student level separately for each of the forty-one nations. As might be expected, we found that within each nation the strength of student perceptions of doing well in math was in fact directly related to math achievement scores. Therefore, the contrast between the inverse relationship observed cross-nationally (top panel of the scatterplot in Figure 2.6) and the direct relationship observed within nations (bottom panel of the scatterplot in Figure 2.6, for all nations combined) is quite dramatic. The most plausible and reasonable interpretation of the within-nation results is that, within their own national “frame of reference,” student perceptions of


30

Fig. 2.5 Observed National Mean Mathematics Achievement Scores as a Function of Predicted Mean Mathematics Achievement Scores for Forty-One Nations the level of their performance are positively related to their actual performance (i.e., students have a general idea of how well they do in math). To understand the inverse relationship seen cross-nationally for the variable “usually do well in math” with math achievement, we correlated this variable cross-nationally with all other predictor variables, to identify which other predictor variables correlated most highly with it. The variables found to be related most strongly cross-nationally to “usually do well in math” were: • National percentage of students who strongly agreed that math is an easy subject (referred to here as the “math is easy” variable) (correlation with “usually do well in math”=0.67) • National percentage of students who strongly agreed that they enjoyed learning math (referred to here as the “enjoy learning math” variable) (correlation with “usually do well in math”=0.65) • National percentage of students who strongly agreed that they liked math a lot (referred to here as the “like math” variable) (correlation with “usually do well in math”=0.60)


Fig. 2.6 Cross-National (Top Panel) Versus Within-Nation (Bottom Panel) Math Achievement and Student Agreement with the Statement “I Usually Do Well in Math”

31


32

As with the variable “usually do well in math” (shown in Figure 2.6), further withinnation analyses of the three variables most strongly associated with it indicated that each one was inversely related to math achievement cross-nationally but was directly related to achievement at the student level within each nation. These complex and seemingly contradictory findings may suggest to policymakers and others either of the following two opposite conclusions: • Within-nation findings at the student level suggest the adoption of instructional policies that make it particularly easy and enjoyable for students to learn math, and that contribute to their particularly liking math and perceiving that they do especially well in math. Such policies will be seen as constructive because these student attitudes and perceptions are all associated with somewhat higher levels of math achievement when students are compared with each other. Alternatively, • Cross-national findings with national-level variables suggest the adoption of instructional policies that do not make it particularly easy and enjoyable for students to learn math, and that do not contribute to their particularly liking math and perceiving that they do especially well in math. Such policies will be seen as constructive because these student attitudes and beliefs are in fact all associated with much lower levels of national average math achievement when nations are compared with each other. Thus, if a policy goal is to improve the national average math achievement, then the cross-national results are paramount because they are driven by national-level variables instead of by student-level variables within nations. In our interpretation, variation in math achievement at the student level within nations is produced in large part by student differences in motivation and ability factors that are largely nullified when aggregated to the national level. In contrast, variation in average math achievement at the national level is a product of major differences in national educational systems, cultural traditions, and economic and demographic factors. Accordingly, • Research findings from within-nation analyses can mislead policymakers by suggesting that instruction that makes math particularly easy and enjoyable will enhance the average national level of student achievement in math. Whereas, • Research findings from cross-national analyses suggest that sufficiently high standards of instruction and achievement should be set so that students do not experience learning math as particularly easy and enjoyable. Students should be sufficiently challenged so that they do not particularly like math and do not perceive themselves as usually doing especially well in math. We therefore hypothesize that variation in national standards for teaching and learning math underlies observed national differences both in achievement and in student perceptions and attitudes. That is, when national standards are higher, students are more likely to score higher on the math achievement tests; but they are less likely to perceive that they do especially well in math, they find math less easy, they will enjoy learning


33

math less, and they like math less. To the extent that this hypothesis is correct, the student perceptions and attitudes examined here are indicators of a fundamental quality of national education systems (i.e., standards). The important implication for educational policy of the variable “usually do well in math” is that: • National standards for teaching and learning math should be set high in order to enhance international competitiveness in student achievement. To be effective, of course, this will require an educational system that can deliver highquality instruction consistently. “Mother Encourages Sports.” Analyses similar to the above were repeated with the variable “mother encourages sports.” This variable was also found to be associated inversely with math achievement cross-nationally (see Figures 2.4 and 2.7). Similarly, inverse relationships were observed within each of the 39 nations available for this analysis. This consistency of inverse association in the cross-national analysis (top panel of Figure 2.7) and the within-nation analysis (bottom panel of Figure 2.7, for all nations combined) might well be expected. Further analyses were performed to identify which other predictor variables correlated most highly cross-nationally with the variable “mother encourages sports.” The two variables that correlated most highly with “mother encourages sports” were: 1. National percentage of the GDP in agriculture, hunting, forestry, and fishing (correlation with “mother encourages sports”=0.51) 2. National percentage of teachers who say inadequate physical facilities limit teaching a great deal (correlation with “mother encourages sports”=0.46) Thus, it appears that the variable “mother encourages sports” is more prominent in developing nations with agriculture-based economies and less investment in educational facilities. In view of these consistent inverse relationships observed both within and across nations, we hypothesize that parental emphasis on nonacademic activities of their children, such as sports, diverts attention and effort away from learning math. The implications of this hypothesis for social policy are that:


34

Fig. 2.7 Comparison of Cross-National (Top Panel) Versus Within-Nation (Bottom Panel) Bivariate Relationships between Math Achievement and Student Agreement with the Statement “My Mother Thinks It’s Important to do Well in Sports”


35

• The social status of educational achievement in math should be enhanced; visible and strong incentives for students to achieve at a high level should be created; and the status of, and rewards for, achievement in nonacademic endeavors such as sports should be deemphasized. “Need Luck in Math.” The variable “need luck in math” was also found to be inversely associated with math achievement cross-nationally (see Figures 2.4 and 2.8). Similarly, inverse relationships were observed also within each nation. This consistency of inverse association in the cross-national analysis (top panel of Figure 2.8) and the within-nation analysis (bottom panel of Figure 2.8, for all nations combined) might well be expected. In view of these consistent inverse relationships observed both within and across nations, we hypothesize that students’ belief that they need good luck to do well in math detracts from their making the effort required to actually do well. The implications of this hypothesis for parents and educational policy are that: • Children should be inculcated in the concept that learning in school requires hard work instead of good luck, and a milieu should be created in which the work ethic is modeled and successful. Math Prediction Model Profile for Six Nations Based on the results of the best multivariate model for math, a three-variable profile for predicting national average math scores is presented in Figure 2.9 for each of the six nations participating in SNERP. As seen in Figures 2.6, 2.7, and 2.8, all three predictor variables were inversely related to math achievement cross-nationally. Therefore, Singapore gained points on all three variables because its students did not believe that they usually did well in math, did not believe their mothers thought it important to do well in sports, and did not believe luck was needed to do well in math. Perhaps the most interesting comparisons that can be made in Figure 2.9 are between the three nations from the East and the three nations from the West in terms of the degree to which students from each nation perceived that they usually do well in math. As seen in Figure 2.6, math performance decreased as the perception of doing well increased (an inverse relationship). In the three Eastern nations (Singapore, Japan, and Hong Kong), this belief is well below the international average as reflected in the prediction points gained by the “usually do well” variable. In contrast, this belief by students from all three Western nations (Switzerland, Germany, United States) was above the international average as reflected in the prediction points lost because of the “usually do well” variable. As stated in the previous section, we interpret variation in national average student perceptions of doing well in math as indicative of differences in national standards for teaching and learning math (such that the stronger the national average student perception of doing well, the lower the national standards).


36

Fig. 2.8 Comparison of Cross-National (Top Panel) Versus Within-Nation (Bottom Panel) Bivariate Relationships between Math Achievement and Student Agreement with the Statement “To Do Well in Math, You Need Good Luck”


37

Fig. 2.9 Predicted Math Achievement Points Gained (+) or Lost (−) as a Function of Each of Three Predictor Variables Included in the Best Multivariate Model for Math, Measured from the International Mean Math Achievement Score of 510 Results and Discussion of Science Achievement As seen in Figure 2.2, large national differences exist in national mean science scores. As reported by Beaton and colleagues (1996a), the mean science scores for all six nations


38

(Germany, Hong Kong, Japan, Singapore, Switzerland, and the United States) were significantly above the international average. The mean score for Singapore, on the other hand is higher, at a statistically significant level, than that of all nations participating in TIMSS. On the whole, students from the SNERP group of nations performed at a high level in average science achievement. The Multivariate Model for Science Achievement As with math, differences among nations in average science achievement are of interest in their own right. The main purpose of this research was to explain the sources of these national differences in science achievement; that is, to identify the national-level input variables that are the strongest predictors of variation among nations in average achievement scores. Using multivariate analysis to quantify the simultaneous association of input predictor variables with science achievement, the predictor variables with the largest effects were identified. The best multivariate model (as generated by the OLS method) is shown in the bottom panel of Figure 2.4. As seen, four variables (two based on the questionnaire responses of principals describing their schools, and two based on questionnaire responses of students) accounted for 85 percent of the total variability observed among nations in mean science achievement. When this four-variable prediction model was recomputed with independent national samples at the seventh-grade level, it accounted for 80 percent of the national-level variability in mean math achievement scores. The OLS and HLM methods produced virtually identical estimates (about 70 percent for the sample of thirty-seven nations in the HLM analysis) of nationallevel differences accounted for by the four-variable science model shown in Figure 2.4. Thus, the powerful four-variable science model, as shown in Figure 2.4, is very stable across national samples (seventh and eighth grades) and analytic methods (OLS and HLM). These four variables were: 1. School provides any special science enrichment activities (referred to here as the “science enrichment” variable) 2. Capacity of school to provide instruction is affected “a lot” by a shortage or inadequacy of science laboratory equipment and materials (referred to here as the “laboratory equipment shortage” variable) 3. Hours students work per week at a paid job (referred to here as the “student paid job” variable) 4. National percentage of students who strongly agreed that to do well in science they need good luck (referred to here as the “need luck in science” variable) The power of this model to predict national mean science scores with little error is illustrated in Figure 2.10 by the close relationship between the observed national mean science scores and the national mean science scores predicted by this four-variable model. Note also that the six nations fall close to the regression line, with top-scoring Singapore having the very highest predicted national score. In interpreting the results of these analyses at the national level, it is important to recognize that they are likely to be quite different from results of analy-


39

Fig. 2.10 Observed National Mean Science Achievement Scores as a Function of Predicted Mean Science Scores for Forty-One Nations. Predictions Based on Best Multivariate Model Using Four Predictor Variables ses that could be conducted at the student level. Therefore, generalizations between levels should not be made without clear evidence of their validity. To do so without such evidence is to commit the “ecological fallacy.” To better understand the variables in the science model, additional analyses were performed on each. Additional Analyses of the Predictor Variables “Science Enrichment.” As shown in Figures 2.4 and 2.11, the variable “science enrichment” was found to be associated directly with mean science achievement crossnationally. We next performed within-nation analyses at the student level separately for each of the thirty-nine nations available for this analysis. As might be expected, the results of these analyses showed that the variable “science enrichment” was also directly related to science achievement scores within each nation. Thus, the provision of science enrichment activities by schools may strengthen student achievement both crossnationally and within each nation.


40

Further analyses were performed to identify which other predictor variables correlated most highly cross-nationally with the variable “science enrichment.” The three variables that correlated most highly with “science enrichment” were:

Fig. 2.11 National Mean Science Achievement Scores as a Function of the National Percentage of Students Who Are Enrolled in a School That Provides Any Special Science Enrichment Activities (Based on Imputed National Data) 1. School provides any math enrichment activities (correlation with “science enrichment” =0.91) 2. School provides remedial teaching in science (correlation with “science enrichment” =0.61) 3. Average hours per week teachers meet with students outside of classroom time (correlation with “science enrichment” =0.55) Thus, it appears that the variable “science enrichment,” and the three variables most strongly related to it, can be characterized as instructional practices that might be expected to contribute to student achievement. In view of these consistent direct relationships with science achievement, both within and across nations, the most plausible implication of the variable “science enrichment” for educational policy is that:


41

• Schools should be enabled, and required, to offer science enrichment activities. “Laboratory Equipment Shortage.” As seen in Figures 2.4 and 2.12, the variable “laboratory equipment shortage” was found to be associated inversely with mean science achievement cross-nationally. After computing within-

Fig. 2.12 National Mean Science Achievement Scores as a Function of the National Percentage of Students Who Are Enrolled in a School Whose Capacity to Provide Instruction Is Affected “a Lot” by a Shortage or Inadequacy of Science Laboratory Equipment and Materials (Based on Imputed National Data) nation associations at the student level for each of the thirty-eight nations available for this analysis, the variable “laboratory equipment shortage” also is related inversely to science achievement scores within each nation. Thus, a shortage of laboratory equipment may detract from student achievement both cross-nationally and within each nation. In view of these consistent direct relationships with science achievement, both within and across nations, the most plausible implication of the variable “laboratory equipment shortage” for educational policy is that:


42

• Schools should be enabled, and required, to offer science instruction supported by adequate laboratory equipment and supplies. “Student Paid Job.” The variable “student paid job” was sim ilarly found to be associated inversely with mean science achievement cross-nationally (see Figures 2.4 and 2.13). After computing within-nation associations at the student level for each of the forty nations available for this analysis, the variable “student paid job” was also related inversely to science achievement scores in all but a few nations. Thus, the extent to which parents need (or allow) their 13-year-old children to work at a paid job to earn money seems to increase the time and energy that students expend on a nonacademic activity, which in turn impairs their ability to perform well in science. In view of these consistent inverse relationships between the variable “student paid job” and science achievement (both within and across nations), the implication for social policy is that: • Family economic status should be sufficiently enhanced so that 13-year-old students do not need to work at a job to earn money. Alternatively, strengthen child labor laws prohibiting employment of 13-year-old adolescents. “Need Luck in Science.” The variable “need luck in science” was also found to be associated inversely with science achievement cross-nationally (see Figures 2.4 and 2.14). After computing within-nation associations at the student level for each nation, the variable “need luck in science” was also related inversely to science achievement scores in all but a few nations. Thus, to the extent that students attribute doing well in science to luck, they seem to do poorly possibly because this detracts from their making the effort that is required to do well. In view of these consistent inverse relationships of the variable “need luck in science” with science achievement (both within and across nations), the implication for families and educational policy is that: • Children should be taught that learning in school requires hard work instead of good luck, and a milieu should be created in which the work ethic is modeled and successful.


43

Fig. 2.13 National Mean Science Achievement Scores as a Function of the National Mean Number of Hours per Week Students Work at Paid Jobs (Based on Imputed National Data)

Science Prediction Model Profile for Six Nations Based on the results of the best multivariate model for science, a four-variable profile for predicting national average science scores is presented in Figure 2.15 for each of the six nations participating in SNERP. Points gained, or lost, are measured from the international mean science achievement score of 512. As was seen in Figure 2.11, one predictor variable (science enrichment activities) was directly related to science achievement. In Figures 2.12, 2.13, and 2.14, we can see that the other three predictor variables (laboratory equipment shortage, student paid job, need luck in science) were inversely related to science achievement cross-nationally. Accordingly, Singapore gained points on all four variables because its schools offered science enrichment activities and did not experience shortages of science laboratory equipment and supplies. In Singapore, students tended not to work at jobs for pay and did not believe that luck was needed to do well in science.


44

Fig. 2.14 National Mean Science Achievement Scores as a Function of the National Percentage of Students Who Strongly Agree That, To Do Well in science, You Need Good Luck (Based on Imputed National Data)


45

Fig. 2.15 Predicted Science Achievement Points Gained (+) or Lost (−) as a Function of Each of Four Predictor Variables Included in the Best Multivariate Model for Science Perhaps the most interesting comparisons that can be made in Figure 2.15 are between the three nations from the East and the three nations from the West in terms of the degree to which students from each nation work at a job for pay. As seen in Figure 2.13, the level of national science achievement decreased as the amount of time that students worked at a paid job increased (an inverse relationship). In the three Eastern nations (Singapore, Japan, and Hong Kong), the degree to which students worked for pay was well below the international average as reflected in the prediction points gained by the “student paid job” variable. In contrast, the degree to which students worked for pay in


46

all three Western nations (Switzerland, Germany, and the United States) was above average, as reflected in the prediction points lost because of the “student paid job” variable. As stated earlier, we interpret increasing degrees of student time working for pay as a distraction of time and energy that impairs students’ ability to perform well in science. Comparison of Results for Math and Science The best multivariate prediction models for math and science achievement at the eighthgrade level can be compared directly in Figure 2.4. The two models have only one predictor variable in common (“need luck in math,” or “need luck in science”). This suggests that national contexts for yielding cross-national differences in mean math achievement and mean science achievement are sufficiently different to justify separate analyses of each. For both subject matters, however, our interpretation of the multivariate results shows that both educational variables and noneducational variables are major sources of national differences in mean achievement scores. With respect to educational variables, national science achievement scores are determined strongly by instructional resource variables (specifically, enrichment activities and shortage of laboratory equipment), whereas national math achievement scores are (in our interpretation) determined strongly by national standards for teaching and learning. It seems reasonable that shortages of laboratory (and other) facilities were not a main factor in predicting national mean math scores because such facilities are not needed to teach math. In contrast, laboratory shortages were a main factor in predicting national mean science scores—a reasonable finding as laboratory facilities are a necessary resource for high-quality science teaching. Both the math and science models included variables that some might classify as “cultural.” National variations of eighth-grade students working at a paid job were inversely related to national mean science scores, whereas student beliefs in the emphasis their mothers placed on doing well in sports were likewise inversely related to national mean math scores. Both predictor variables suggest cultural differences in student activities outside of school, activities that appear to detract from a focus on academic performance. Though this seems plausible, it is not clear why the variable “mother sports” emerged as a strong predictor in the math model but not the science model, and why the variable “student paid job” emerged in the science model but not in the math model. A student “attitude” (“need luck to do well in math/science”) was the common predictor variable in both the math and science multivariate models. This certainly indicates a detached perspective by students, and it may reflect low motivation to learn math and science—subjects that, for the most part, are difficult to master. Education and Economic Development A central theme of SNERP was the relationship between education and economic development. Because economic development is a process that occurs over an extended


47

period, this is a complex topic that lends itself to long-term longitudinal study. Unfortunately, a cross-sectional database such as TIMSS can provide only a snapshot at one point in time (1995). Nonetheless, the strong cross-national relationship between a major index of the production of a national education system (the national mean math achievement score) and a major index of the national level of economic develop (gross domestic product, or GDP, per capita) is shown in Figure 2.16. As seen, the six nations participating in SNERP are all bunched toward the high end of economic development, with mean achievement scores that are average or higher. One cannot infer causal connections from the kind of simple bivariate relationship between two variables, such as those shown in Figure 2.16 for math achievement and GDP per capita. It is possible that national education systems contributed to varying levels of educational achievement and economic wealth or, alternatively, wealthier nations invested more in education and thereby produced higher achievement levels. More likely, subtle reciprocal

Fig. 2.16 National Mean Mathematics Achievement Scores as a Function of the Logarithm of Gross Domestic Product (GDP) per Capita Adjusted by the Purchasing Power Parity Index (PPPI) for 1990 relationships exist between education and economic development that play out over many years. We can only speculate about this based on the short-term data available from TIMSS.


48

It is clear from our cross-national analyses of math and science achievement that GDP per capita did not emerge as one of the most powerful predictor variables in the best multivariate modes of national mean math or science scores. Instead, educational, cultural, and attitudinal variables emerged as the most powerful predictors. The topic of education and economic development deserves much more extensive research—research that is designed specifically to ferret out relationships between these two major and multifaceted sectors of human endeavor in the life of nations. Assessment of Methods and Results: Strengths and Limitations Among several possible approaches to studying TIMSS data, we chose to capitalize on its cross-national dimension in order to explain the sources of national differences in math and science achievement. Our objective was to identify the national-level variables that are the strongest predictors of variation among nations in average achievement scores. Within the strengths and limitations of TIMSS data (as augmented by national-level variables from other sources), we have accomplished the first extensive national-level analysis to be reported. Our comparative education research has had several distinctive features: • It has focused on national-level input variables, including student, classroom, and school variables aggregated at the national level. • It has focused on national-level outcome variables, specifically comprehensive (i.e., full-scale) measures of student achievement in math and science aggregated at the national level. • It has focused on studying the cross-national relationships among these national-level input and outcome variables. • It has employed sophisticated multilevel statistical analysis methods to identify key predictors of national mean achievement in math and in science. Our analyses have shown that national mean math and science scores are more strongly related (generally) to student variables (i.e., background, behavior, and attitudes) than they are to educational variables (i.e., teacher qualifications, teaching methods, and curriculum design). In fact, many educational variables that are commonly regarded as important for enhancing student achievement (e.g., amount of teacher professional development) are not related to cross-national achievement differences. This can be viewed as disappointing from an education policy-making perspective because the results provide little direct information about actions that can be taken to improve student achievement. Two possibilities might explain these findings: 1. Variation among nations in a wide variety of educational input variables is not the major source of national differences in academic achievement. We believe this is what the results of our analyses suggest. 2. TIMSS data, and/or the methods we used to analyze the cross-national relationships between educational variables and student achievement, may be inadequate for detecting genuine differences among national educational systems and processes that have major influences on national differences in educational achievement.


49

Although we believe the first explanation to be substantially valid, several aspects of the design of TIMSS and our analyses may not be sensitive to subtle cross-national educational effects. If the intent is to detect the subtle effects of national differences in educational inputs during a particular school year (e.g., the eighth grade) on national differences in student achievement, then the design of TIMSS is far from optimal for this purpose (National Center for Education Statistics 2000). Ideally, one would like to link the attributes of teachers and teachers’ instructional practices to the demonstrated achievement of the students they teach and, in this way, identify effective teachers and effective teaching practice. Such a linking is possible within the TIMSS data, but cross-sectional designs of the kind that characterize TIMSS (and IEA studies in general) are not well suited to this propose. Students enter the eighth grade with knowledge, beliefs, and orientations accumulated over seven years of schooling and some thirteen to fourteen years of family life. What teachers do within the pace of a school year is unlikely to radically alter the achievement level of the class as a whole and so create a sizable correlation between teacher instructional practices and student achievement at the classroom level. The best hope to demonstrate the relationship between teachers’ instructional practices and student achievement is to look at the relationship to growth in achievement over the year, rather than absolute levels of achievement. Recognizing this, the original design of TIMSS was one that required a pre- and post-test to measure this growth. Unfortunately, most of the participating nations were unable to support both a pre- and post-test, so the study reverted to a simple cross-sectional single testing design (p. 91). In addition to the absence of a pre- and post-test design, Schmidt and colleagues (1999) identified another difficulty. They observed that comprehensive (full-scale) test scores (such as in math and science) will not be as sensitive to particular instructional or curricular inputs as a more focused test, such as subscale scores in algebra, geometry, and the like. If so, our analysis using full-scale achievement scores may have precluded the detection of subtle educational influences. As noted earlier by the National Center for Education Statistics (2000), since students enter the eighth grade with knowledge, beliefs, and orientations accumulated over 7 years of schooling and about 13 years of family life, it is reasonable to expect that these cumulative student characteristics might correlate highly with the full-scale achievement scores in math and science because they represent life-long cumulative learning. This should be contrasted with studying instructional events during a particular year, the effects of which could best be measured with a pre-post-test design based on subscale scores focused on these instructional events. Thus, it is possible that strong cross-national education effects might have been detected if it were not for limitations inherent in TIMSS with its cross-sectional instead of a pre- and post-test design, and if particular subscale scores (rather than fullscale scores) were used. With respect to the latter point, however, it should be recognized that the fullscale and subscale scores, in both math and science, correlate from 0.94 to 0.98 at the


50

cross-national level at which our analyses were made. Therefore, finer-grain analyses with subscale scores would probably not lead to substantially different findings about the key predictors of national differences in achievement. Thus, it may well be true that, contrary to common wisdom, the predominant sources of national differences in educational achievement are not educational variables, and that this would be demonstrated with a pre- and post-test design based on subscale scores. If the interest of international policy matters is in the effects of a wide range of student, educational, and broad national variables on full-scale scores in math and science, then the results reported here, based on rigorous cross-national analyses using advanced statistical methods, are no doubt valid. It should be recognized that researchers, policymakers, the press, and the public have showed great interest in the national differences in these comprehensive (full-scale) achievement scores as shown in Figures 2.1 and 2.2. It is cross-national variation in these scores that our research has addressed— the very scores that have generated so much interest. Notes 1. Support for this research was provided by a grant (Award Number R215U980021) from the Fund for Improvement in Education (CFDA Number: 84–215U), Office of Reform Assistance and Dissemination, Office of Educational Research and Improvement, U.S. Department of Education; by a grant (Grant Number REC-9815112) from the Research on Education, Policy, and Practice Program (NSF 96–138), Division of Research, Evaluation, and Communication, Directorate for Education and Human Resources, National Science Foundation; and by the Center for Research and Evaluation in Social Policy, the Graduate School of Education of the University of Pennsylvania. 2. The TIMSS achievement scores reported in Figure 1 and Figure 2 are scaled based on very complex psychometrics (mean of 500, with standard deviation of 100, basically). These scores cannot be read as 0% or 100%, as can scores computed as % of total questions answered correctly. As to what is failing, this is a matter of judgement. For example, many U.S. policy makers state that the U.S. students failed at the 8th grade, even though their average scores were average within cross-nation comparisons. For them, average internationally is failing. Anybody can say anything they want about this, apparently. The relevant context is given in Figures 1 and 2 that show the overall international mean so nations can be compared with this mean and with each other.

References Beaton, A.E., I.V.S.Mullis, M.O.Martin, E.J.Gonzalez, D.L.Kelly, and T.A.Smith. 1996a. Mathematics achievement in the middle school years: IEA’s Third International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS). Chestnut Hill, Mass.: Center for the Study of Testing, Evaluation, and Educational Policy, Boston College. Beaton, A.E., I.V.S.Mullis, M.O.Martin, E.J.Gonzalez, D.L.Kelly, and T.A.Smith. 1996b. Science achievement in the middle school years: IEA’s Third International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS). Chestnut Hill, Mass.: Center for the Study of Testing, Evaluation, and Educational Policy, Boston College. Boe, E.E., G.Barkanic, C.S.Leow, H.May, S.Shin, J.C.Singleton, G.Zeng, and R.F.Boruch. 2001. Correlates of national differences in mathematics and science achievement: Evidence from


51

TIMSS (Data Analysis Report No. 2001-DAR1). Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania, Graduate School of Education, Center for Research and Evaluation in Social Policy. Boe, E.E., H.May, G.Barkanic, and R.F.Boruch. 2001. Predictors of national differences in mathematics and science achievement: Data from TIMSS for eighth grade students. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania, Graduate School of Education, Center for Research and Evaluation in Social Policy. Bryk, A.S., and S.W.Raudenbush. 1992. Hierarchical linear models: Applications and data analysis methods. Newbury Park, Calif.: Sage. Gonzales, P., C.Calsyn, L.Jocelyn, K.Mak, D.Kastberg, S.Arafeh, T.Williams, and W.Tsen. 2000. Pursuing excellence: Comparisons of international eighth-grade mathematics and science achievement from a U.S. perspective, 1995 and 1999. Washington, D.C.: National Center for Education Statistics, U.S. Department of Education. Martin, M.O., I.V.S.Mullis, K.D.Gregory, C.Hoyle, and C.Shen. 2000. Effective schools in science and mathematics: IEA’s Third International Mathematics and Science Study. Boston, Mass.: TIMSS International Study Center, Boston College. May, H. E.E.Boe, and R.F.Boruch. 2003. The ecological fallacy in comparative and international education research: Discovering more from TIMSS through multilevel modeling. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania, Graduate School of Education, Center for Research and Evaluation in Social Policy. National Center for Education Statistics (NCES). 2000. Mathematics and science in the eighth grade: Findings from the Third International Mathematics and Science Study (NCES 2000– 014). Washington, D.C.: Office of Educational Research and Improvement, U.S. Department of Education. National Education Goals Panel. 1996. The national education goals report: Building a nation of learners. Washington, D.C.: Author. Neter, J., M.H.Kutner, C.J.Nachtschiem, and W.Wasserman. 1996. Applied linear statistical models. 4th ed. Chicago: Irwin. Peak, L. 1996. Pursuing excellence: A study of U.S. eighth-grade mathematics and science teaching, learning, curriculum, and achievement in international context. Washington, D.C.: National Center for Education Statistics, U.S. Department of Education. Schmidt, W.H., C.C.McKnight, L.S.Gogan, P.M.Jakwerth, and R.T.Houang. 1999. Facing the consequences: Using TIMSS for a closer look at U.S. mathematics and science education. Dordrecht, Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers. Woessmann, L. 2001. Why students in some countries do better: International evidence on the importance of education policy. Education Next (summer):67–74.

Chapter 3 Pedagogical Practices in English Language Education RITA SKUJA-STEELE AND RITA SILVER The Pedagogical Practices in English Language Education study was conceptualized initially by members from Singapore, Switzerland, and Germany at a February 1996 meeting in Singapore of the Six Nation Education Research Project (SNERP). The basic purpose of this meeting was to define the aims and scope of a collaborative project with two broad goals: • Explore the ways in which English language teaching is carried out in the participating countries • Consider connections between language education and economic development The participants agreed that the first phase of the project should comprise a review of sociopolitical and sociocultural backgrounds of each country related to national language and literacy education, as well as to economic policy. In addition, the participants were eager to involve policymakers in all facets of the research. At the highest level, that of the Steering Committee, policymakers were represented by John Yip, then-director of Education (Singapore); Jean-Etienne Berset, head of International Affairs, Swiss Federal Office for Professional Education and Technology (Switzerland); Zhang Li, director general, National Centre for Education Development and Research (China); and Susan Fuhrman, dean of the University of Pennsylvania Graduate School of Education and director of the Center for Policy Research in Education. In Singapore, the participation of Chan Jee Kun—director of the Curriculum Planning and Development Division in the Ministry of Education—in Steering Committee meetings also ensured that the focus of projects in which Singapore was involved would produce results that could be useful in policy making. At key stages of SNERP, reports were presented to the Ministerial Committee Meeting. When Yip retired from the ministry, Wee Heng Tin, director general, convened a meeting of all those involved in the project to discuss the status and progress being made in the project. During their visits to Singapore, the National Institute of Education (NIE) also involved François Grin and Christoph Metzger of Switzerland, and Nancy Hornberger and Erling Boe of the United States, in discussions about the broader implications of SNERP and how our different countries were using education to promote economic growth. At one of the meetings held in the United States, then Secretary for Education Richard Riley addressed SNERP participants.

Pedagogical practices in english language education

53

Introduction From the outset it was clear that the project would be challenging. First, while all countries expressed an interest in the study, it was not clear that they could all be full participants involved in data collection. Second, the varied English language teaching (ELT) concerns in each country could lead to difficulties in determining a common focus. Each of the three participating countries had different interests. Singapore wanted to focus on primary language education; Switzerland on language in the workplace; and Germany on the use of technology. Grin (1997a) set out a detailed summary of progress and discussions up to that point. Finally, the different contexts for language education in each country could lead to complications in establishing a common research framework. It was agreed that each country would pursue its particular research interest but would facilitate data collection for others in their home country. Reorientation of the Study Progress on the project stalled after the original principal investigator changed employment and left NIE in 1998. Rita Skuja-Steele was appointed the new principal investigator in 1999. At the annual SNERP meeting held in Shanghai, China, in June of that year, the Singapore research project was refocused on case studies in each of the six participating countries: the People’s Republic of China (PRC), Germany, Japan, Singapore, Switzerland, and the United States. Because of the scope of the project and the large populations involved, data collection was restricted to Shanghai in the PRC and to Philadelphia in the United States. These were selections of convenience as participating researchers lived in these cities. The study overall investigated English language education in large, urban areas (Tokyo and Osaka in Japan, the city-state of Singapore, and the Geneva area in Switzerland). The project was reconceptualized and named the Pedagogical Practices in English Language Education (PPELE) study to reflect the emphasis on language teaching in the fourth year of English learning. Given the countries involved in the project, the study focused on English instruction for students who were (for the most part) not considered to be native speakers of English. As some families in Singapore and some of the students in the U.S. bilingual class use English as their home language, it may be that these students consider English to be their dominant language. Based on teacher reports, these students are in the minority. This issue was not taken up in this study. The study focused on English as a second language (ESL) and English as a foreign language (EFL) teaching. Overall, the study was intended to be descriptive rather than evaluative and quantitative. Project Motivation The linkage between education and economic policy had been central to SNERP since its inception. Initial surveys revealed that, generally, a strong consensus existed across all participating countries that English was important from multiple human resource standpoints: enhanced job prospects, more effective participation in the global marketplace, and access to the vast English language resources of the scientific and commercial communities. Hence, policy connections among English language education,


54

the economy, science, and industry seemed to be a foregone conclusion. This is in keeping with the view that language-in-education planning is part of human resource development planning (Kaplan and Baldauf 1997). Although we assume that these connections exist, we are aware of the controversies surrounding how they are connected and how these connections can best be studied. For discussions of this controversy from an economic point of view, see, for example, Bruthiaux (2000) and Grin (1995, 1996). For a somewhat narrower “development” perspective, see Murni and Spencer (1997) and Smith (1997). A more political point of view can be found in the writings of Pennycook (1989, 1994) and Tollefson (1991, 1995). A potentially more fruitful line of inquiry would be to seek insights into the relationship between English language education policy and economic development policy. In particular, the aims of policymakers for the teaching of English language and the extent to which such aims might percolate downward through the various levels of the educational hierarchy and into the classroom were of interest. In this context, it must be recognized that, although pedagogy is influenced by social and political factors outside the classroom, the influences might be relatively subtle and indirect. The use of a comparative educational research approach as exemplified by the current study appears to be an appropriate way to explore the issues just mentioned. A study of practices in one’s own country is inevitably biased by overfamiliarity with the situation and with insights blurred by rationalizations. Held up against the mirror of other countries’ practices, one can better perceive the various characteristics of one’s own educational system. Research Aims The overall aims of the PPELE study, given the general background previously noted, were to do the following: • Examine English language teaching practices across a diverse range of participating countries • Understand the extent to which these practices differ from country to country • Understand the manner in which they reflect the cultural and political environments in which they take place

Research Design Research Questions Based on the foregoing, the following research questions were developed for each country studied: • What is the focus and structure of English language lessons? • What are the classroom activities that teachers use for English language teaching?


55

• What are the interaction patterns employed by teachers in English language classes? • What are the rationales and explanations that the teachers give for their classroom practices? • What support systems for language learning are available to and used by English language teachers? • What are the existing constraints as perceived by these teachers? • In what ways do the classroom practices described by teachers reflect the stated government policies of each country for language education and economic development? Choice of Approach The current study, like many research projects, was subject to varying constraints, which in turn necessitated compromises in the methodological approach. Constraints in this case were related to time availability on the part of both participants and researchers, as well as to the fact that the research was being carried out across countries physically far removed from one another and of differing cultural backgrounds. The manner in which these factors shaped the study will be reviewed in order to clarify the particulars of the research approach that was adopted after a considered weighing of the options. The limitations of available manpower and time mandated a selective case-study approach with a limited number of participating teachers. Given the size of populations in China, Japan, and the United States, it was clear that this study could illustrate only a sample of English language classrooms. Although the findings of such research could not be generalized, it was nonetheless felt that such an endeavor would provide “snapshots” of what was going on in classrooms and, as such, would result in useful information regarding present-day English language pedagogy in a variety of international settings. Working within such diverse national contexts meant that a point of comparison had to be identified and had to be clearly present in all the teaching contexts. A unit of comparison was sought. A decision was taken to consider the English learning activity (ELA) as a suitable unit to work with. The rationale for this was that ELAs occur in all lessons because learners go through a sequence of learning activities every time they come to class. Furthermore, for any given learning activity the teacher could be expected to be able to provide a rationale for the use of the activity, as well as after-the-fact reflections as to how effective the activity was felt to be in furthering the aims of the lesson. It was expected that ELAs would be readily understood and recorded by teachers, whereas specifications for lesson plans would be cumbersome and more open to teacher misconceptions of what was required for the research project. Hence, for this study, ELAs were taken to be the basic units of comparison. Design of Instruments In order to collect case-study information on classroom practices across distances and in widely different contexts, a teacher log (TL) form was designed. This form asked


56

participating teachers to note down the essential elements of each lesson in terms of ELAs, interaction patterns, rationale statements, and other reflections/comments. The strengths of this approach included: • Ease of use for volunteer participants • Uniformity across a variety of contexts while maintaining some flexibility • The opportunity to collect concrete information about activities and interaction patterns • More reflective data from rationale statements and comments Ideally the TL data would be supported by extensive classroom observations and by video taping. However, distance, time, cost, and varying cultural and political conditions made this impractical. Therefore, a limited number of classroom observations—at least one in each country—were carried out. Although the participating teachers worked with their respective classes for at least one term or semester (and, in some cases, one year or longer), we used a more manageable time period for data collection. A full semester would result in an unmanageable amount of data and a heavy burden for the teachers. A few lessons or even one week would not provide the evidence of patterns in pedagogical practice, especially given the different amounts of time devoted to English language in each country. We settled on one month of data collection for each teacher as sufficient to show instructional patterns without placing an undue burden on the teachers. Definition of Population to Study Another decision involved the age/ability/grades to be studied. Age and/or grade level was discarded as a basis because the levels at which English language was taught in the different countries was found to vary widely, making comparisons problematic. We decided to focus the study on instruction in the fourth year of English language, regardless of age. We expected that earlier levels would be too basic to provide for comparisons of interest, whereas later levels might be expected to diverge into areas of specialization that could potentially impede effective comparison of findings. In the United States, this meant that we studied “intermediate level” ESL classes because there is an attempt to place ESL students with age peers regardless of number of years in school. In China and Singapore, the fourth year of English instruction corresponds to ages 9 and 10; in Japan, 16 and 17; and in Switzerland, 17 to 19 years of age. Interviews were carried out to further explore teacher perceptions and perspectives. These were conducted with each teacher as a follow-up to the TL. These provided important information about contextual factors as well as clarification from the “inside” view to complement our “outside” view (Cochran-Smith and Lytle 1993). Research facilitators in each country were asked to identify a minimum of five and a maximum of seven teachers who would be willing to take part in the research project. This was a somewhat arbitrary selection, dependent on teacher willingness and availability. Indeed, the only criterion was that they were teaching students in the fourth year of English instruction. Recruitment of teachers was a generally difficult task. The facilitators had to provide information about the project aims to teachers and to administrators; overcome teacher reservations; and gain permission from administrators and, in some countries, from other government departments. This was a lengthy process;


57

due in large part to the commitment and perseverance of the country research facilitators, however, twenty-nine teachers in five countries were finally recruited. Germany was not able to continue its participation, so the project proceeded with the five countries discussed in this report: China, Japan, Singapore, Switzerland, and the United States. Data Collection Data collection consisted of five components: 1. Teacher logs (English language classroom data) 2. Teacher interviews 3. Lesson observations 4. Background information questionnaires 5. Country reports (overview of the current situation for language education) Teacher Logs All participating teachers provided English language classroom data. Teachers were asked to keep track of their lessons and materials for one month for one class of students in their fourth year of English language learning. Simple forms (Table 3.1), known as teacher logs (TLs), were created for this purpose. For consistency, the same TL forms were used across all participating classrooms and all countries. The TL form had different columns for recording information on such categories as general information, daily teaching activities, rationales, and comments. Participating teachers were provided with guidelines for completing the forms; one TL form was to be prepared for each English language lesson with information in each category. General Information. General information on the TL form included the name of the teacher and school, the date, the time the lesson began, the time the lesson ended, and the lesson focus. Teachers were free to interpret the “lesson focus” as they saw fit; however, they usually indicated the English language skill areas that were the subject of the lesson. Activity and Time. Class activities were listed in chronological order. Each activity was described, together with the time spent on it (usually a rough approximation). Teacher/Class Interaction. This part of the TL was used to indicate the various types of interaction (e.g., teacher-led, individual, working in pairs). Rationale or Learning Purpose. Teachers were asked to note down their rationales for including a particular activity in the lesson. Reflections/Comments. Teachers were asked to write down reflections and additional comments. This was an open category that gave the teachers a chance to add comments about the effect of the activity, other aspects about the lesson, or anything they thought would be important for the researchers to know.


58

TABLE 3.1 Teacher Log

At the end of the one-month period, each teacher sent the TLs to the facilitator. The facilitator in each country then forwarded them to Singapore for analysis. Altogether, a total of 468 TLs were collected and analyzed. Teacher Interviews Interviews were conducted as soon as feasible after one month of lesson recording (TL completion). The research facilitator was invited to be present at these interviews, for reasons of protocol as well as for assistance in clarifying background on the local teaching situation. The purpose of the interviews was to flesh out the findings arising out of TL analysis and to provide teachers an opportunity to articulate their views. The teacher interviews were anchored in a series of standardized questions related to activities in the classroom. The questions were constructed so that information from the interviews addressed the research aims of the project and explored in greater detail the information provided on the TLs. The majority of the questions were used across all interviews and across all countries. In addition, some questions were introduced for each country based on country-specific issues that arose in the TLs. Questions were also introduced to explore features specific to individual teachers as identified in their TLs and to elicit clarification as needed. An overview of the TLs and a sample lesson were used during the interview to refresh the memories of the participating teachers and to provide an opportunity for confirming or disconfirming our initial analysis of the teachers’ ELAs, interaction patterns, rationales, and comments. Other topics that arose during the interview were also probed. Lesson Observations During the visit to interview teachers in each country, classroom visits and observations were arranged. These visits depended on feasibility, willingness of the teacher, and regulations/policies in each school/country. Thus the number of observations in each country varied (one, two, or three in each country).


59

Background Information Questionnaires Information about each class and school, and the professional background of the teacher, was provided via brief teacher questionnaires. Country Reports An overview report of the current situation for language education, especially English language education, was prepared for each country. These reports, known as “country reports,” were prepared by researchers who were knowledgeable about the country’s policies and educational system. The country reports were designed to provide important information about the educational, linguistic, and economic systems in each participating country. They were written with an eye toward helping others (i.e., those from other countries) become acquainted with the country-specific systems that influence language education. The country reports provided background information on the following: • Demographic data, including information on immigration, foreign populations, and ethnic groups • Linguistic information, including dominant languages, language-use patterns, and any relevant aspects of bilingualism and multilingualism • Discussion of language planning and policy efforts and their impacts • Historical information that would be crucial to understanding current educational, linguistic, and/or economic systems • A description of the educational system • A description of English language education and its role in the educational system Information from the country reports, as well as additional searches of government documents and news media, contributed information on social context, cultural factors, and language and education policies. Data Analysis Teacher Logs As received from the teachers, some TLs were typed and quite easy to read, while others were written by hand; some were written in full sentences, others in brief phrases. In order to extract meaningful components from the data, analysis of TLs was carried out through a process of progressive data condensation so that patterns and trends became apparent. As a first step in this process, the information in each column was visually scanned to highlight keywords and expressions that reflected the essence of the information. This information was then tabulated in a TL Summary that, in effect, condensed all critical information into an abbreviated, focused document. Thereafter, this TL Summary was used as a source of information to support analysis of classroom activities and the teacher


60

rationales and views regarding these activities, as described in the following sections. The original TLs were used for clarification and crosschecking. Activities. The TL activities column for each lesson (now condensed in the TL Summary) was analyzed to identify the various kinds of ELAs reflected in the lessons. Specific types of changes identified activities: if there was a change in materials, topic, concept/skill focus, or mode of interaction, it would be coded as a different ELA. This information was transferred to an ELA Chart that showed repeated patterns in the classroom teaching for an individual teacher (common sequences of activities). Subsequently, an ELA Frequency Chart of activities for all lessons in the study was constructed. These charts provided an immediate visual indication of the individual activities and their frequency of use during the reporting period. Time. The time spent on the various English language lessons throughout the month was tabulated separately, to provide an indication of the total amount of time spent on English language per month and the average amount spent per week. This information would prove to be of interest in intra- and intercountry comparisons. Rationale or Learning Purpose. The TLs were analyzed to extract key phrases that voiced the teacher rationales related to the various learning activities; for example, “review work from previous lesson.” From these key phrases, the principal verbs, such as review, were extracted and tabulated. Given a total of several thousand phrases appearing across all TLs, a listing of those verbs that appeared ten or more times across countries was extracted and clustered into thematic groupings that reflected the major reasons teachers gave for including ELAs in their language lessons. Reflections/Comments. Reflections/comments usually included realizations formed during or after the lesson. Thus, these were aspects of the lesson that “caught the teacher’s attention” during the actual classroom teaching time rather than at the lessonplanning stage. The reflections were analyzed for keyword descriptors and followed the same procedure as that of the rationale analysis. It is important to clarify our use of frequency information from the TLs. Information on the frequency of a particular activity or teacher rationale statement was taken to show patterns and themes that were worthy of investigation. The absolute number of times an activity was done by a teacher or used in a country was not considered to be significant in and of itself. Teacher Interviews All of the interviews were transcribed and lines were numbered for reference purposes. The transcribed texts were then perused in detail, and sections that contained information relating to the TLs were highlighted and labeled. This material clarified and elaborated information from the TLs. Lesson Observations As stated earlier, classroom visits and observations were done when circumstances permitted. These were considered to be supplementary, rather than primary, data for this report. The purpose of the observations was to provide general contextual information and background for the overall research findings. Detailed notes were recorded from


61

class observations (two for Shanghai, one for Japan, three for Singapore, three for Switzerland, and two for Philadelphia). These notes provided a vivid picture of lessons taught in each country. In addition, these visits helped to validate, to some extent, the TLs of the teacher observed. However, information from the observations could be interpreted only with great caution and careful attention to our primary data sources: TLs and interviews. Background Information Questionnaires Information from the background questionnaires gave an overview of the participating teachers and where they were teaching, as well as information on how many hours of English instruction was given in each setting, how many hours the teacher taught per week, and what other subjects they taught. This provided specific background on the class used in the study, as well as contextual information on the system in that country. For example, through analysis of the background information questionnaires, we were able to determine if the number of hours for English language instruction was standard in the country or was variable. We also could tell if specific textbooks were generally required or if the teachers had choices, and whether teachers specialized in English instruction or were expected to fill broader teaching roles. Country Reports The country reports were used to identify links and gaps between practices and policy. They were also used to provide information about the social, political, educational, and economic context that the individual TLs and interviews could not. Finally, in some cases, information in the country reports helped to explain some of the teaching practices described in the TLs. Research Findings Because the participating teachers were an integral part of the research project, a summary of information on teacher backgrounds is given here first. Subsequently, the research questions are addressed. One caveat is in order: when reviewing the research findings, it must be remembered that we are not in a position to generalize the findings to other classrooms within these countries, nor to other countries, due to the small set of case studies. Instead, the data provide examples of classroom practices situated in local contexts. Together, these provide a window into the range of English language teaching practices. Teacher Backgrounds Participating teachers were, for the most part, experienced teachers with two or more years of teaching experience (see Table 3.2). Two teachers had less than one year of teaching experience: Satoh (all teacher and school names are pseudonyms) in Japan had


62

been teaching for only two months, and Chew (in Shanghai) had been teaching for six months. The “youngest” teaching group

TABLE 3.2 Years of Teaching Experience Country

Range

Average

China (Shanghai)

6 months–13 5.3 years years Japan 2 months–16 14 years years Singapore 2 years–40 12.57 years years Switzerland 5 years–21 15 years* years United States 3 years–25 12.5 years (Philadelphia) years *Note: Two co-teachers in Switzerland did not report the number of years of teaching experience. Therefore, the Switzerland average is based on only four teachers.

was Shanghai’s, with four out of six teachers having less than four years of experience. In some locales, the teachers were involved in teaching a variety of content subjects as well as English. This was most notable in Singapore, where all of the teachers taught a variety of topics (e.g., math, science, music, physical education, art). In Philadelphia, the two middle school teachers taught other content areas, but these courses were also with ESL students. The participating high school teacher in the United States also taught English for non-ESL students. At the primary level, one teacher taught only ESL; the other teacher taught math and science for the same group of students and also taught science and other content subjects as needed. In Shanghai, all of the teachers specialized in English language, although one teacher also taught Chinese. Similarly in Switzerland, a few teachers taught, or used to teach, other European languages (e.g., French, German, and Spanish). These differences reflect differences in the educational structure in each country. Focus and Structure of English Language Lessons The lesson focus varied from country to country: English as a foreign language (EFL) countries (China, Japan, and Switzerland) tended to emphasize grammar and vocabulary. Of the two English as a second language (ESL) countries, Singapore covered all language aspects but tended to put an emphasis on written language, whereas the United States emphasized reading and discussion (see Table 3.3). China. In Shanghai, substantial attempts have been made to change instructional and assessment practices for English language. These include decentralizing curriculum planning, allowing some districts (including


63

TABLE 3.3 Focus Areas Country Listening Speaking Reading Writing Grammar Vocabulary Assessment China — X — Japan X — X Singapore X X X Switzerland — ? X United — ? X States Key: X=a focus for teachers in this country. —=not a focus for teachers in this country. ?=a focus for some teachers in this country.

— — X X ?

X X X X X

X X X X X

— X X X X

Shanghai) to develop their own textbooks, introducing content-based instruction, and beginning English instruction in primary school (Hu 2002a). Decentralization of curriculum planning and the introduction of English teaching at the primary level seemed to be particularly relevant to the emphasis on speaking. All of the Shanghai teachers in our study said that speaking was very important, and two specifically noted that this was different from when they were at school. They also stressed that speaking and listening came before reading and writing; therefore, students in primary school would do a lot of speaking in class. Finally, three of the teachers in Shanghai mentioned that reading could be done at home, after school, or in the library. This, coupled with one teacher’s comment that there was not enough class time to do reading, seemed to imply that class time must be spent on oral work while other skills could be practiced outside of class. Japan. The lack of speaking focus in Japan was, to some extent, due to the classes included in our study. Three of the teachers were from technical schools that offered fewer hours and fewer options for English study compared with high schools. These technical schools tended to opt for reading and grammar, given their limited instructional time. In the high school setting, on the other hand, students took a greater variety of classes: reading, grammar, speaking, and the like. The classes that the high school teachers recorded for this study were not the speaking classes, however; instead, both teachers chose to record their reading classes, which have a greater number of hours of instruction per week. Even if the separate speaking classes at the high schools were considered, it is unlikely that we would have found that speaking had a high profile in English language instruction in Japan. This is one area in which the Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology is pushing for change (Iino 2002). Reading, grammar, and vocabulary were addressed frequently in all of the classes from which we collected data in Japan. These three areas of focus were most frequently integrated with the students reading a text and answering comprehension questions from the textbook, the teacher explaining grammar points and vocabulary, and the students completing textbook exercises on the grammar and vocabulary points. Listening was often integrated in that students listened to the text that they read. It was clear that “reading” in the Japanese context meant “read and answer comprehension questions” as well as “read for grammar usage.” This was somewhat akin to the situation in Singapore. Singapore. Lessons in Singapore were skill focused, with most lessons emphasizing a particular skill area (grammar, speaking, reading comprehension, etc.). Materials (textbooks and worksheets) were prepared around themes to encourage thematic


64

teaching. Each theme was treated throughout one two-week unit often in the sequence of (1) oral introduction, which served as prereading; (2) reading plus reading comprehension questions; (3) listening; (4) vocabulary; (5) grammar; and (6) writing. The sequence was not rigidly followed, however, in terms of integrating vocabulary and grammar. These two areas were addressed in relation to the reading, and activities focusing on these skills might be completed after reading or before/after listening. There were usually two reading passages in each unit and at least one writing assignment. There might be several brief speaking activities depending on the topic and whether speaking was being used as a “tuning in” activity or as a focus in its own right (usually the former). Switzerland. In Switzerland, English is a third language. (Students are required to study two of the three national languages, of which neither are English [they are French, German, and Italian]; they then take English as a third language.) As such, it did not appear to be valued as a means of developing communicative competence. Although five out of six teachers mentioned possible use of English in future jobs and two mentioned opportunities to use English for pleasure and/or travel, they felt that students saw it largely as an academic requirement. The second school language was perhaps seen more as a language of communication in the Swiss context. When oral skills were addressed, it was with reference to oral exams. The classes in Switzerland tended to be dominated by grammar instruction. After grammar, came vocabulary expansion across all classes in our Switzerland sample. It is worth noting that the teachers often taught grammar and vocabulary in response to stated student preferences. In all cases, these teachers mentioned being influenced by the types of activities/ways of learning that the students liked. For example, in one case a teacher did a vocabulary memorization exercise with a test because the students felt they learned best this way. The teacher also noted that the students did not do well on the test, and she used this opportunity to point out that memorization and testing might not be the best strategy for vocabulary acquisition. Four other teachers mentioned doing grammar exercises because the students liked them/wanted them/felt comfortable with them. United States. While we have marked areas of skill focus for the United States in order to provide a basis of comparison with other countries, the key features found in the English language lessons in Philadelphia were diversity and integration. Diversity was visible in the substantial amount of variation from teacher to teacher. Thus, the question marks in Table 3.3 indicate focus areas for some teachers but not others. One commonality was a focus on reading across all teachers and all classes in Philadelphia, although reading was treated differently by the different teachers and at the different levels (primary, middle, and high school). Integration was indicated by an emphasis on integrating skills within each lesson and—to a greater or lesser extent, depending on the teacher—resistance to the idea of “four-skills teaching.” For example, vocabulary was frequently integrated with reading, and grammar sometimes was as well. However, again, it depended on the teacher. One high school teacher emphasized reading and grammar, with little time for discussion and writing. In her interview she mentioned this, noting that trying to find time for writing was always a problem. One of the primary school teachers also placed a heavy emphasis on reading, with little time left for other areas. This was due to the stated purpose of her class within the school schedule: she was supposed to focus on development of reading skills. Writing was addressed at other times in the students’ day with their “regular” classes rather than their ESL class. Speaking, especially through class


65

discussion, was emphasized more at the middle school level than at primary or high school levels. Classroom Activities for English Language Teaching Because this chapter focuses on country comparisons, a detailed analysis of activities teacher by teacher and/or lesson by lesson is not taken up here. Looking across the five countries, we see that materials had a large influence on the types of activities. This merged with the selection of interaction patterns. In countries where the textbooks and/or syllabus are standardized, the classroom activities tended to be more similar across teachers. For example, in China, the activities were nearly identical; in Singapore, they were also very similar from teacher to teacher. In Japan, where there is a national syllabus and a limited selection of textbooks based on the syllabus, the lessons from teacher to teacher were not interchangeable but the types of activities were similar. This was due to the similarity among the approved textbooks. Where textbooks are not mandated and the syllabus is more flexible, as in the United States and Switzerland, there was greater variety in the types of activities used. However, even in Switzerland (where the text is not mandated), once the teacher or school chose a textbook, lessons regularly proceeded from it. Thus, the textbooks and, to some extent, the syllabus, tended to direct the types of activities used. This point is discussed further in the sections on support systems and on constraints. Because most classes were teacher-fronted (as discussed later), classroom activities tended to be those that could be conducted in teacher-fronted formats—teacher presentation of information, teacher-whole class interactions (question and answer), teacher-led discussions, teachers leading students through activities step by step, and teachers checking assignments (worksheets, comprehension questions, oral drills, and assessments) orally with the whole class. This was not necessarily due to the class materials, but there seemed to be a symbiotic relationship among materials, activities, and interaction patterns. Interaction Patterns Teacher-fronted classes dominated in all classes, across all countries, but there were variations in the ways teacher-fronted classes were used. In China, the teacher directed each class activity. The students sometimes worked in pairs or groups, but these activities were highly structured dialogues that generally were based on “hidden drills.” In Japan, some individual work was done, but the classes were overwhelmingly teacher-led. The teachers gave extended explanations and examples, a sort of “chalk and talk” format. “Chalk and talk” was also evident in Singapore and Switzerland, although there were attempts at brief communicative activities usually in the later part of the lessons. In the Philadelphia classes (the United States), there was more teacher-class discussion and much less teaching by “teacher explanation,” at least as represented in the TLs. Teacherfronted activities included “mini-lessons” with the teacher explaining at the board, teacher-led class discussions, and teachers working with small groups, pairs, or individuals.


66

Overall, teachers valued the better class attention and control associated with teacherfronted lesson delivery. However, there was use of pair or group work in many classes for limited time periods. The use of pair work as speaking practice was evident in teacher comments in China, Japan, and Switzerland. In China, this was the predominant view of pair/group work: all of the teachers in Shanghai mentioned using dialogues and pair drills for speaking practice. Teachers in Switzerland also mentioned pair/group work as useful for practice, although there were mixed comments on the value of group versus pair work. For example, one teacher said that group work was noisier because the students tried to speak over each other to get their turn; another teacher said that pair work was better because, in group work, some didn’t speak. Thus, the personalities of students in the classes seemed to influence the choice of group or pair work rather than any ideas about pedagogical differences in the interaction patterns. In Japan, the two high school teachers noted that they rarely used pair or group work—perhaps because the students had other classes oriented toward speaking; the classes used in this study focused more on reading. Two other teachers in Japan noted that they wanted to use pair work, but it was not in the textbook; they commented on not knowing what materials to use. The fifth teacher did use pair or group work regularly, again with the idea of speaking practice. Despite this, he felt that pair and group work were not prominent enough in his class activities. The use of pair or group work for speaking practice was mentioned less than the potential for collaborative learning in pairs/groups in the United States. This does not mean that teachers in the United States did not see pair and group work as useful for speaking practice, but rather that they had a different emphasis than the other countries. The quantity and variety of pair/ group activities was substantially higher in the United States than in any of the other countries. In the United States, teachers were most likely to mention concern for groups learning to work together, especially with students from different backgrounds. In the American classes, all but the high school teacher used pair or group work in each class. That teacher stated in her interview: “I feel a little guilty. I feel like I’m not really being a good teacher, not doing it.” (Barton transcript, lines 574– 575). She noted that one reason for not using pair work in her class was that students tended to group with others who had the same ethnic background. On the other hand, Singapore teachers were the most likely to talk about classroom-management issues related to pair and group work. They were concerned about noise and about the time required to complete the work. Rationales Eight themes emerged from the analysis. Table 3.4 shows these in order of frequency of mention by teachers. Descriptor verbs illustrating each cluster are also given in order of frequency. Italicized descriptors indicate that teachers in all of the countries that participated in the study used them in rationale statements. In examining the eight clusters, we can identify practical teaching arguments that explain how teachers perceive the learning process. The themes and corresponding keywords appeared to set out teachers’ main understandings and explanations for why certain activities were included in lessons. It is interesting to note that such perceptions were not linked to syllabus goals or to theoretical principles. Rather, the concern was for


67

student learning and how to achieve this based on practical experience and on the expectations that teachers understood to be part of their role and job description. This is in keeping with earlier work on teacher practical knowledge (Elbaz 1983). The terms enable and activate prior knowledge (used in Singapore) were the only links to professional language-learning theory found in the rationale statements. In these cases, however, it is not clear if the statements reflected a theoretical understanding or consideration of practical, situated knowledge—these terms are explicitly taught by teacher trainers, appear in the national syllabus, and are used by heads of departments in Singapore. For the most part in the countries studied, the rationale statements did not appear to show clear

TABLE 3.4 Summary of Rationale Statements Themes

Rationale Descriptors

Go over work to reinforce learning Help internalize lessons Use particular learning/teaching strategies Focus on particular language skills Prepare for lesson or a subsequent activity

Review, reinforce, consolidate, revise, recall Learn, understand, know, see Practice, elicit, use, activate prior knowledge, share, answer question Listen, read, write, express, say/speak Prepare, warm up, introduce, tune in, get ready Provide learning Help/aid/assist, enable, support show how to, encourage, promote Augment learning Develop, extend ideas, improve Evaluate learning check, assess, test Note: Italicized descriptors indicate that teachers in all of the countries that participated in the study used them in rationale statements.

references to general educational theory (e.g., schema theory, collaborative learning, constructivism) or to language-acquisition theory (e.g., role of comprehensible input, use of communicative language teaching, learning strategies). Reflections The two main focal points of teacher attention as represented by the reflections/comments appeared to be (1) student behavior/attitude, and (2) the manner in which the class performed the activities during the lesson. The teachers mentioned these two aspects an equal number of times in their TLs. Reflection on Learner Behavior/Attitude. It is interesting to note that teachers from China commented most on and showed concern for whether pupils’ interest was aroused,


68

including generalizations regarding what pupils like/love to do in class and whether they enjoyed the lesson. Singapore was the only country concerned with whether pupils were noisy or quiet. Comments from teachers in Japan and the United States were extremely varied and covered the whole range of descriptors mentioned by teachers in the study, resulting in a low frequency count for any particular category of reflection. Swiss teachers did not comment on student behavior and attitudes in the TLs, apart from some general reference to class interest during particular ELAs. General reference to class interest was also evident in their interviews. Reflection on Learner Performance. When it came to reflecting on the way ELAs were carried out, teachers in China and Singapore commented on three aspects: • What learners were able to do (“understand, recall/remember, use, read, say, imitate, identify”) • General success descriptors (“able to, can do, know, did good job, can complete”) • Difficulty levels (“difficult, easy, not difficult”) Teachers in Japan and Switzerland focused mostly on whether their students had been able to understand a text, rule application, or concept. The American teachers had few comments on any of these three aspects. In addition to these focal points, time, and the difficulty in estimating time, was mentioned as a reason for not being able to achieve activity objectives. We believe this was because students tended to work at their own rather than the teacher’s intended pace during lessons. Comments related to students were usually generalized under “good” versus “poor” learners as a reason for being fast or slow in completing the activity at hand. Some teachers did reflect on whether their intentions had been successfully implemented via particular activities and whether their intentions had been validated by the way the learners did the activity; a few teachers also recorded reactions to individual students. In general, however, specific comments about different types of learners and their needs or references to individual students did not feature as a main theme in the teacher reflections. Rather, they seemed to view the class as a unit, with some attitude or performance exceptions at both ends of the ability range that drew teacher attention during the lesson. Teacher “wish lists” also emerged from the reflections. They wanted to have students who were interested and active, who were able to do the activities well, and who could understand and remember what they were learning. These statements appeared to reflect what teachers valued and considered as features of successful lessons. Some statements were not tied to a specific activity but were reflections at a more global level—almost like teacher “truths” that they had internalized about language learning. Examples include the following: Must have nonthreatening environment for students to talk. They respond well in a nonthreatening environment. Many such reflections incorporated the key words need (e.g., “They need guidance”; “Need to prompt quieter/weaker students”) or important (e.g., “Important to stop students referring to the way tenses are used in French”). As with the rationale statements discussed previously, these seemed to indicate practical arguments that teachers had


69

developed from their experience. A review of these statements revealed that teachers had come to conclusions about what worked or did not work in the classroom and the importance and nature of an enabling environment for learners. They had developed an awareness of continuing learner needs and what to do next in subsequent lessons as further follow-up. Support Systems Support structures for instruction included a wide variety of options. Teachers referred to the following: textbooks and materials, syllabi, staff, facilities, and teacher training/development activities. These options were not mentioned with equal frequency, nor were they given equal weight by teachers across our sample. Textbooks and Materials. Almost all lessons were closely tied to textbooks. There were some exceptions in the United States and with one teacher in Switzerland. In those cases, lessons were often focused on texts of some kind (literature or grade-level-appropriate readings). Teaching materials, combined with the pressure of assessment, were found to have the greatest influence on which teaching approaches were adopted. In Shanghai, the teachers had the choice of a textbook published by a major British publisher with a special Shanghai edition, a textbook from Taiwan, or one published by a university in Shanghai. The textbook for each school was chosen through discussion among the teachers and, for the most part, they seemed quite satisfied with their choice. In Japan, teachers could choose from a limited set of government-approved textbooks for secondary schools. Usually one textbook was chosen for all students at a particular grade level. Teachers at that grade level had to use the same book because the students took a unified exam at the end of the year. The two high school teachers felt that the textbooks were adequate, although they did not include many communicative activities. These teachers supplemented the textbook exercises with their own materials. The teachers in the technical schools, however, found they had greater problems with the required textbooks and fewer opportunities to supplement or deviate from the required text. Teachers in Singapore also used government-mandated textbooks. At the Primary level, only one option was given, the Primay Education Series known as “PETS.” These included the main textbook and other materials such as worksheets and CD-ROMs. The teachers said that options also existed for adaptation and supplementation, at least in theory. In reality, they had little time to use supplementary materials or to adapt the existing materials because of the heavy worksheet burden—worksheets to cover in class and worksheets to mark each night. Over time the worksheets seem to have become an end in themselves. As one Singapore teacher noted, Actually, before I plan a lesson I look at the PETS worksheet. To see if I can do something related to the PETS. So it’s actually, that’s the goal for me. They have to do it. And when they do it, they must be able to fill in all the answers correctly. That’s my goal in the end. (Narayana transcript, lines 1234–37)


70

In Switzerland, the teachers were quite satisfied with their materials. This was true whether the textbooks were teacher-selected or school-selected. They tended to use a main textbook plus supplementary grammar books. On the other hand, where teachers were required to use a textbook that didn’t match class needs, usually selected by committee vote, the teachers were less satisfied. One teacher in Switzerland did not use a textbook; instead, a variety of self-prepared materials to create multimedia lessons centering on literature were used for an academic class. The situation in Philadelphia, in the United States, was quite different—there were few required materials, and teachers were free to make adaptations according to specific student needs. Where schools were rich in materials and options, the teachers were satisfied. Where materials were unavailable due to problems with ordering or were used by another class at the same time, however, the teachers were less satisfied and showed concern for the impact on students. Most teachers found preparation of their own materials quite time consuming; therefore, they relied on textbooks. They said that the commercial textbooks were adequate. In fact, supplementary materials were often taken from other textbooks rather than being teacher-prepared. Syllabi. Given the reliance on textbooks for organizing instruction, it was not surprising that the teachers felt the syllabus had little direct impact on their teaching. In China, there was no required syllabus, as students at this level were not required to take English instruction. In Japan and Singapore, where national syllabi were in place, the teachers were aware of the syllabus but felt that it was realized through the textbook materials; therefore, they did not need to study or follow the syllabus closely in their own planning. In Japan, unified (across all students at the same grade level) assessments based on the textbook played a significant part in determining what needed to be covered in a course. In Philadelphia, there was a common syllabus for schools and grade levels within the city. This was usually communicated through the Philadelphia “benchmarks,” documents that set out what should be accomplished in each year of instruction (School District of Philadelphia n.d.). The teachers in our study felt that they needed to be familiar with these documents but did not have to follow them rigorously in their daily planning. The role of assessment rather than syllabus was also evident in all countries. In Switzerland, students had to take national maturité examinations, which influenced what and how instruction was accomplished (see the later discussion in the “Constraints” section). Where students were not involved in national examinations, the textbook was more likely to have an impact on lesson planning and delivery. Staff. Staff members such as aides, librarians, and special program leaders (mentioned mostly in the United States) and colleagues (to a greater or lesser extent in each country) were seen as a support system in some cases. Resource people were seen as facilitators of instruction through the individualized attention they provided for students with problems (e.g., extra help with reading for small groups, translation in multilingual classes). They also were seen as necessary for taking over part of the administrative duties of the teacher (checking worksheets, preparing instructional centers within classes, etc.). Where collaboration with colleagues was mentioned, it was seen as being very positive. Teachers in high schools in Japan and in schools in China who participated in more lesson planning were more satisfied with their lesson plans, materials, and teaching. Those who were required to follow a textbook or scheme of work that was established by


71

a school committee without allowing true collaboration (technical high schools in Japan and some schools in Singapore) were less satisfied. Where schools did not have systems to support collaboration (through scheduling of slots for collaborative-planning meetings, for example), teachers noted that they felt this would be helpful but was not possible. For example, teachers in the United States, at all levels of instruction, and in the technical high schools in Japan talked about the lack of opportunity for collaboration. The perception of positive results from collegial collaboration was usually about idea sharing, which gave the individual more variety, helped with problem solving, instilled confidence, and/or cut down on the paperwork aspects of teaching. Facilities. Facilities were rarely mentioned as problematic. For example, in one case, a teacher in Switzerland talked about a planned move to a new school that would alleviate problems of crowding; however, this was framed by a discussion of school plans for the future rather than a complaint about facilities. When facilities were mentioned as impacting teaching, it was usually with reference to instructional technology (IT), especially use of computers. All schools had some computer facilities; these were housed in special rooms that had to be reserved. Problems with IT facilities were usually caused by logistical and technical glitches. These included computer rooms that were inaccessible (e.g., rooms in use by other classes, distance from classroom, locked doors) or time spent on activities that were not central to the instructional purpose (e.g., starting the computers, handing out disks, extensive amounts of time needed for typing). Where teachers were most satisfied with IT facilities, this was due to special planning for activities that integrated IT into the lesson or to activities that facilitated paperwork (e.g., video viewing, watching an international news broadcast, submitting lessons via email). Teacher Training and Development. Teacher training and development—when it led to new or better ideas for teaching, problem solving, or ways to cut down on the administrative aspects of the job—was seen in a positive light. However, teacher training and development were mentioned infrequently. This is not surprising because it was not a focus of the study and was not included as one of the standardized questions in the interview. A few teachers in China, Japan, and Switzerland brought up the topic. Those who had individually and voluntarily participated in teacher training/development activities mentioned these as having a positive impact on their teaching. Constraints Although support systems in general could be considered to have a positive impact on teaching and teachers, it was clear from teacher comments that they could also have a negative effect. Thus, constraints were sometimes born of systems intended to offer support. Teachers in this study highlighted three key areas of constraints: textbooks, assessment, and time. Textbooks. As noted earlier, teaching materials had a great impact on teaching approaches. For this reason, teachers were concerned about the selection of texts. Despite being generally satisfied with their textbooks, as described previously, all teachers expressed some reservations. These reservations could be viewed as problems of “fit”: fit between the teacher’s beliefs and the textbook activities, fit for a particular group of students, and fit across different cultures. Teachers in China were the least likely to complain about materials, perhaps because of the collaborative aspect of their planning.


72

Several teachers in Japan noted problems of fit in the first sense—they found that the national textbooks did not allow them to make use of communicative activities that they believed would be beneficial to their students. The teachers in Japan were also most likely to highlight the fact that they had to select materials from among a limited set of government-approved textbooks and that they were required to use the entire textbook without adaptations. This may be the reason that they reported the greatest mismatch between teacher beliefs and materials. This was mitigated, to some extent, by collegial collaboration, as discussed earlier. Teachers in Singapore had some of the same problems with fit. They used required textbooks and felt they had to cover all of the materials. The number of worksheets that they were required to cover, or felt they had to cover, was problematic; sometimes the worksheets took time that the teachers would have preferred to spend on other activities. At least part of the push behind completing worksheets came from parents who felt their children needed to cover every single page in order to be ready for the standardized assessments. Problems with textbooks and materials in the United States were largely due to lack of materials. While teachers usually had a choice, logistical problems sometimes meant that textbooks didn’t arrive in time for the school year and/ or not enough materials were available for special areas. For example, the high school teacher had ordered a textbook, but it didn’t arrive until well after half the year was finished. Instead, she used a textbook that the school had used in the previous year, but it was not a good fit for her class. She felt it was difficult to organize effective, coherent instruction without a suitable textbook. Assessment. As noted earlier, assessment was a concern in all of the countries involved except China. It was not only a purpose for instructional focus in most countries but also a part of classroom instruction. This is not surprising given that English is a required subject (de facto if not de jure) in the contexts presented in this study. Although studying English is not technically required in Japan, studying a foreign language is. As college entrance exams include a section on English, this subject becomes a de facto requirement at secondary level. (See Iino 2002 for discussion.) The situation in Switzerland is also complicated, as described by Grin (1997b), in that English is often the preferred choice for third-language study although students do have other options. The forms of assessment and the way these impacted classroom activities varied from Japan to Singapore to Switzerland and the United States. All of the participating teachers in Shanghai noted that there were examinations at the end of each term. Two teachers stated that the exams were both oral and written; one teacher noted listening, writing, reading, and speaking; the other three teachers did not provide details. Regular tests in class (after one week, two weeks, or completion of a unit) also seemed to operate as a kind of continuous assessment. Test practice and preparation were not done as a class activity, however, and examinations were not given as the rationale for class activities. Questions about tests and examinations elicited minimal responses in the interviews. Overall, this seemed to indicate that tests were used regularly but were not an area of concern. In Japan and Singapore, on the other hand, examinations drove the syllabus to some extent. Teachers in Japan felt compelled to follow and complete the required materials (as discussed in the earlier “Textbooks and Materials” section) because students had to take unified examinations at each school. Although practice tests and activities during class


73

time were not common, examinations were given as a rationale for some activities— especially those on grammar. All but one class had in-class tests on a regular basis, especially for listening. No mention was made of oral testing, but grammar, reading, and writing were mentioned. The only class that did not have weekly tests was the one that met in the computer lab; in that case, the students handed in exercises each week. The students in Singapore also had regular exercises to do (most commonly in the form of worksheets). In addition, they had weekly spelling and dictation quizzes. Beyond this, assessment was a significant presence in the Singaporean classes: examinations were a motivating factor for some activities; they were referred to in explaining how certain activities were done, and whole lessons were devoted to practice for future standardized assessments. “Standardized” in this case can mean standardized across the school for all students at that grade level. This was true of the semester examinations. “Standardized” can also mean across the nation, as in the Primary School Leaving Exam that all primary school children take before going on to secondary school. In the weeks prior to term exams, all of the Singapore classes devoted several lessons to practice tests with practice exams either from other schools or from prior years. These tests involved grammar, reading, writing, and listening; no oral tests were conducted. It is not surprising that assessment is prioritized in primary school. There is a “streaming exam” at the end of the fourth year of primary school used to decide future placement, and the Primary School Leaving Exam (at the end of the sixth year) is crucial for determining selection of secondary schools. It is difficult to tell whether this emphasis on tests exists in a cause-effect relationship with the focus on outcomes that we found in the Singaporean lessons; however, it is clear that outcomes-oriented teaching is bound up in the Singapore exam culture. In Switzerland, as noted previously, teachers were influenced in their planning and instruction by the fact that they had students taking the national maturité examinations. Because the maturité exams were literature based, these teachers used literature extensively in their classes. Other teachers were also influenced by the exams that students would take; however, different exams existed for different types of programs. Most students in vocational programs were preparing for the Cambridge First Certificate examinations. Their teachers emphasized grammar instruction to help them prepare for this exam. One class included activities on oral examinations, and their teacher noted that this was done because students had to pass an oral examination—a direct influence of assessment on instructional choices. The teachers in the United States, like those in Singapore, showed great concern for examinations. The types of tests that concerned them differed, however, as did their impact on their classes. All but one of the teachers mentioned the SAT9, a standardized, national exam that helps evaluate how students in grades 1–8 are progressing toward their preparation for the Scholastic Aptitude Test (SAT). The SAT is a standardized text used by most universities in the United States as part of their college-entrance selection procedure. More information is available at the College Board Web site: www.collegeboard.com. The American high school teacher had students who might take the SAT in the near future. She stated that she did not do any special activities for the exam. On the other hand, she noted that part of the materials she regularly used were in a standardized test format. In this way, her students became accustomed to the required format. This reflects


74

a teacher concern for ESL students understanding the format of the test as much as the content. Both teachers at the middle school level included some activities that were intended to help their students prepare for these exams—again, at least partially geared toward becoming accustomed to the format. One teacher devoted more class time to this than the other did. Interestingly, the middle school teachers were more hopeful that their students would go on to university than was the high school teacher. This may have played a part in the greater effort spent on preparing their students for these tests. It is also true that the time of year (just prior to the test) was a factor in the prevalence of SAT9 preparation that we found. As one of the middle school teachers noted, “Had I done this earlier in the year [the TL] it would look like it was all reading and discussion” (Baiul transcript, lines 629– 30). The second primary school teacher devoted considerable amounts of in-class time to required “running record” assessments based on School District of Philadelphia Guidelines (Lowell transcript, lines 764–70). Running record assessment is usually associated with the Clay Reading Recovery program (Clay 1985). In this case, the teacher’s discussion of running record assessments does not indicate a full Reading Recovery program, but a sort of “on the run” use of a record that can be distinguished from the more formal “miscue analysis.” For a discussion of this distinction, see Tierney, Readence, and Dishner (1995, pp. 509–16). This was a time-consuming task, which she accomplished by having students work in groups on particular activities while she conducted tests with individuals. Allocation of Time to English Language Lessons. The amount of time for English language instruction in each country varied considerably—with the lowest number of hours per week being 1.5 for one teacher in Switzerland and the greatest number of hours per week being 7.0 for one teacher in Singapore. Teachers in Philadelphia (the United States) and Singapore had the greatest average number of hours: approximately 6 hours per week (with some variation from teacher to teacher). The average hours per week in other countries were substantially lower: 3 in Shanghai, 2.25 in Japan, and 3.25 in Switzerland. Table 3.5 summarizes the number of teachers involved in the study from each of the participating countries, the number of lessons conducted, and the time allocated. A range of times is noticeable within each country. This is related to both grade level and type of school. For example, in Philadelphia, where English language instruction at primary, middle, and high school (secondary) was examined, it was found that the high school students (grades 9–12) had the fewest hours (4 hours, 10 minutes per week). Across countries, academically oriented schools (as compared with vocationally oriented schools) tended to have more hours of English instruction. In Switzerland, for example, those in an academic program had the greatest number of hours (5.25) and those in a vocational program had the fewest (1.5). This was true in Japan as well: students in an academically oriented high school had the highest number of hours (3.33) and those in a technical school had the fewest (1.5). The classes in China showed the least variation, with all teachers reporting that the class met for 3 hours per week. If we assume that instructional time indicates, to some extent, the value placed on English language education, we can see that English language is highly valued in the two countries where communication in English is part of daily life through business and education (i.e., the United States and Singapore). Clearly, the social and economic


75

environment outside of school in these two locales impinges on the values of the educational system, so that countries with the most opportunity for using English outside of school encourage more English language instruction inside schools. More English language instruction in schools in turn leads to more students with the potential to

TABLE 3.5 Instructional Time Comparison

Country

Number Average Average of Lessons/ Hours/ Teachers Month Week

China 6 16.5 3 (Shanghai) Japan 5 9 2.25 Singapore 7 23 6.01 Switzerland 6 9.5 3.25 United States 5 18 5.75* (Philadelphia) *Note: Average taken without the extended hours of the Special Education class.

take up those opportunities for use outside of school. Cooper (1989, pp. 157–63) has discussed the role of incentives in acquisition planning. In countries such as China, Japan, and Switzerland, the immediate need for English is lower, and the priority placed on its instruction in schools (as evidenced by instructional time) is similarly reduced. Despite the number of hours devoted to English language instruction across all participating countries, teacher consensus was that not enough time was scheduled for English. Connections between Policy and Teaching Practices So far, we have mentioned relevant contextual factors (e.g., textbook selection, standardized assessment, time and schedule for English language classes). Now, a closer look at the larger social, political, and economic situation in each country is in order with special consideration to how these impact English language teaching. For this, reference is made to the country reports that were prepared as part of this project. Based on the interests of SNERP, connections between English language education and economic development were considered in each country report. In keeping with the individual issues in each country, however, economic and language connections were discussed more or less explicitly. For example, in Switzerland, English is but one of several languages taught in the educational system; in fact, it is often taught as a third language with one of the national languages (French, German, and Italian) taught as a second language. Therefore, discussions of the educational system, language use, and economy in Switzerland must consider not only English language teaching but also teaching of the national languages and how these interrelate. This is in contrast to Singapore, where English language education is clearly connected to economic development efforts, at least at the policy level. At the other end of the spectrum, the position of English as an economic factor is quite ambivalent in Japan. Discussions of English language education in Japan reflect this ambivalence, and one focus of


76

investigations into English language education is often to consider whether English is merely an academic subject. In China there is a push for the use of more communicative approaches with an eye toward developing communicative competence in English (Hu 2002b). However, this is based on a tradition of structured English teaching that is in keeping with a larger societal view of what it means to teach and learn. Communicative approaches espoused in English-dominant countries such as the United States and Great Britain may need to be modified when used in countries such as China. This not only because of the differences between ESL and EFL environments, but also because of the differences of perceptions of what constitutes teaching and learning. Currently, change is occurring at the classroom level because other systemic changes, such as adoption of new textbooks and new testing procedures, are also being endorsed. In the case of Japan, we found that policymakers espouse a communicative teaching/learning philosophy (see Iino 2002 for discussion), and the teachers who participated in our study seemed to agree that this was important. Yet other policy decisions reduced opportunities for change. The use of standardized textbooks and tests not connected to the teaching and use of English as a mode of communication prevented teachers from implementing teaching practices that they believed in—at least to the level they wished. In particular, when conflicting policies set up conflicting expectations (English for communication versus English for written, discrete-item college entrance exams, for example), teachers were left to attempt to accommodate as best they could. The level of comfort, or discomfort, that teachers experienced may have to do with the level of adjustment they believed to be possible. These same tensions were visible in Singapore where government policies clearly pushed for bilingualism with high English proficiency standards (see Silver, 2002, for discussion). High proficiency includes use of an exonormative (preferably British) standard, verbal fluency, ability in listening under a variety of circumstances, and literacy for reading and writing with traditional texts and with new media (electronic texts, use of information technology, etc.). In our sample, teachers felt they should use traditional methods such as drills, extensive grammar explanations, and structured practice to reach the standard desired; however, they were required to teach process writing, to incorporate information technology, as well as to prepare their students for high-stakes exams. In Switzerland, English is taught as a third language and has less immediate importance as compared with the first and second language. It is not always an examinable subject and may not be required for employment or further education. In discussing multilingualism, Grin asks, “What languages do we wish to teach, to whom, and to what level of competence?” (1997a, p. 13). This question seems to underlie classroom teaching in Switzerland in terms of how much time teachers have, what they expect their students to learn, and how the students will be assessed. If English is purely an academic subject, the heavy use of grammar exercises and teaching English as discrete items are an understandable approach. If English is interpreted as an examinable, literary subject, then using Shakespeare as a basis for thematic teaching (as one teacher does) is also reasonable. However, if English is intended as a mode of communication with social and economic impact, then these teachers might have to reexamine their approaches. The fact that Switzerland does not have a national syllabus allows for variability in different cantons (districts). Use of this flexibility is most notable in the ways that English


77

language instruction is adapted for students in different types of programs: academic, university-bound students, and those in vocational programs who intend to move into the work environment more immediately. In the United States, although there is no national syllabus, the school district in Philadelphia does have guidelines for teachers to use in planning the class syllabus. These allow for considerable flexibility on the part of each teacher. This is in keeping with the teachers’ firm belief that they must adapt their teaching for the specific group of students. Because concern for local context is so strong in this setting, we have tried to stress throughout this chapter that we are discussing not only a subset of teachers but also a subset in one city. Local circumstances—such as high poverty levels, a less-than-affluent school system, and potential for racial conflict—have an impact on classroom lessons in ways that are not immediately apparent in the TLs provided by teachers. Evidence of these larger social and political issues, however, can be found in the transient nature of the student population, some of the problems with materials, and the teachers’ concerns for the futures of their students. The dominance of English in the United States makes discussions of the utility of English a rather moot point with these teachers. However, three out of five did note concerns for the students’ opportunities for bilingual development; these three clearly saw both languages (English and the family language) as resources that would be useful for students in the future (Hornberger, Harsch, Evans and Cahnmann 1999). On this point, the teachers were more in line with bilingual policies of the Singaporean government than with the tendency toward transitional bilingual programs (which try to mainstream students into English-only tracks) found in the United States. Taken together, the classroom data and the country reports show the diversity of educational systems, language issues, and economic connections in the participating SNERP countries. In most cases, government policies regarding teaching and use of English are more implicit than explicit. Connections with economic development are assumed rather than rigorously tested (Grin 1995, 1996), and useful interdisciplinarity is rarely exploited (Bruthiaux 2000). In addition, the “dynamics of the language lesson” beyond that of the conception of a lesson as curricular unit are not taken into account in policy making (Prabhu 1992). Without considering the arena of social interaction (both within the class and outside of it), the implications of curricular decisions can not be fully understood. Discussion Given the limitations of information from a small set of case studies, we are not in a position to generalize findings. Instead, the data present some insights arising from a range of English language classroom contexts, as well as the teaching values and priorities highlighted in five different countries. The greater social and political environment influences all of these.


78

ESL and EFL Environments One contextual factor that must be considered for all countries is that of language use outside the classroom. One way of viewing these different environments is through distinctions of English as a second language (ESL) as compared with English as a foreign language (EFL). ESL environments are those in which the language being learned is dominant outside the classroom. EFL environments, on the other hand, are those in which the language is rarely used outside the classroom. This is a very simplified view of the ESL/ EFL dichotomy; for a fuller discussion, see Nayar (1997). Contrary to the traditional view of ESL and EFL environments as a dichotomy, the five countries in this study show a continuum of possibilities (see Figure 3.1). Japan and Switzerland are clustered together at the EFL end of the continuum because English is not the dominant language, not an official language, and often is not necessary for conducting business. Although teachers in both countries noted that English could be useful for future work, it was not considered to be a requirement for gaining employment. China is placed toward the middle because English is also not the dominant language nor is it an official language. In Shanghai, however, it is more and more frequently a language of business and is required for being hired in one of the highly valued jobs in international companies. In contrast, Singapore is clearly an English-speaking country where English is used on a daily basis by many; however, it is not the dominant language. Recent census figures indicate that Mandarin is used at home by 35 percent of the population, so-called Chinese dialects are used by 23.8 percent, and English is used by 23 percent (Department of Statistics 2000). It is still possible for many to go about their daily lives without ever using English, although this is less and less common (KwanTerry 2000). This may also be true for some non-English speakers in the United States; however, there is no question that English is the dominant language in the largely monolingual United States. Choice of Teaching Approaches Differences in preferred teaching approaches and pedagogical focus among the nations surveyed are summarized in Table 3.6. The preferred approaches shown in this discussion are influenced by political, social, and cultural factors, as well as by the pedagogical focus.

Fig. 3.1 Environments for EFL/ESL


79

TABLE 3.6 Summary of Preferred Teaching Approaches Country

Priority

Preferred Approach

China (Shanghai)

Method Uses communicative textbook activities, mandated by the teacher’s guide Japan Academic Teaches language as a Subject content subject, focusing mainly on expanding grammar and vocabulary knowledge Singapore Outcome Emphasizes learner effort and preparation for success on school and national language tests and examinations Switzerland Academic Teaches language as a Subject content subject, focusing mainly on expanding grammar and vocabulary knowledge United States Learner Addresses (Philadelphia) individualized and social needs for language use

Pedagogical Theories and Classroom Realities: What Can We Learn from Each Other? Although the purpose of this chapter is to describe rather than evaluate classroom practices, it is worth taking a moment to consider some of the exemplary and useful practices found. A few insights gleaned from classroom practices in each country are presented here. In China, the teachers have collaborated in their planning to look for ways to include oral skills in their classrooms and to encourage more “communicative teaching,” as they understand it, without forsaking their traditional views of the teacher’s role and the meaning of “learning.” Their sense of adapting theories and practices to suit local circumstances is well placed. The drills and repetition that are part of traditional practice have become embedded in more communicative dialogue tasks and activities that involve the students and keep them motivated. High-stakes assessment at the primary level has been deemphasized so that teachers and students can focus on enjoying learning and performing together.


80

In Japan, all of the teachers involved in the study were very interested in continuing to improve themselves as teachers and as English users; they were equally interested in engaging their students in communicative learning whenever possible. Although the teachers were not always satisfied that they had sufficient time and enough flexibility in the syllabus for adopting communicative language teaching, they all were in agreement with the new policies that promote English for communication. The teachers looked for opportunities to be creative in their lesson implementation, so that students could learn more about communication in English, while also being mindful of the examination pressure that these students experience. The lessons in Singapore show how theories and methods originating in other environments (for example, in more stereotypical ESL environments) can be adapted to local circumstances. These lessons also offer insights into how teachers can work with large classes and high goals for content coverage. All basic language skill areas are covered in each two-week unit in addition to (1) efforts to improve presentation skills for public speaking and building student confidence, and (2) the infusion of information technology. The teachers work tirelessly to help their students develop “Standard English” while bearing in mind the special circumstances of bilingualism in Singapore. Schools in Switzerland have found ways to adapt to the different language-learning needs brought about by Swiss multilingualism. Students are required to study two national languages, of which neither are English; they then take English as a third language. Given this, teachers and schools within the different cantons must make decisions about what they can expect to accomplish in the third language and how this impinges on their teaching. In addition, student goals vary by the type of school and expectations for future employment. Flexibility in the system allows various needs to be taken into account. Teachers in the U.S. classes make a substantial effort to adapt to the learning needs of each class and each group of students. The greater flexibility in the system allows for more attention to individual needs and encourages the incorporation of a greater variety of classroom practices to accommodate these individual needs, with the exception of the bilingual class that had instruction in both Spanish and English. Although they did not teach in the students’ (non-English) home language, the American teachers were aware of the important role of the home language and were supportive of language and literacy programs that would foster both languages. They were also keenly aware of connections among language, culture, and identity, and they worked to foster classrooms that respected these connections. Implications for Policy and Practice There appears to be little evidence of any universally accepted theoretical paradigm molding the approach to English language teaching in the SNERP countries. Our analysis of these diverse patterns gives rise to three observations worth bearing in mind when attempting to implement new policies or influence educational change. Different countries emphasize different aspects of English language learning based on their perceptions as to the role of English language in their particular context. This can be shown on a continuum of contact with the language from “immersion” in a native speaker context to distance from real communication opportunities. The PPELE study


81

countries illustrate varied international learning environments. The pedagogical effect appears not only in the teaching approaches but also in the different coverage of language aspects. In China, teachers had a lively awareness of the need to build oral communication skills in learners, even though it is an EFL context. This was done by adapting “communicative language teaching” methods to lessen conflict with traditional views of education. Japan appeared to put more emphasis on grammar and vocabulary building as means of developing language proficiency and was very examination oriented. Singapore appeared to cover all four language skill areas of listening, speaking, reading and writing, as well as grammar and vocabulary. Because of the examination orientation (as in Japan), however, written skills and grammar development were emphasized. Switzerland might be expected to emphasize a different set of skills because it is located in Europe and is a center for international business. We had anticipated more consideration to be given to oral skills. As the teachers in our sample pointed out, however, English is the third language and the second language takes priority for communication and employment prospects. Teachers in the United States focused on integration and communication with reading, speaking, and writing, but little explicit grammar or pronunciation work. In general, those systems that were more results driven and had concerns about assessment deemphasized oral skills (most notably Japan and Singapore). In the early years of language learning, China did not focus on streaming or examinations but rather on memory work wrapped up in contextualized dialogues. These are really manifestations of traditional methods presented in a more motivating form. The prioritization process was also influenced by the EFL versus ESL learning context, as previously discussed. The data from this study does not indicate that integration and equal emphasis on all language areas is crucial. Rather, it is clear that we need to be more aware of textbook, cultural, and assessment forces operating in classrooms. Such an understanding should lead to more insightful and better-informed decisions about how to implement changes in pedagogy. There is a gap between prevailing pedagogical theory (educational and linguistic) and teacher practical perspectives. As noted earlier, the teacher rationales and reflections did not refer to current pedagogical theory for language teaching. For comparison, Table 3.7 illustrates eight principles used by

TABLE 3.7 Principles of Communicative Language Teaching Role of learner in learning and importance of motivation Collaborative learning Integration of learning Focus on meaning and communication Diversity of learning styles and metacognitive strategies Cognitive processes, not just product valuing Alternatives to traditional assessment modes Role of teacher as facilitator Source: Adapted from Jacobs and Farrell (2001).


82

Jacobs and Farrell (2001) to describe principles of “communicative language teaching” that they believe to be a well-established paradigm in ESL/EFL. The teachers in this study paid little attention to the terminology, let alone the essence, of such overarching principles in their rationales, reflections, and interviews. Rather, their classroom approaches were more directly related to the immediate needs of their pupils and were shaped by practical arguments in response to school expectations and learner needs. This is in keeping with prior research on teacher thinking and teacher cognition (Elbaz 1983; Feinman-Nemser and Floden 1986; Morine-Dershimer 1988). Evidence suggested that teachers were willing to adopt methods that were tied to theoretical principles, but this evidence was supported by the teachers’ perceptions of what was possible in the classroom (feasibility) and what meshed with their personally held theories of good educational practice and how languages are learned (practical arguments). Based on these glimpses, we would not say that teachers do not possess any theory; instead, we find that their teaching rationales are based more on practical knowledge than theoretical knowledge. In some cases, teachers adopted methods and procedures that seemed to be connected to current theories, but deeper investigations of their rationales showed that “theoretical notions” were not the deciding factor; classroom practice was. This was evident in the use of “communicative language teaching” in general, and in the implementation of IT in particular. Our data showed that some teachers integrated IT into their English language teaching practices; however, most did not. Of those who did, many continue to use videos, computers, multimedia, the Internet, and the like as updated tools for existing methods and techniques, missing out on possibilities for learning from and about information technology, not just instructional technology. In this case, knowing more about the policies behind attempts to implement IT are unlikely to be helpful. Instead, teachers need to know more about the various ways IT can be used to deal with instructional issues that concern them. Some of these issues can be found in the teacher rationales from this study, such as consolidating knowledge, providing opportunities for practice, helping students to extend ideas, and encouraging students to express themselves. There is a considerable amount of inertia and of resistance to change within the closed system of the school and the classroom. Teachers established their own teaching approaches and routines some time ago. These are based on a multiplicity of factors, including their perceptions of learner needs, textbook and materials used, assessments, school practices, cultural factors, and so on. If policymakers purport to introduce changes to the educational system, such changes must reflect an awareness of the multidimensional nature of the forces influencing events in the classroom. Policymakers cannot hope to foster educational initiatives by forcing change in any one aspect (such as introducing a new syllabus, requiring project work, or mandating group work). They must also consider changes to the other areas of the educational system (such as inst ructional time, materials, and assessment practices) and without taking teacher practical knowledge into account. With specific reference to assessment, it is clear that some of the countries involved in our study are more examination driven than other countries; they use high-stakes exams to motivate students to pursue English language studies. In general, “teaching to the test” is not a good educational practice. Teachers and educational systems, at least in Japan


83

and Singapore, have regularly been criticized for this. When teachers, parents, and students are aware of the high-stakes nature of tests, however, and those tests require English or particular kinds of English skills, teachers would be remiss not to address those needs. Therefore, if changes are to be made in the way English language is taught, changes must also be made in assessment—how it is done and how it is used. It is essential for policymakers to be sensitive to classroom realities and to make full use of teacher practical and pedagogical knowledge because an understanding of the teachers’ interpretation of policies and practices is crucial to effecting change. Policymakers need to better understand the teacher’s world and the professional consciousness of teachers. Bearing in mind the contextual factors just discussed, not only at the national level but also at the school and classroom level, may help policymakers plan and implement initiatives more efficiently. Because teaching realities will play a part in implementing language education policies, teachers must be included in the planning process. If we miss out on intellectual capital in the form of teachers’ classroom knowledge, then we are not making full use of human capital in our planning. At this point, it is worth mentioning teacher training and the role of teacher trainers. To some extent we have seen evidence in each country of policies enacted at higherplanning levels (national, state, canton or district, city) with the expectation that teachers would implement the policies in classroom practice. Teacher trainers have been expected to participate in the process by transmitting to teachers the reasons behind the policies and the best ways of implementing them in classrooms. This top-down approach, with policy filtering downward through teacher trainers, may be part of the reason that teachers in schools sometimes feel their preservice training did not prepare them for the realities of the classroom. Instead, we suggest that policymakers, teacher trainers, and classroom teachers must work together to plan and implement policy. We would recommend that teacher trainers be brought into a recursive discussion of policy and practice, with teachers and policymakers, so that all may benefit from the expertise of the others. Finally, importing reforms wholesale from abroad is not likely to be effective. Although data from this project show that teachers are interested in what others are doing and are willing to learn from each other, they are also keenly aware of the variety of forces that impact their classrooms. Thus, options presented by investigating policies and practices in other countries can best show us possibilities for adaptation in our own local circumstances through collaboration among policymakers, curriculum writers, teacher trainers, and classroom teachers. References Bruthiaux, P. 2000. Supping with the dismal scientists: Practice and interdisciplinarity in language education and development economics. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development 21(4):269–91. Clay, M. 1985. The early detection of reading difficulties. 3rd ed. Portsmouth, N.H.: Heinemann. Cochran-Smith, M., and S.Lytle. 1993. Inside/outside: Teacher research and knowledge. New York: Teachers College Press. Cooper, R.L. 1989. Language planning and social change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.


84

Department of Statistics. 2000. Census of Population. Singapore: Government of Singapore. Elbaz, F. 1983. Teacher thinking: A study of practical knowledge. London: Croom Helm. Feinman-Nemser, S., and R.Floden. 1986. The cultures of teaching. In Handbook of research on teaching, edited by M.Wittrock. New York: Macmillan. Grin, F. 1995. The economics of foreign language competence: A research project of the Swiss National Science Foundation. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development 16(3): 227–231. Grin, F. 1996. The economics of language: Survey, assessment, and prospects. International Journal of the Sociology of Language 121:17–44. Grin, F. 1997a. The LIVE Project and its partners: Structuring collaboration between Germany, Singapore and Switzerland. Report prepared for the Language and Literacy project as part of the Six Nation Education Research Project. Geneva: Univeristy of Geneva. Grin, F. 1997b. Swiss Multilingualism: Key figures and issues in language teaching policy. Country report prepared for Language Education and Literacy project of SNERP. Geneva: Univeristy of Geneva. Hornberger, N.H., Harsch, L., Evans, B. & Cahnmann, M. (1999). Language education of language minority students in the United States. Working Papers in Educational Linguistics, 15(1). Hu, G. 2002a. The People’s Republic of China country report: English Language teaching in the People’s Republic of China. In R.Silver, G.Hu, & M.Iino, M. English Language Education in China, Japan and Singapore. Singapore: National Institute of Education. Hu, G.W. (2002b). Potential cultural resistance to pedagogical imports: The case of communicative language teaching in china. Language, Culture and Curriculum, 15, 93–105. Iino, M. 2002. Japan country report: Language and English education in Japan. In R.Silver, G.Hu, & M.Iino, M.English Language Education in China, Japan and Singapore. Singapore: National Institute of Education. Jacobs, G.M., and T.S.C.Farrell. 2001. Using the concept of paradigm shift to understand and implement change in second language education. Teaching English as a Second or Foreign Language 5(1):1–16. Kaplan, R.B., and R.B.Baldauf. 1997. Language planning from theory to practice. Clevedon, U.K.: Multilingual Matters. Kwan-Terry, A. 2000. Language shift, mother tongue, and identity in Singapore. International Journal of Sociology of Education 143:85–106. Morine-Dershimer, G. 1988. Premises in the practical arguments of preservice teachers. Teaching and Teacher Education 4(3):215–29. Murni, D., and S.Spencer. 1997. Consultants and counterparts. In Language development: Teachers in a changing world, edited by B.Kenny and W.Savage. Harlow, Essex, U.K.: Longman. Nayar, P.B. 1997. ESL/EFL dichotomy today: Language politics or pragmatics? TESOL Quarterly 31(1):9–37. Pennycook, A. 1989. The concept of method, interested knowledge, and the politics of language teaching. TESOL Quarterly 23(4):589–618. Pennycook, A. 1994. The cultural politics of English as an international language. Harlow, Essex, U.K.: Longman. Prabhu, N.S. 1992. The dynamics of the language lesson. TESOL Quarterly 26(2):225–41. School District of Philadelphia (n.d.) Curriculum Frameworks. Retrieved April 3, 2004 from http://www.philsch.kl2.pa.us/teachers/frameworks/gridmenu/ Silver, R.E. 2002. Singapore country report: Policies on English language education and economic development. In R.Silver, G.Hu, & M.Iino, M. English Language Education in China, Japan and Singapore. Singapore: National Institute of Education. Smith, H. 1997. Donors and recipients. In Language development: Teachers in a changing world, edited by B.Kenny and W.Savage. Harlow, Essex, U.K.: Longman. Tierney, R.J., J.E.Readence, and E.K.Dishner. 1995. Reading strategies and practices: A compendium. 4th ed. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.


85

Tollefson, J.W. 1991. Planning Language, Planning Inequality. London: Longman. Tollefson, J.W., ed. 1995. Power and inequality in language education. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Chapter 4 Vocational Training and Education CHRISTOPH METZGER, HIDENORI FUJITA, SONG-SENG LAW, ROBERT ZEMSKY, JEAN-ETIENNE BERSET, AND MARCUS IANNOZZI Periods of discontinuous change inevitably raise basic questions about skills, training, and the fundamental link between education and the economy. The paradox occasioned by such change is that, even during periods of discontinuity, a nation cannot start anew: goals for education are inherently durable, and educational systems are slow to change or are impossible to replace. On the other hand, social images—perceptions of the adequacy of a workforce, the pursuit of education, the potential for economic mobility, and the viability of educational systems—are quick to be transformed. The conflict between durable institutions and mutable social perceptions often accounts for the disconnection that can emerge regarding educational and economic institutions. It is particularly true for institutions of vocational training and education (VTE) because this educational pathway tends to be accompanied by assumptions about social class and educational goals; it is in some ways situated at the front line of the economic-educational conflict. Increasingly, the questions raised have become international ones, as forces such as technological innovation, the globalization of markets, and the formation of multinational corporations continue to reshape economic systems around the globe. Within their own borders, employers, educators, and policymakers are beginning to reexamine the ability of educational systems, particularly of VTE, to meet rising and changing skill requirements. They ask: • In a new economic era, do different skills require different educational paths for a larger proportion of our students? • Can the requirements of the workforce be met by simply increasing the levels of general education that students receive? • Or, can specialized VTE alone help to fill the gap? Countries with well-defined VTE systems in place might ask more pointed questions: • Is our traditional structure still relevant? If not, how can we retool yesterday’s system to meet today’s challenges?

Vocational training and education

87

The Research Question, Approach, and Methodology This chapter focuses on the role that VTE plays in a changing economic context in four different countries—Japan, Singapore, Switzerland, and the United States—each of which is undergoing a different version of discontinuous change. To address the role that VTE plays in meeting a country’s skill demands, an international team of researchers from these four countries convened the Vocational Training and Education project to map its importance across national contexts. From the outset, our primary motivation for focusing on VTE was twofold. On the one hand, initial discussions with the four countries’ representatives and our respective analyses revealed that the more people view VTE at the secondary level as being outside the educational mainstream, the more likely it is that an overt stigma will be attached to this educational path. At the same time, a country’s society and educational system ought to be responsible for promoting fruitful vocational training and education for young people in order to minimize costs to both society and the individual. On the other hand, the quality and importance of VTE are closely related to several economic and social factors in a country: the employability and employment of young people; their socialization; the quality of the educational system; and economic, workplace, and skillrequirement changes driven by technology. The VTE systems are further affected by factors outside the country, such as the globalization of economic and social systems, which have an impact within its borders. Our intention in this project was to promote discussions in national and international settings that reexamine fundamental issues related to the evolution of VTE to meet national needs in an increasingly global economy. Research Sites and Procedures In each country, a single community was chosen as the research site: • in the United States, the Lehigh Valley in Pennsylvania • in Japan, Hamamatsu, located just outside Tokyo • in Switzerland, the eastern university city of St. Gallen • in Singapore, the city-state itself Despite the enormity of the task, a deceptively simple idea of how to proceed was developed. The full research team, which included one senior scholar from each of the four participating nations and a senior official from the Swiss federal government, conducted site visits in all four countries, witnessing how VTE was organized and what role it played amid changing economic circumstances and educational expectations. In addition to the authors, the research teams included Ah-Seng Ng, Kian-Kwang Ng, Institute of Technical Education and Choon-Kiat Sim, Singapore; Verena Beuchat, ITE, Switzerland; and Jacqueline Hendrick and Pamela Erney, the University of Pennsylvania, United States. The fieldwork began in September 1997 in the Lehigh Valley. The following month, the team went to Singapore. The fieldwork in Switzerland took place in March 1998, and


88

in Hamamatsu the following October. Acting as participant observers, these researchers visited each other’s countries and VTE systems, interviewing school officials, students, and representatives from industry and recording their impressions of the educational systems and industrial contexts in which VTE was conducted. For each site visit, a full schedule of interviews, both individual and group, were organized at eight to ten separate locations over the course of a week. The general pattern included time spent at two companies, two VTE providers, two secondary schools that were not focusing on university-bound students, and two secondary schools that were focusing on these students. At each location, sessions were held with both teachers and students and, at the two companies, with both managers and young workers. At each site the lead interviewer was the senior researcher from that country, although the researchers from other countries posed more than 70 percent of the interview questions. The order of the site visits also proved to be important, as each interviewer honed his or her set of questions over time. The particular national context on which the researchers drew ensured that their individual set of questions did not become standardized. Mutual visits in each of the participating countries were chosen as the primary qualitative data collection method. The research team decided that each visit should take the form of an ethnographic study that included site visits to schools and businesses, as well as conversations with a focus group. The full team of researchers gathered regularly to discuss common themes across settings, distinct issues across settings, and VTE’s increasing or diminishing role in sustaining economic growth—indeed, we did not meet unless the representatives from all countries could be present. All of the parties related to the VTE system were represented in this focus group. The focus-group interview used in our project consisted of the characteristics described below (Bogdan and Biklen 1998). Two small groups participated—specifically, the research team (consisting of approximately eight individuals) and a group of representatives from the parties related to VTE, such as students, teachers, school administrators, parents, employers, and government officials (approximately six to ten individuals). Each conversation was based on questions defined by the visitors’ and the hosts’ teams. These questions were not standardized but did focus on the aspects defined in the working model and on the characteristics of the host country’s educational system. The interview was therefore not fully standardized and structured. To a certain extent, each conversation developed a dynamic of its own, influenced by the reactions of the focus group as well as by the research team’s learning process during and between the visits. Each visit to a participating country followed the same general structure: an introductory meeting organized by the host team, a program of meetings and site visits as arranged by the host, and a closing meeting. The programs included conversations with students and teachers at a range of schools conducting VTE, with young employees and managers from at least two different companies, with parents, as well as with different representatives from the private and public sectors. For more details, see Metzger and colleagues (2001). Ongoing Analysis of Interviews. As our meetings progressed, a common language emerged. For example, it was during our visit to Zug, Switzerland, that the notion of “college mania” crystallized for the entire team. In the United States, the notion of the VTE “stigma” was introduced and subsequently found to be present in aspects of the


89

other countries’ systems. As we proceeded with the site visits, we also began to refine our questions, based on the common issues we had uncovered. We knew that, in addition to our “wrap-up sessions” and dinner conversations during site visits, time was needed to compare our observations and consolidate our findings. We met regularly in a relatively short period to compare impressions, notes, and our country reports in order to arrive at findings for individual countries and distill the common lessons and challenges we perceived across nations. This approach can be regarded as an interpretative paradigm that places greater emphasis on the qualitative interpretation of both facts and perceptions than on quantitative and objective interpretation. It therefore represents a constructivistic research approach expected to generate a deeper understanding of actual events and outcomes in each country. The use of the approach was not without problems. Inevitably, the network available to the host influenced the choice made by the focus groups. Participants in each focus group did not represent a randomized sample but were selected according to their willingness and interest. Both the questions and perceptions of the visitors and hosts were influenced—and, to a certain extent, even biased—by their respective backgrounds in relation to the research questions and by the particular dynamic that developed in each discussion. To a certain extent, these problems were ameliorated by having the research teams exchange impressions and reports, as well as discuss and develop conclusions and recommendations collectively. A more detailed description of the research agenda from February 1996 to December 2000 is included in Metzger and colleagues (2001). Revision of the Research Question As the research group analyzed systems of VTE and their relationships to other social and economic systems, it became increasingly clear that the project’s research question should not focus solely on the relationship between VTE and economic growth. Such an inquiry would be too narrow and, given the scope of this project, would fail to capture the multiple dimensions of the relationship between VTE and economic growth. The research question was restated as follows: • What is the economic and social importance of VTE in each country? • What general and country-specific recommendations can we make? • What are the core elements of a common VTE model? To answer these research questions, the team developed a working model (see Table 4.1) to guide the ensuing qualitative and quantitative analyses and to outline the effort’s final products. The team used this model to develop a set of challenges facing each country regarding ways to improve VTE so as to foster higher rates of employment and, hence, economic growth and social stability. It stressed the importance of taking into account several variables that are necessary for understanding and explaining different systems of VTE and their relationships to employment and economic growth. See also Frommberger and Reinisch (1995).


90

The following section, “General Findings,” reports on the project’s overall findings, conclusions, and recommendations regarding VTE across the four

TABLE 4.1 Working Model VTE

Employment

History of education

General education; vocational education; role of state, workplace, and family Fundamental Equity, income, social security, values of welfare, goals of education society (socialization, knowledge), quality of processes and products at the workplace and on the market, professionalism, mobility, satisfaction of workforce Economic State of development, market system forces and structures, natural and human resources, incentives to invest in young people, social responsibility of the economical system Educational Responsibility of the public sector system for education, relationship between business and schools, responsibility of the economic system for the educational system Political Decision-making processes, system planning, centralization/decentralization, incentives to invest in young people

participating countries. The “Country Reports” section contains the description of each country’s VTE system and the findings as reported by the host researcher, the impressions of each visitor from the other three countries, and the challenges for improving or retooling each country’s VTE system. For a more detailed description, see Metzger and colleagues (2001). The fourth section provides a detailed description of the methodology. General Findings The research process has resulted in a rich analysis and set of meaningful insights on vocational training and education (VTE) systems in the countries we visited. General conclusions and their implications are presented here in brief. They include developing a definition of VTE, explaining the differences among systems in the participating countries, describing the primary trends across countries, and identifying the primary demands on VTE systems across countries. Readers should note, however, that the


91

economic context that first spurred the development of this project had shifted by the time our efforts came to a close. A Note on Shifting Economic Contexts The VTE project began in February 1996 under one set of economic circumstances and concluded under another. Switzerland was contending with an economic recession and was motivated to examine the weaknesses and strengths of its dual apprenticeship system. Meanwhile, Singapore introduced several new initiatives to transform its highly structured educational pathways to accommodate a more flexible knowledge-based economy. Japan’s recession called into question its traditions of lifelong employment, employer-based training, and the structure of its educational system. In the United States, recovery from a recession and continued economic restructuring prompted a reexamination of preparing young people for work and creating a national system to facilitate the school-to-work transition—intensifying questions about basic skills and the educational quality of the workforce that had emerged as early as the 1980s. Although the manifestation of change was unique to each country’s setting, all four nations were experiencing a moment of economic and social discontinuity: fundamental shifts in economic conditions and modes of production that called into question the equally fundamental changes that were required of other institutions. Even as we examined each system, progress was being made in each country to adapt to these changes, and the tide of economic change continued its own ebb and flow. Japan. Recent social and economic changes have begun to reshape Japan’s career development practices. Dramatic innovations in information technology, the rise in economic globalization, and a sharp increase in job turnover have undermined the assumptions of the traditional labor management culture and the “credential society.” Accordingly, Japanese businesses have begun to change their recruitment practices and to reshape their career development schemes. These new trends serve as some of the primary reasons why enrollment in special-training colleges has expanded rapidly and attracted many ambitious students—both high school graduates and university students. On the other hand, many colleges and universities have started to reshape their programs to emphasize more practical knowledge and vocation-oriented skills. In fact, a significant—although not yet large—number of college and university students are also attending special training colleges (called “double-schooling” in Japan) or pursuing vocation-oriented programs outside of their own colleges and universities. Social changes are causing fundamental shifts in the knowledge base and in the incentive structures for education and work in Japan. These same fo rces are also causing the Japanese to reassess their country’s institutions. Under pressure from these changing forces, Japanese education has been undergoing radical reforms and, as a result, nearly every aspect of schooling is being reshaped. Singapore. The Asian financial crisis briefly affected Singapore’s economy in 1997– 1998. At the same time, the increasing trends toward globalization and a knowledgebased economy have provided the motivation for realigning the VTE system. It was evident that earlier efforts in promoting the importance of technical training had visibly elevated the image of the Institute of Technical Education (ITE) in Singapore.


92

Switzerland. During its recession, Switzerland faced several problems related to VTE. On the one hand, the younger generation was experiencing a shortage of demand for apprentices by companies; on the other hand, the economy was—despite the recession— facing a shortage of well-qualified professional workers, particularly in those areas of production/service industries driven by information and communication technology. Supported primarily by intensive initiatives from both the Swiss government and the companies that supply apprenticeship placements, the number of apprenticeships was increased, particularly in the areas of information and communication technology and ebusiness. This development can be seen as an indication that the Swiss VTE system is highly adaptable. United States. Early in the 1990s, the federal government considered constructing a national “school-to-work” system led by the U.S. Department of Education to help young people make better transitions to work during a recession and perceived skills shortage in the United States. With the onset of the longest period of economic expansion in the nation’s history, labor markets tightened, and the interest in formal school-to-work systems waned. The federal government opted instead to open a National School-toWork Office with the intention of promoting policymaking at the state and local levels around this issue. A noticeable slowdown of the American economy began in 1999, as well as a shifting away from the enthusiasm initially expressed over “dot-coms” and information technology as primary drivers of growth. At the same time that the economy began to cool, so too did the fervor around federal efforts to rationalize the school-to-work transition in the United States. Clearly, in U.S. policy, markets are perceived to matter more than systems—proof of the old axiom that tight labor markets are what really solve labor problems. However, it remains to be seen whether the issues of VTE, the school-towork transition, and education and employment policy will once again become important issues if the recession continues. An Analytically Valid and Potent Definition of VTE Taking into account the unpredictability of change and the efforts already initiated, we were able to identify challenges for all four VTE systems that were sufficiently specific to promote meaningful action but broad enough to apply even in the most turbulent of contexts. Our first step, however, was to arrive at an analytically valid definition of vocational training and education that applied across the different countries studied. Based on the observed commonalities and differences in the VTE systems of each country, the research group defined VTE in the following way. Vocational training and education can be defined by reference to a set of core attributes that the educational systems of all four countries hold in common. What. Vocational training and education typically is a key part of a student’s school-towork transition and is intended to result in or relate to employment. In other words, VTE is designed to serve as education or training for employment and can be defined as conveying a specifiable set of skills related to specific jobs or professions. However, many of these jobs are becoming more diversified, enriched, and demanding due to increased competencies driven by information and communication technology. As a result, VTE must increasingly focus on competencies that ensure mobility and


93

transferability. Traditionally, VTE does not include those occupations that result in a bachelor’s degree or its equivalent. For Whom. Vocational training and education is primarily focused on young people ages 16 to 25, although it can apply to older adults who undertake VTE because they left the educational system with no certification and did not pursue higher education. Why. Both economic and social reasons necessitate that a country should sustain a highquality VTE system. First, VTE’s importance rests in a country’s responsibility to members of its younger generations who, for various reasons, do not engage in higher education as a first step in their professional careers. Failing to meet this responsibility increases social costs enormously, resulting at worst in a high degree of youth unemployment or at least in unstable employment and bad job prospects. Second, VTE can play an important role in the process of socialization for young people. Third, VTE has an effect on a country’s economic system; the quality of VTE, in particular, appears to be related to worker productivity and higher quality production and services. Finally— at least in the long run—VTE is important to an investment in human resources by individual companies and public agencies. However, certain attributes of VTE can vary substantially across national settings. Where. Vocational training and education can take place either entirely at school or in the workplace, as well as in dual settings that integrate formal schooling and the workplace. When. Vocational training and education can take place at different stages of the educational system. Typically, it occurs either during the latter part of secondary education or at the postsecondary level. A country’s preference for when VTE is delivered depends on three interrelated factors: (1) the duration of secondary education, (2) the number of years that students receive general education, and (3) the extent to which businesses assume responsibility for VTE. How. Vocational training and education can vary according to the extent to which the learning process is formalized. Typically, school-based VTE appears to be as formalized as general education, while VTE in the workplace can be as structured as school-based learning or as informal as learning on the job. Explaining Differences among VTE Systems Underlying factors that are fundamental and normative ultimately shape a country’s educational system. The fact that the importance of formal VTE is different in each of the four countries studied seems to be related to the following factors: • Each country’s system reflects the valuing of either general education, which stresses general knowledge combined with cognitive competence, or VTE, which stresses vocation-oriented skills and knowledge together with socializing students in the workplace. • Each country places a different weight on the importance and status of various educational opportunities, and the perception of VTE as having equal or less value than general education tends to vary according to which educational opportunities are held in highest esteem. • The countries vary in where they assign responsibilities for the education of young people, either seeing education chiefly as a public function or viewing it as an area in which employers have an important role.


94

It became clear to us that the strategies and solutions each country would pursue to increase the quality and stature of their VTE systems would need to be specific to that country’s individual cultural and economic concerns. Although the desired outcomes may be similar, the development of uniform solutions would clearly not represent a logical starting point for an effective policy discussion. Primary Trends The following primary trends were evident in all of the participating countries’ VTE systems. First, the analyses indicated that differences in the economies of the four countries studied—mainly conditions in the job market—cannot be explained directly by differences in their respective VTE systems. Although the quality of a VTE system may indeed have an impact on a country’s economy, the differences apparent in the VTE systems of the four countries are not significant enough to warrant such a conclusion. Second, in all four countries VTE in grades 10–12 (or their equivalent) runs the risk of being stigmatized. An overt stigma is attached to VTE in those countries in which 25 percent of a cohort’s 16- to 19-year-olds (upper-secondary level) enroll in VTE and in which VTE is, for the most part, postponed until the postsecondary level (for the age group of 19 and above). This is true in the United States and Japan and is somewhat the case in Singapore. This stigma is based on the notion—or at least the prejudice—that the academic performance of vocational students is weaker than that of their peers. It is also related to the fact that, in many countries, VTE systems and their students are segregated from the educational mainstream. When VTE is seen as the primary educational pathway for students with weaker academic performance, the stigma becomes one of association— based more on those with whom these students find themselves in class than on the quality of the education they are receiving or their actual performance in vocational education. This undervaluing of VTE is less apparent in Switzerland’s dual apprenticeship, as evidenced by the fact that approximately 60 percent of the age cohort participates in the system. For the lowest 25 percent of the school cohort, however, Switzerland does face problems similar to those of the other three countries. The lower academic performance of these students—who come from nontraditional language and socioeconomic backgrounds—causes them to face greater difficulties in finding an apprenticeship of their first choice. Third, in all four countries higher education increasingly is perceived as the educational path of choice. This trend, what our research team came to call college mania, is related to escalating social ambitions on the part of students and their families, as well as by the expectations of employers. The valuing of general education at the postsecondary level is also driven by the demands of economic development and a knowledge-based economy. In fact, the more VTE is viewed as the only choice for academically weak students, the greater the importance of general education at the uppersecondary level. Even VTE at the postsecondary level in these countries tends to be valued much less than general education. For example, in a traditional dual VTE system such as that of Switzerland, the pursuit of higher education—attending a higher specialized college—after engaging in VTE is widely seen as advancement in status.


95

Primary Challenges for VTE Systems The study yielded various insights into the educational, social, and economic factors shaping the VTE systems of the respective countries. Each system has its strengths and weaknesses and is being challenged by specific forces and demands. Although there are more differences in the approach and delivery of vocational education than similarities, however, the goals and purposes are often similar. The project identified challenges, described below, that apply to the VTE systems of all the countries studied. Educational systems need to be highly flexible and continuously reshaped. It is simply not feasible for a nation to recreate its educational system whenever external events reduce the effectiveness and efficiency of that system. Given the pervasiveness and extent of economic restructuring and increasing social diversity, all four countries require an increasingly flexible educational system that provides young people with both general education and VTE. On the one hand, VTE must impart substantial and current knowledge and skills and support students’ ability and motivation to adapt to future challenges. On the other hand, it must also socialize young people in the culture of the workplace. Among other things, the VTE system has to be continuously evaluated with respect to the following questions: what content should VTE teach? At which age and at what national rate should students enter VTE? Should VTE be primarily school based or workplace based, or should it take place in combined—that is, dual—settings? Vocational training and education should be positioned within the mainstream of a national education system. While wholesale educational restructuring is neither advisable nor possible, the four countries studied can make changes to link VTE more closely with the academic mainstream and promote the image of VTE as an integral part of mainstream education and training. The stigma issue will continue to have pejorative effects on vocational students as long as VTE is viewed as appropriate only for students with weaker academic performance. While staying focused on its mission, VTE must continue to build on its strengths and promote its social and economic importance. For VTE, the goals of producing world-class facilities, quality programs, and successful graduates must equal what society has come to expect of any degree-granting educational institution. Müller and Shavit (1998) came to a similar conclusion when they criticized placing students with low academic and socioeconomic profiles into poorly developed VTE institutions. Vocational training and education systems should not serve as a short-term economic strategy alone. Each country needs to engage in longer-term strategies for promoting improvement and flexibility in their VTE systems. In other words, a VTE system should not be fundamentally changed simply to meet a country’s short-term economic needs. It is important that the VTE curriculum offers a strong foundation for employability and is sufficiently flexible to meet the constantly shifting needs of the economy. Countries must maintain a continuous national discussion of VTE. These discussions are necessary because VTE plays a substantial role in the viability of an educational system and, as previously described, relates strongly to other social and economic factors. At the same time, VTE systems in each country are facing several important challenges that require national attention and action. Without a sustained dialogue about how VTE can best serve a country’s workforce-development needs, VTE cannot become part of the


96

mainstream educational system, remain flexible enough to adapt to changing requirements, or adequately serve long-term economic needs. In addition, discussions of VTE must honestly address how this pathway educates those students with lower academic performance—particularly those who fall in the lowest performance quartile. The long-term efficacy of VTE to serve economic systems and individual futures rests on an examination of the larger socioeconomic patterns that often underlie how VTE systems are formed. Vocational training and education should prepare graduates for a knowledge-based economy. Curriculum and pedagogy need to advance beyond the delivery of technical knowledge and skills. The key challenge is to impart skills for lifelong learning and sustained employability in a knowledge-based economy. An independent learning environment will help stimulate thinking, creativity, innovation, and problem-solving skills for a more rounded development of students, as well as dispel the stigma attached to students following the VTE path in many countries. Vocational training and education should be directly linked with work experience. VTE students should learn not just for work but through working. Making work an integral part of VTE will strengthen the school-to-work transition for young people. Although the “first school, then work” institutional system may seem more compatible with the needs of a knowledge-based economy, there is value in further enhancing the work-based learning aspects of VTE systems for young people. Employers, as interested partners, should play a supportive role in the development of VTE students. In addition to formal and structured apprenticeship, other more informal approaches, such as internships, that link VTE with work experience should be explored. Vocational training and education should meet the needs of lifelong learning. Similarly, VTE should lead students not only to a career, but through one. The “traditional” role of VTE in preparing young people for work must account for the need to continually learn and upgrade one’s skills or to meet shifting economic demands. Meeting the expected increase in returning adult learners will require a rethinking in the approach and delivery systems to promote accessibility, flexibility, recognition, relevance, and responsiveness. The potential of electronic technologies to deliver relevant VTE in a timely and flexible manner is substantial; countries should examine how these technologies can meet these needs and those of working adults. Applying Our Findings for VTE Stakeholders The project’s findings have a range of applications for various audiences across national contexts. Policymakers. Policymakers at all levels of government and education have the responsibility of reflecting on the importance, rethinking the relevance, and realigning the structure of VTE in their own countries. They can benefit from the experiences of other countries to provide the leadership necessary for making VTE a national priority, improving its ability to contribute to economic growth, and providing students with the skills necessary to perform in a changing workplace. The key lesson, however, is that there are no quick fixes—simply investing in new educational fads, adopting the approaches of other countries, or applying short-term approaches will not solve the problem. What is required is a sustained strategy that takes


97

into account the relationship between economic and educational polices over the long term. Furthermore, simply postponing VTE to the postsecondary level where it is less likely to be stigmatized does not offer a viable solution. Policymakers cannot avoid confronting the economic and educational futures of those least likely to succeed in the educational mainstream at a college or university. Employers. Employers shape the context for VTE in their respective countries. They identify the requirements for preparing VTE students and make critical decisions regarding work-based learning and apprenticeship placements. In order to avoid unintended consequences for students who pursue this educational pathway, employers’ decisions need to be informed by longer-term perspectives and broader goals. As their decisions are increasingly shaped to maximize shareholder value, employers should consider how VTE affects their bottom lines, particularly as VTE offers the promise of skilled workers at entry-level wages. Employers also have a role in national discussions of both public and private responsibility for VTE, and they can help inform the role of VTE in responses to skill shifts caused by globalization and technology. Educators. Our consideration of the role of VTE has taken place during a time when college mania rules in many countries’ educational arenas. As we have mentioned, the VTE track and its students are already being marginalized—in fact, stigmatized—as a function of the extent to which VTE is separate from the mainstream educational system. Educators need to understand that VTE could play a more central role in student preparation if it were a more integral component of a country’s educational system. Clearly, educators should not treat VTE as a last resort for academically less-gifted students. Media. The treatment of VTE in the media varies according to its prominence in a country’s educational system. In some settings it receives attention, while in others it goes virtually ignored. Where VTE is on the radar screen, media outlets should not treat this educational pathway as a “filler” or “sometimes” story. To highlight the need for national and local discussions around the changing nature of VTE’s relationship to the economy, the media should cover it as a continuing issue and help advance a sustained public discourse. Where VTE is faced with stigma and marginalization, mass media can help to place it on a country’s educational map, bringing its value to light and raising questions about why it is unrecognized or unexploited. In general, the media can play a critical role in addressing the lack of professionals that many countries face in light of changing technology, helping the public understand the need to adapt existing systems to fill skills gaps as well as the value in using international comparisons to explore national concerns. Country Reports This section contains a series of reports on the VTE systems of each country studied: Japan, Singapore, Switzerland, and the United States. Each country report consists of a host report and a set of visitor reports written by the research team members. The host report includes a brief description of that country’s educational system; an assessment of the challenges facing its VTE system from the host’s perspective; and a list of findings


98

regarding VTE, as developed by the host and visitors’ discussions. The visitor reports offer the research team’s impressions and their experiences with the VTE systems in the respective countries. One of the strengths of this international comparison is that its design explicitly used and benefited from the perspectives of each researcher. The members of the visiting team share a background in education—and specifically in VTE—in their respective home countries. While their expertise provided critical knowledge during the visitations and the analysis, the experience and familiarity that all researchers had with their own country’s VTE system did influence what questions they asked, what observations they made, what conclusions they developed, and what recommendations they offered. Rather than see the frameworks we brought with us as an encumbrance, we considered our respective biases to be virtuous, in the best sense purposefully applying the lenses through which each visitor viewed a country’s VTE system. Precisely because this study makes international comparisons, the specific experiences and knowledge of each researcher has added value to our work. For this reason, the research team believed it is important to include in the final report the actual text of each visitor’s report for each country studied. The value, we believe, of a comparative study such as this is derived from its ability to allow countries to see themselves as others see them—and to come to understand other countries in a comparative framework. It is a key distinction, as individuals or teams who share the same national origin often undertake international comparisons by focusing on how their country’s educational system compares to that of another. The approach undertaken in this study’s methodology is inherently different; each analysis and its resulting recommendations include the perspectives of researchers from all of the countries studied on each VTE system. Japan Organization of the Japanese Educational System The Formal Schooling System Includes Five Grade Levels Japan’s educational tiers include six years of elementary education beginning at age 6. This is followed by three years of lower-secondary education (junior high school), three years of upper-secondary education (senior high school), two to four years of higher education, and two or five years of graduate education (two-year master’s of arts program and three-year doctoral program). Compulsory education includes nine years of schooling at the elementary and lower-secondary levels. More than 90 percent of young children aged 4 and 5 years old attend either nursery school or kindergarten. Approximately 97 percent of each schoolage cohort is enrolled in senior high school, with a graduation rate of more than 90 percent. Approximately 44 percent of senior high school graduates pursue a degree at Japan’s four-year colleges and universities, roughly 11 percent attend two-year junior colleges, and 17 percent matriculate at two- or three-year special-training colleges (whose diplomas are equivalent to junior college degrees). Senior high school education consists of three major courses (or schools). These courses include the “general course” (general high school) with an academic curriculum, the “integrated course” (integrated high school) with a comprehensive curriculum and an emphasis on elective subjects, and “specialized courses” (vocational high school) that


99

provide vocational and technical education. Approximately 74 percent of students attend general high school, 24 percent enroll in vocational high school, and 1 percent attend an integrated high school. Traditionally, the four major specialized courses in senior high school education have included industry, commerce, agriculture, and home economics. Responding to the declining popularity of traditional vocational high schools and the growing diversity of students’ interests and learning habits, the Japanese government has attempted to expand integrated high school through the reorganization of vocational high schools and those general high schools that are less popular. The Present School System Is Examination Oriented and Hierarchically Stratified As is often pointed out, the Japanese system has been characterized by strict entrance examinations for senior high schools and for colleges and universities, while specialtraining colleges maintain a policy of open admissions. Preparation for high school and college examinations and the tests themselves have served a number of functions in the Japanese educational system. First, they have embodied the ideals of equal opportunity and meritocracy. Second, the teaching/learning process has emphasized knowledge accumulation more than creative thinking and has contributed to maintaining high standards for the academic achievement of Japanese students. Third, they have differentiated senior high schools, colleges, and universities hierarchically on the basis of the average examination scores of successful applicants. Fourth, they have placed substantial pressure on secondary school teachers, students, and parents; many educational reformers and critics believe that this pressure is the cause of various school disorder problems such as bullying, vandalism, and violence. Fifth, the system has contributed to the development of college mania among students and to the stigmatization of vocational high schools students and those from unpopular general high schools. This stigma has tended to erode the self-esteem of these students. Accordingly, VTE at the upper-secondary level generally faces difficulties in attracting smart and ambitious students, as well as in motivating their students to study hard and effectively. Since the 1980s, the Japanese system has received a great deal of criticism, and current reforms are attempting to reorganize it to become more diversified and flexible. However, the question of whether the measures will succeed in solving the system’s problems remains unanswered. High School-Aged Japanese Teens Pursue Vocational Education at Four Types of Institutions These vocational education institutions include vocational high schools, special-training colleges, vocational-training facilities regulated and funded by the Ministry of Labor, and employers’ in-house training programs. Prior to the 1980s, many vocational high schools enjoyed a good reputation, fulfilling an important role of securing successful job placement for their students. Beginning in the 1980s, however, when the enrollment ratio of higher education grew to more than 50 percent, the status and reputation of vocational schools declined and their role diminished dramatically; meanwhile, the role of special-training colleges had expanded. As late as the 1970s, many large industrial companies were eager to provide well-organized in-house training programs for their employees; beginning in the 1980s, however, many employers shifted in-house training toward shorter-term programs or used outside training programs of various kinds, including those offered by special-training colleges. This trend is especially evident in the service and software industries. Thus, VTE for high school-aged teens is now in the process of reorganization and diversification.


100

Japanese Host Report and Findings. Japanese economic success and business culture have attracted international attention as a successful model since the 1970s. Although aspects of the Japanese labor market are currently being restructured due to changing economic circumstances, it would be worthwhile to identify some of its features in relation to the VTE system: Labor-Management Culture in a Hierarchically Stratified Labor Market Labormanagement culture, particularly within large Japanese companies, has several outstanding characteristics. These include lifelong employment; the recruitment of new graduates; job rotation and career development within the company (in internal and segmented labor markets), commonly differentiated by educational degree; in-house and on-the-job training; a seniority- and status-based wage system; and large research and development departments or institutes attached to the company. Generally speaking, this culture has been more evident in larger firms; has been highly valued by employees; has helped to ensure labor stability; and has contributed to the development of disciplined, collaborative, and motivated work habits among employees, as well as cultivated their loyalty to the company. It has also helped to differentiate and stratify labor markets hierarchically, in terms of company prestige and recruitment power. Thus, large companies that promote this culture have enjoyed the ability to recruit new graduates from a relatively narrow set of schools and universities, often developing ties with particular institutions. In fact, the employees interviewed for this study, whose employers were either major corporations in Hamamatsu or had global reputations, were graduates of well-known schools and universities. Traditional Workforce Development: The “Credential Society” and Worker Potential Japan’s culture of labor management—in particular, employers’ tradition of offering job rotation and career development within the company, as well as in-house training—corresponds to employers’ recruitment criteria, which emphasize workers’ potential more than their specific job skills or work experience. This culture has helped to create and reinforce a degree-oriented social and educational culture that emphasizes and values general education rather than specialized education. Thus, in Japan there is a congruency between the culture of the workplace and that of schooling. Schools emphasize general education and character building. Educational credentials are valued by employers and are considered to certify a job applicant’s potential for learning, his or her trainability, and the possession of general knowledge. Employers prefer to recruit employees with higher education credentials and have provided initial in-house training and periodic retraining both on and off the job according to their career-development schemes. The underlying assumptions of this workforce development system are the following: • Lifelong employment is desirable for maximizing a worker’s potential and developing loyalty and commitment to the company. • In-house training is both essential and appropriate, while vocational skills and knowledge provided at schools and universities are not sufficient for high levels of job performance. • Learning potential and trainability are more crucial prerequisites for receiving in-house training than any special vocational skill or knowledge. • Vocational skills and knowledge are almost always insufficient and often prevent workers from adapting themselves to a collaborative workplace.


101

• Businesses continually need to invest in technological innovations to become frontrunners in a competitive marketplace, thus necessitating investments in employee skills. Motivating Students to Study and Develop Self-Esteem Japanese culture places a high value on the notion of “trust.” Japanese people tend to trust someone not on the basis of his or her individual achievements but on the basis of institutional attributes that represent and guarantee sincerity, diligence, and potential. This culture of trust has manifested itself in Japanese society as an emphasis on credential-seeking activities and has been institutionalized in the ways in which credentials, certificates, licenses, and awards are valued and admired. The Japanese value not only college degrees but also the reputations and brand names of schools and universities. This emphasis is not limited to educational degrees. Cultural certificates—such as trophies, medals, honorary certificates, and badges—have as much merit as job-linked certificates. All of these credentials, certificates, and awards—whether they are educational, job related, or cultural—tend to be seen as indicating the abilities, efforts, and achievements of their holders. For example, as the visitors pointed out, all three of the Hamamatsu high schools that we visited placed many trophies and honorary certificates either at their entrance hall or at the principal’s office. Many of the vocational high school students whom we interviewed obtained several credentials and certificates and expressed their intentions to collect more. Success in various extracurricular activities, especially in interschool competitions, is also praised. Nationwide senior high school baseball championships are the most popular ones in this respect, but many other championships at local, prefectural, and nationwide levels are showcased; they are also used to motivate students’ effort as well as to develop their self-esteem. Everyone in a community becomes enthusiastic if some of its students have a chance to win a championship. For example, at Hamamatsu Commercial High School, the visitors observed about fifty students and ten teachers practicing brass band marching in the gymna-sium after 11:00 P.M. They had won the prize for the best demonstration in the previous year and were willing to exert the additional effort to win the award again. Based on the visiting team’s observations and his own expertise, the Japanese host arrived at the following conclusions about his country’s VTE system: The Japanese educational system, like those of many other countries, is not immune to recent social and economic changes. A wide range of factors are causing fundamental shifts in the knowledge base and in the incentive structures for education and work. These include economic globalization and intensified international economic competition, innovation in information and communications technology, the expansion of international relations, the growing complexity of intercultural and multicultural relationships, and the diversification of lifestyle and value orientation. These same forces are also causing the Japanese to reassess their institutions. Under pressure from these changing forces, Japanese education has been undergoing radical reforms and, as a result, nearly every aspect of schooling is being reshaped. For more details see Fujita (1997; 2000) and Fujita and Wong (1999/2000).


102

Singapore and Japan seem to be faced with similar challenges, but each country’s ability to cope with these challenges is different. Current reform movements in Japan are driven by neoliberal and neoconservative ideologies, which together place an emphasis on diversification, freedom of choice, accountability, and market efficiency. Because public education in Japan has historically been provided and centrally controlled by the state, many believe it is necessary to promote an appropriate degree of deregulation and devolution. However, simply continuing with centralization may not prove to be beneficial either. It is thought necessary by some to modify and update curriculum and pedagogy at all levels of education in order to contend with innovations in information and communication technology, economic globalization, and cultural diversification. It also seems necessary to expand and diversify opportunities for postsecondary education, including opportunities to transfer from one institution to another and for recurring and lifelong learning. Although these challenges are important, they are not really social or political in nature but rather more technical, so it is possible to find functional and rational solutions. Japanese elementary and secondary schools traditionally have emphasized general education and character building for all students and have provided them with comprehensive environments for their life and learning. Given the nature of Japanese schooling, given that enrollment ratios in both upper-secondary schools and higher education are high, and given that academic achievement levels are also extremely high in Japan, merely reshaping the opportunity structure within elementary and secondary education is a questionable solution. In particular, reform measures such as introducing six-year secondary schools and promoting “parental choice” may not provide young people with the comprehensive environments for lifelong learning that the Japanese educational system has traditionally offered. The Purpose of VTE in Japan Vocational education in Japan may raise questions among foreign observers concerning its role: should VTE in Japan constitute specialized training for a specific job or preparation for work in general? Or should it consist of general education and citizenship training, along with a vocational learning experience? Vocational high schools have attempted to fulfill all of these roles at the expense of training for a specific job, which is usually provided by an employer through in-house training. There is a remarkable difference between the VTE systems in Japan and Switzerland, and it is driven by cultural and structural differences rooted in each country’s history and tradition. For example, Switzerland’s VTE system focuses on occupation-specific training rather than general preparation for work. Although it is not feasible for vocational high schools in Japan to adopt an occupation-based apprenticeship system such as Switzerland’s, it seems necessary that Japanese schools accommodate the expansion of new business and technological innovations as well as try to refresh mechanical and manual training and to make them attractive. The Stigma Problem In many countries, including the four participating countries in this project, VTE at the secondary level is faced with a lack of motivation and low selfesteem among their students as well as a pronounced stigmatization. Alleviating the stigma—and helping to improve students’ motivation and self-esteem as a result—has proven to be a hard task. In part, the challenge exists because the stigmatization is rooted in the education system itself, and in part because the incentives for making an effort to pursue a better life are eroding as affluence rises. Of course, the extent of this


103

stigmatization varies among the four countries. The VTE problem in Switzerland seems to be less salient because of its dual apprenticeship system and the Meister system (discussed later), both of which provide real work-linked learning experiences and wellsituated career perspectives for their young people. It also is less salient because of Switzerland’s culture, in which students are tracked along specific educational paths, and training for vocational occupations is not considered to be less valuable than general education. The stigmatization of VTE in Singapore also seems to be relatively unpronounced, due to that country’s extremely meritocratic schooling system, ongoing economic development efforts, and egalitarian social policy. These three features combine to create and maintain a culture that values effort making and high achievement as well as cherishes the sense of efficacy among youngsters irre-spective of their school affiliation. The stigma problem seems more serious in the United States and Japan, given their highly expanded education systems and their associated school cultures, which value general education and higher academic credentials. The problem differs even between these two countries, however. In the United States, the stigma attached to VTE programs and their students tends to be linked not only to students’ lower academic competencies but also to their lower socioeconomic status and often their non-white ethnic backgrounds. In Japan, however, the stigma is only related to students’ lower levels of academic achievement. If this observation is true, it follows that the countries should follow different strategies. In the United States, the answer lies in the sphere of social differentiation and discrimination more than its educational system, while in Japan the answer will be found in its educational system and the relatively stable labor market segmented by educational degrees. Ongoing changes in both Japan’s VTE and its labor market will improve the image of VTE. In other words, current Japanese reform measures have tried to expand upper-secondary and postsecondary education; at the same time, the labor market and the workplace have been restructured and reorganized toward more diversification and higher elasticity. Together, these measures have provided a variety of new perspectives on career preparation. Singaporean Visitor Report on Japan. I arrived at several observations about the relationship between general and vocational education during my visit to Japan. The Lines between VTE and General Education Are Blurring in Japan Our visit to Hamamatsu confirmed for us that Japan provides a very high level of general education. Some 97 percent of graduates from lower-secondary schools progress to upper-secondary schools or other institutes of higher learning. The compulsory nine years of schooling is intended to supply a solid foundation in general education. Even the curricula at the vocational high schools—Hamamatsu Technical High School and West Hamamatsu Commercial High School—contain a significant share (up to 50 percent) of general academic subjects. We also noticed that, like the general education institution West Hamamatsu High School, the vocational high schools took great pride in the number of their graduates who have progressed to universities. The tendency of these schools to place a premium on university education has further blurred the line between a general and a vocational high school, making one question the role of vocational high schools. The emphasis on general education is also reflected in an academic bias regarding individual aspirations, parents’ expectations, and employers’ recruitment patterns. This preference is probably due to Japan’s examination-oriented education system, which has placed tremendous pressure on students, parents, and teachers. At West Hamamatsu High


104

School, six of the ten students whom we met cited “examination” or “my study” as their primary sources of worry and distress. Three said that they worried about their futures. The teachers and parents we met believed that the examination system in Japan, particularly the university entrance examinations, ought to be reformed to lighten students’ burdens and broaden their knowledge and interests. Examinations seemed to be everywhere. At the Hamamatsu Technical High School, nine out of the ten students in the focus group had already acquired shikaku, or occupational licenses. Even companies—for example, the Yamaha Motor Corporation—use examinations for recruitment and staff promotion. Industry Plays a Central Role in Japan’s VTE System The three companies that we visited all maintain systematic career development plans for their employees, beginning with initial training and followed by periodic “refresher” training both on and off the job. The Yamaha Corporation even operates two training centers and an advanced skill school to cater to the various training needs of its employees. Perhaps due to a strong culture of on-the-job training, we observed that the large firms prefer to recruit prospective core workers with good general education backgrounds and to train them subsequently inhouse. This point was raised by employees, who said they found no direct link between what they had learned at school and what they currently do at their jobs. In our discussions with employees of three different companies, we were impressed by the professionalism of Japanese workers and their identification with their employers. We noticed that even a sales clerk took pride in and spoke confidently about her work. However, managers and supervisors at Yamaha also see reflections of the changing social and employment climate in new employees. One manager said, “The young Japanese today differ in many ways compared to us. They may be more vocal, but they lack the creativity, motivation, and initiative to carry out tasks without being told.” The Japanese VTE System Is Now Challenged to Respond to Economic and Social Changes Considering the rapid pace of technological change and economic restructuring toward a more knowledge-based economy, we believe that companies will need to place greater emphasis on off-the-job instruction than on-the-job training. To support this approach, Japan’s institutes of higher learning will play a greater role in meeting the manpower needs of industry, especially in training for the new skills of a knowledgebased economy. Therefore, given the changes apparent in the attitudes of Japan’s young people, company practices in lifelong employment, and a growing knowledgebased economy, will the present system of industry-dependent VTE continue to be relevant in Japan? Swiss Visitor Report on Japan. Japan is one of the world’s leading industrialized nations for many reasons. Is the structure of its education system one of those reasons? I was surprised by how loose the link between Japan’s public education system and its stillstrong economic system seems to be. Attending General High School and Subsequently Obtaining a College Degree Is the Desirable Aim Much like in the United States, most Japanese seem to consider attending general high school as the best option for the vast majority of its younger generation. Several reasons were emphasized. First, it is believed to be important to obtain the broadest education possible, both in the sense of general cognitive advancement and as the best preparation for transition to university. Second, obtaining a bachelor’s degree is increasingly seen as the minimum credential necessary to meet the requirements of


105

professional life as well as to advance in one’s career—in fact, the term college mania applies as much in Japan as in the United States. Finally, college education also can serve as a way to postpone the transition into professional life. Vocational training and education at both the secondary and postsecondary levels is only of minor importance and only partly meets the requirements of a rapidly changing economy. Primary responsibility for VTE seems to be relegated to firms as opposed to secondary or postsecondary institutions. Among the schools offering VTE, specialized high schools have a higher status than technical development and training colleges. The former resemble general high schools, combining vocational and general education in order to prepare students for the transition into professional life as well as into vocational junior colleges or university colleges. Therefore, they offer better prospects for students’ futures than training colleges. In fact, the training colleges have difficulty attracting a sufficient number of students—even though their graduates are apparently needed in the labor market—most likely because they focus solely on teaching vocational skills and are unable to continually maintain state-of-the-art equipment and upgrade teachers’ qualifications. Regarding VTE, however, both specialized high schools and training colleges lack the mediation of actual experience in the enterprise, in production according to the real market, as well as in socialization to professional life. Perhaps more so than in the United States, Japan lacks an institution like the Swiss University of Applied Sciences (Fachhochschule), which provides high-end VTE. Junior technical colleges, which offer VTE at the postsecondary level to those students who have not made use of VTE at the upper-secondary level, do not seem to even approach this measure of quality. The Companies Are the Main Providers of VTE Because VTE is not generally seen as a public function, it remains under the purview of Japanese firms; however, this is the case only at the postsecondary level. Within the scope of firms’ more- or-less intensive in-house programs, employees are trained in job-specific skills for their work at the company. At least in Japan’s larger firms, this training is still rooted in a culture of lifelong employment. In choosing young new hires, the evaluation of the employee’s long-term potential has more of an impact on the decision to hire than the applicant’s specific vocational skills or work experience in the labor market. Thus, while many of the employees we interviewed demonstrated a high degree of identification with their companies, their pride in having learned or practiced a specific craft or profession is much less apparent. As a visitor, I noticed several things. First, in reality, in-house training often reflects very job-specific and low-level training that never reaches the skill level of a high-quality VTE program. Second, company-based education is extremely focused on an individual firm and could diminish workers’ readiness to continue their studies outside of the company. Third, Japan’s culture of lifelong employment and firmbased training is threatened by current economic conditions, including recession, globalization, and young people’s changing attitudes toward lifelong employment. The School-to-Work Transition in Japan Is Driven by Several Underlying Factors Similar to beliefs commonly held in the United States, the Japanese postulate very clearly the equity of educational opportunities, in the sense that every student is provided almost the same comprehensive education and socialization. At the same time, I detected a pervasive social desire to achieve upward mobility—and this in a society with little visible social differences. Furthermore, the focus on general education rather than VTE signaled to me that, in the view of most Japanese, high cognitive competence meets the


106

requirements of society, while the formation of vocationally oriented skills and knowledge as well as socialization for the workplace can wait. Japanese people impressed me with their skill and determination, both in providing high-quality general education to all and in socializing young people to Japanese values. However, does the education system invest enough in the VTE of young people? Will firms still be able to provide all the VTE necessary to remain competitive in the future? Should the link between the education and economic system be reinforced in the future? U.S. Visitor Report on Japan. Based on earlier work I had done in Japan, I was aware of the basic dilemmas facing this country’s educational system. These are the greatly diminished birth rates of the 1980s and subsequent negative population growth; the emphasis on tracking and competitive examinations; the use of shadow educational institutions, or the so-called cram schools; and the increasing drive for having as many students as possible matriculate at a university. The four days of intensive interviews in Hamamatsu reinforced those impressions, with important new twists. There Was a Noticeable Sense That Japanese High School Students Were Adopting “Satisficing” Rather than Maximizing Strategies The students and young workers we interviewed in Hamamatsu seemed less tense than expected about the competition to get into university. It is an impression to be expected, because the declining number of high school graduates coupled with an excess supply of university and college places means that competition for entry had, in fact, lessened significantly. Less expected was the fact that even the very best students we interviewed were seemingly willing to settle for lessdemanding choices. I came away with the feeling that the issue was just not as important as it used to be. For Younger Workers, the Recasting of Employment Expectations Was Well Under Way Many of the young workers we interviewed talked openly and easily about the prospect of not working for the same employer all their lives. When pushed, a few of the more ambitious of these younger workers were both ready and willing to search for better positions with other firms as a way of accelerating their careers. The Erosion of Japan’s Once-Powerful System of Technical Education Is Now Complete Although the vocationally oriented schools we visited remained strong, they were not as interesting as, nor seen as a viable alternative to, the academic track high schools. Their strengths lie in their sense of community, in their ability to field competitive sports teams, and in their myriad after-school programs that stretched well into the early evening hours. While these programs have a long-standing tradition within Japanese secondary schools, it is the cocurricular programs, more than the academic and vocational ones, that give definition to vocationally oriented schools. There Was an Unexpected Emphasis on the Collecting of Credentials and Certificates on the Part of Young People I do not know if this is a new phenomenon or one I simply missed before. My sense was that one’s skills were reflected in the number of special certificates, awards, and other credentials one had to display. It was a radical form of what I have come to call “merit badge” education, where skills are seen as discreet units whose mastery can best be demonstrated by passing the appropriate standardized test. The Link between Employment Skills and a University Education Remains Uncertain Most of the students and young workers we met understood that their performance in high school and subsequently in university has a powerful impact on the


107

kinds of jobs and careers open to them. Beyond scientific and technical knowledge, however, it was hard to discern what young people thought they would learn at university to succeed at work. These patterns raise interesting questions about Japan’s current push to convert more of their most selective universities to institutions focusing on graduate education and to turn more of their faculty into research scholars. Several of the young technical workers we interviewed had pursued their master’s degrees and seemed to indicate that their professors hoped they would continue on for their doctorates. Several of these young workers said they eventually decided to seek employment rather than continue their graduate studies because they thought that working would be more engaging than more study. Still, one cannot help but be impressed with the skill, energy, and discipline exhibited by Japanese students at all levels. The changes on which I have focused may be due to the fact that Hamamatsu is a community that is different from those I had come to know during earlier visits. On the other hand, the changes may prove to be substantial, early indications that profound shifts are at hand, as Japan struggles to revitalize its economy and reenergize its educational system. Singapore Education in Singapore is largely geared toward meeting the needs of social and economic development and playing an important role in building a cohesive and modern industrial society with a high standard of living. For the individual, education is perceived as a way to access better jobs and careers and higher levels of success in society. As a matter of policy, all students receive ten years of general education. Upon completion of secondary schooling, approximately 90 percent of a student cohort will pursue postsecondary education and training at Singapore’s junior colleges (JCs), polytechnics, or the Institute of Technical Education (ITE). The overall system is efficiency driven and centrally coordinated to meet educational goals and supply necessary manpower. As such, students are tracked at an early age so that they can study at their own pace, depending on their individual abilities. High and consistent educational standards are maintained. Junior colleges provide two-year academic courses for the top 25 percent of a student cohort preparing for university education. Singapore’s four polytechnics cater to the middle 50 percent of the student cohort, offering three-year paraprofessional diploma courses in engineering and technology, applied arts, and business. The lowest 25 percent are oriented toward technical training at ITE, which offers full-time engineering, technical, and business courses as well as apprenticeship training. Thus, 65 percent of a cohort—composed of polytechnic and ITE students—constitute the VTE component of Singapore’s education system. Singaporean Host Report and Findings. Singapore is a former British colony, founded in 1819, which achieved independence in 1965. It is a young nation with a population of 3.1 million people living on a small island of 650 square kilometers. Located in Southeast Asia, it has a multiracial population, of whom 77 percent are Chinese, 14 percent are Malays, 7 percent are Indians, and 2 percent are from other ethnic groups. English is the principal language of business, government, and education.


108

Singapore is a modern city-state and a global center for industry, business, finance, and communications. Its port is now one of the world’s largest in terms of tonnage handled. Major industries include petroleum refining, elec-tronics, and shipbuilding and ship repair. Its main trading partners are the United States, the European Union, Japan, and Malaysia. The national per capita income is U.S. $26,000. As a young multiracial nation, Singapore’s priority has been social cohesion and economic development. It must maximize the potential of the only resources it has—that is, its human resources—which also are limited. From this perspective, centralized planning around workforce development down to the micro-level of the educational institution is pragmatic. Given this approach, students’ choices and opportunities are not as flexible as in a less-structured system such as that of the United States, where the courses offered are not governed by national manpower needs. Several features of the Singapore educational system were of significant interest to the visitors (Chiang 1998; Tan, Gopinathan, and Ho 1997). The School Tracking and Ranking Systems Became a Focus of Discussion Both the school tracking and ranking systems create pressure and cause stress for principals, teachers, pupils, and parents. However, the principal of Zhonghua Secondary did express support for “streaming.” It has been her experience that the process is quite accurate in sorting pupils by ability. The streaming criterion is transparent and has reduced attrition rates. In fact, several parents noted that, if not for streaming—which allows their children to follow a slower learning pace—these students may have given up schooling. The principal also felt that streaming may promote a self-fulfilling prophecy, however, one that may affect the self-esteem of pupils in the Normal Technical (NT) stream, who are the least academically inclined and most technically orientated, and who enroll in VTE at ITE after completing ten years of secondary education. VTE Has a “Low Image” in Singapore, Particularly at the Level of ITE, Which Trains the Lowest 25 Percent of a Student Cohort The low image of VTE relative to the universities and polytechnics reflects cultural norms. Asian societies tend to hold less respect for skills and greater respect for knowledge. As in many other countries, the desire for university-degree qualification is strong. Testifying to the importance of a degree, one parent explained, “Our society is like that. It is so obvious. In recruitment advertisements, the good jobs specify a university degree as a requirement.” According to Singapore’s teachers, the competitive education environment and the importance attached to good grades in the “paper chase” have produced exam-smart students. Yet, teaching to the test will not place Singapore in a good position for competing in a knowledge-based global economy. As the visitors noted, in addition to knowledge and technical skills, future workers will require critical-thinking skills. For this reason, Singapore has begun to reexamine its education policies and practices according to its “Thinking Schools, Learning Nation” vision. There Is a Concern That VTE Students in Singapore Do Not Experience Real Work at a Real Worksite The country’s “first school, then work” system delays or postpones work for youths. The visitors generally recommended that ITE students get to work earlier—and deemed apprenticeship as a good way to achieve that end. However, students prefer full-time training courses despite the strong promotion of apprenticeship training. Students at an ITE technical institute told the visitors that they wish to complete their vocational training as soon as possible and then advance to another level of training,


109

in particular at the polytechnic. They were concerned that an apprenticeship would entail an extra year of training—and perhaps more if a training bond (commiting the recipient to a particular skill or trade upon graduation) was tied to it. They also believed that apprenticeship training would not teach them as much as full-time training, particularly in terms of the theory and knowledge that will better prepare them for higher studies. One student perceived that engaging in an apprenticeship would “shut the door to the polytechnics.” Singapore Parents and Teachers Were Not Well Informed about, or Were Prejudiced against, Apprenticeship Training Parents and teachers generally saw apprenticeship as an inferior form of training, a perception based on the notion of apprenticeship training in the past for low-technology craft industries. The visitors also noted, with interest, the attitudes regarding apprenticeships of two companies they visited. National Semiconductors, an American multinational, felt that the Singapore government should increase training to meet the needs of industry and that the responsibility of preemployment training of youths rests with the government. On the other hand, Leica Instruments has followed the German tradition of using apprenticeships to meet its manpower needs. From the VTE point of view, employers have a role in workforce development and should participate in the various industry-based training schemes. Singapore’s VTE system is efficient but highly structured and therefore less flexible regarding individual choices and opportunities for youths. Given an increasingly knowledge-based economy, the next fundamental change for Singapore may be to provide a more holistic educational experience to its students, with greater emphasis on thinking, creative learning, and critical-thinking skills. With the restructuring of the economy, the challenge will be to create new learning opportunities for new skills and to increase the value of lifelong learning (Law and Low 1997). Based on the visiting team’s observations and its individual expertise, the Singaporean host arrived at the following conclusions about his country’s VTE system. (See also Institute of Technical Education [1996/1997 to 1999/2000] and Law [1996].) To ensure efficiency, Singapore undertakes centralized manpower planning—a relatively rare practice compared to other countries in which, for example, a ministerial-level council sets intake targets for each edu-cational institution to support economic growth. Measures are taken to influence the career choices of young people, particularly toward science and engineering, in order to support the needs of industry. Singapore’s education system is efficiency driven through mass customization, but it may need to become more flexible to adjust more readily to economic shifts. Singapore believes that youths differ in terms of their abilities, following a bell-curve distribution. The system attempts to maximize the potential of every child by directing them, as early as Primary (grade) 5, into educational tracks with differentiated curricula and paces of learning. Attention is also paid to the lowest 25 percent of the student cohort in order to advance them through an appropriate form of secondary education to minimize attrition. In many respects, the likely educational path a child would take to university, polytechnic, or ITE is practically determined by the time they reach the end of primary education. Schools are organized to run efficiently and to help students excel in a competitive environment that is characterized by ranking. As the visiting team noted, such a highly structured and examination-oriented system will need to adjust to an


110

increasingly knowledge-based economy by placing greater emphasis on critical-thinking skills, creativity, and entrepreneurship. Singapore’s highly structured and differentiated educational system makes VTE a less desirable option compared with university education. Polytechnics and ITE primarily provide VTE at the postsecondary level. These institutions are highly differentiated within Singapore’s hierarchical education system. The polytechnics offer a higher level of VTE training than the ITE—training paraprofessionals through three-year, full-time diploma courses—while the ITE trains certificate-level technicians and skilled workers through one- or two-year full-time courses. In a sense, these institutions are specialized and focused on their primary functions. The polytechnics award diplomas only; they cannot award degrees. Likewise, the ITE awards only certificates. The two universities in Singapore assume a prestigious position, as only they can award degrees. This structure imposes pressure on students, teachers, and parents—given that every child aspires to be a university graduate—to focus on preparing students for university attendance. Although there is some permeability regarding progression within the educational system, VTE is viewed as a less-desired option relative to the university. Full-time institutional training is highly preferred over apprenticeships, making preemployment credentialing more important than experience on the job. The primary function of VTE in Singapore is to prepare young people for work through full-time training. In Asian cultures, scholarship is highly revered. Because apprenticeship is associated with manual work, it is not as well regarded in Singapore’s culture. In addition, Singapore’s government must create a ready supply of trained workers to attract foreign investors for economic development, and full-time preemployment training is perhaps the most efficient way to accomplish this goal. Given this “training before work” regime, students do not experience work on the job, although they are exposed to a great deal of practical, vocational work in well-equipped laboratories and workshops. Although the strength of an apprenticeship should not be ignored, the more important goal must be to ensure that the training received by VTE students is relevant and responsive to the needs of the new economy. Japanese Visitor Report on Singapore. Social selection, training young people to work, and allocating them within the job market are major roles and functions of the modern educational system, and are linked with the societal goals and tasks of promoting social and economic development and of keeping society integrated and harmonious. Singapore is a distinctively experimental country currently pursuing and performing these goals and tasks with an efficiency-oriented, highly stratified, differentiated system of schooling provided and controlled by the state. At present, the system seems to be generally successful, although I believe it is faced with two challenges. These are (1) how to maintain high levels of quality and efficiency in schooling with a shifting knowledge base and globalizing economy, and (2) how to keep or reshape the incentive structure as well as solve the problem of low self-esteem among the students in the lower tracks. VTE in Singapore Is Highly Regulated Education in Singapore is centrally regulated and managed, highly stratified and differentiated, and very much meritocratic and competitive. Singapore’s education system is strictly regulated and efficiently managed by the state to meet the manpower requirements of the nation’s economy, to mobilize the country’s limited human resources on a full scale, and to develop the national welfare and social integration. It is highly stratified and differentiated with an overt tracking system


111

beginning as early as the fifth year of primary education. From Primary 5, students are grouped into three streams with differentiated curricula based on their language ability. Institutional tracking starts from the secondary level where students take the Primary School Leaving Examination and are placed into four courses (Special, Express, Normal Academic, and Normal Technical) with differentiated curricula and subsequent educational opportunities. After finishing secondary education, most students take either General Certificate of Education (GCE) “O” level or GCE “N” level examinations. With these qualifications, they enroll in one of the following three postsecondary institutions: two-year junior colleges (top 25 percent of the cohort), three-year paraprofessional polytechnics (the middle 50 percent), and full-time or apprenticeship training courses offered by the ITE (the lowest 25 percent). University education is open only to those who finished junior colleges and obtained GCE “A” level qualification or those who finished polytechnics. This highly stratified and formally tracked system combines with the examination-driven competitive scheme of social selection and allocation to create the prestige-conscious culture that puts both students and parents under significantly heavy pressure. The System Sorts Students into Different Careers According to National Requirements Vocational training and education in Singapore seems to function as an efficient training and sorting machine while, at the same time, developing career perspectives and self-esteem differentially according to students’ tracks. Such features as a clearly stratified tracking system of school education and the examination-based scheme of student placement seem to be well suited for maximizing the potential of Singapore’s limited human resources and meeting manpower needs for economic development. The differentiation in terms of educational goals, credentials, curricula, and teaching/ learning styles is especially clear among postsecondary institutions. Academic subjects are emphasized and certificates of general education at the advanced level are awarded at junior colleges, theoretical knowledge in the specialized field and exploratory learning are emphasized and diplomas are awarded at polytechnics, and practical knowledge and skill training are emphasized and certified at the ITE. Career perspectives and self-image are also differentiated more or less according to the tracks in which students are placed. Although lower tracks of ITE seemingly tend to lower career expectations and self-esteem, equipping students with well-designed practical training, awarding occupational certificates, and providing good job opportunities seem to compensate for their negative effects and increase students’ motivation for learning. Globalization Is Changing the Nature of VTE In Singapore, as in many other countries, school education in general and VTE in particular is challenged by the rapid development of information technology (IT) and by the rise of a globalized economy. Reshaping teaching/learning styles and expanding IT education seem to have become one of the country’s major policy efforts. This challenge and its associated reforms may create a dilemma—or at least some difficulties—similar to those facing Japan. First, a growing emphasis on IT education may move vocational education toward softtechnology jobs and away from traditional manual work, making the latter less attractive. Second, the greater emphasis on progressive pedagogy and creative thinking may make the student placement scheme (which is based on standardized examination) complicated and controversial, taking the focus away from the high standards of basic knowledge and


112

work habits for which Singapore has been admired. The latter scenario could be problematic, especially at the lower tier of the country’s workforce. Swiss Visitor Report on Singapore. In a society considered to be highly competitive, shaped by a strong common ideology and governed in a rather technocratic and centralized manner, it is hardly surprising to find an education system characterized by national norms and regulated by the state, both in matters of general education and VTE. General Education Is Very Important, but It Is Highly Differentiated Although general education is universal for ten years (one year longer than in the other three countries visited), it is remarkable that a differentiation into four streams takes place after only six years of education, according to a student’s level of achievement. To be assigned to a particular stream largely predetermines whether someone will proceed to university or not. Because assignment is based on a student’s results in a national exam, secondary education in Singapore comes across as a very competitive affair. The practice of ranking secondary schools strengthens this impression further. This differentiation seems to be widely accepted, but the enormous significance of achieving good exam results seems to place teachers, students, and parents under a considerable amount of pressure. General education continues at the postsecondary level, albeit to varying degrees of intensity. While it occupies the whole of the curriculum at a junior college, it plays a lesser role at polytechnics, and an even less important one at ITE. In-School VTE Is Very Important, but It Too Is Highly Differentiated In the eleventh, twelth, and thirteenth grades, VTE acquires great importance, with 65 percent of a student cohort enrolled. Within VTE, there is a distinctive and hierarchical relationship between the polytechnics and the ITE—one that is also clearly felt by all of those concerned—even if advancing to the more prestigious school is to a certain extent possible. ITE Is Providing VTE at the Lower End Training by the ITE, offered to the nation’s 25 percent of its academically weakest students, leads to various national certificates in a variety of professions and is perceived by the market as being of a good quality. However, ITE seems to be confronted with a number of problems. First, although it would certainly be an exaggeration to speak of full-blown stigmatization, ITE students realize that, in terms of their performance and abilities, they represent the weakest portion of the overall school cohort and must make an effort to acquire additional qualifications once they leave school. Employers, parents, and teachers signal this deficiency to them. Second, the schools find it difficult to attract students of higher ability. Third, the ten technical institutes within ITE seem to differ in their reputations—a difference that is accentuated by the ranking of the respective ITE certificates. Fourth, those familiar with the dual apprenticeship model have confirmed my impression that, on average, ITE graduates’ level of qualification is lower than that of similar students in Europe. This disparity could stem from the fact that ITE students are negatively selected. It also may indicate the difficulties of conveying practical experience, market-compatible production, and socialization in professional life in a purely school-based environment. The Polytechnics Are Providing More Demanding VTE In my opinion, the polytechnics seem comparable to the more demanding vocational schools and intermediate diploma schools in Switzerland and, at least partly, even to the University of Applied Sciences (Fachhochschule). Not surprisingly, both students and teachers demonstrated a high degree of self-confidence, and employers praised the broadness of


113

the graduates’ knowledge while at the same time they deplored their lack of practical experience—a shortcoming that I would once again like to stress. Accordingly, Businesses Participate in VTE Only through the Training of Adults Because of the strong in-class emphasis on the theoretical aspects of VTE, Singapore’s companies can expect young people to arrive with a good grounding in theoretical knowledge, while their practical skills are usually rather limited. It is this complete lack of practical experience that often compels companies to invest in their young employees through training. Consequently, a high importance seems to be attributed to in-house training and education, and it is practiced intensively. The School-to-Work Transition in Singapore Is Driven by Two Primary Underlying Factors In my opinion, the structure of the Singapore system—and the general perception of it—relates to the following conditions. First, although the system is designed to provide all students with a fair start in primary education and to keep opportunities equitable for as long as possible (primarily by providing ten years of universal, broad, and general education), it does differentiate markedly according to ability and performance. The former seems to be driven by a strong belief in the bellcurve distribution of ability and the latter by a widespread confidence in the government’s ability to regulate the number of students enrolling in the various educational institutions, according to the economic and social needs of the country. Second, not only general education but also VTE have a high status in Singapore’s culture. According to the public function of education, however, the transition from school to work is delayed by offering VTE as full-time school-based training. U.S. Visitor Report on Singapore. No other contrasts in this study were more striking than those between the Lehigh Valley (Pennsylvania) and Singapore. The latter’s story was about diversity, about the power of economic and social planning, and about the heady essence of economic growth. In Singapore, globalization is the engine of change— that which makes the island nation an importer rather than an exporter of talent and youth. In one important way, however, Singapore and the Lehigh Valley have in common a growing college mania and a burgeoning stigmatization of vocational education. It is these differences and similarities that framed my impressions. The Singapore Educational System Is a Traditionally Configured Enterprise That Places Enormous Pressure on Its Young Using a sorting and exam system adopted largely from the British, Singapore has made merit-based testing and tracking its hallmark. Students, schools, and whole segments of the educational system know exactly where they stand based on their test scores. Early on, students understand both what is expected of them and the path they are likely to follow through the educational system and in the world of work. Though just a phrase, I was struck by the number of times the students we interviewed said they had “disappointed” someone—themselves, their parents, their school—by not scoring higher on one entrance exam or another. The consequence, they knew, was a slot lower down in the pecking order. One clear consequence of educational tracking based on standardized testing is substantially lowered expectations for students enrolled in Singapore’s Institute for Technical Education (ITE). Here, the irony is that Singapore has developed one of the most sophisticated and strategically placed programs for vocational and technical education anywhere in the world. Its new facilities are world class, and teaching staff are eager and qualified. My sense is that one motivation for Singapore to participate in this


114

study is that it is looking for answers on how to better position technical education—to make it more important, more a thing of status and repute. What ITE does not want to become is a dumping ground for the unsuccessful or the recently arrived, although it also understands it has a social responsibility to reach out to both populations. Increasingly, the Singapore educational system has sought ways to offer students a second chance, as a means of reducing the stigma attached to the system’s lower rungs. ITE has had considerable success in making its upper-end programs a second route to enrollment in a polytechnic and then perhaps at a university. The question I have is whether making this linking of ITE to polytechnics helps to solve or inadvertently exacerbates the lower status attached to ITE’s traditional programs, as well as the jobs and occupations they serve. Even within Singapore’s Technical and Vocational Education System, Strong Links Do Not Exist between Schooling and Work Singapore has held to the older, established pattern of “first school, then work.” The former is expected to provide the skills necessary to succeed in the latter. The socialization to work is something that happens only after one has obtained his or her first full-time job. For those at the top of the system, those bound for junior college and then university, there is a curious disjunction between the world of school—where succeeding is seen as serious work—and the world of employment. Here, the questions become “Should Singapore encourage greater labor force opportunities for its youth? Should youngsters from across the spectrum of educational institutions be encouraged to seek part-time employment?” The fact that ITE has sought to establish a European-style apprenticeship program only to find it undersubscribed is testimony to the dominance in Singapore of the “first school, then work” notion. Although the United States is likely to resolve its school-to-work dilemmas by letting market forces shape the outcome, Singapore’s commitment to planning and direction suggests it might likely seek an articulated solution—a policy that totals up the costs, defines the opportunities, and then prescribes a preferred pattern of action. It will be interesting to see if and how either of these two cultures solves the problem of college mania and the resulting stigma that, in both countries, is now firmly attached to vocational education and the jobs linked to those programs. Switzerland The Swiss educational system is composed of four principal levels (Federal Statistical Office and Federal Administration of Finance 1991). These are primary (grades 1 through 6, preceded by one to two years of kindergarten), lower-secondary (grades 7 through 8/9, normally divided into two achievement groups), upper-secondary (grades 9/10 through 11/13), and postsecondary or tertiary. Primary and lower-secondary education are compulsory. Currently, approximately 87 percent of students pursue upper-secondary education in one of the following three possibilities: academic education, academic and professional education, and vocational training and education (the dual apprenticeship system). Upper-Secondary Academic Education. Each year, approximately 19 percent of students in a cohort enroll in a four-year full-time school (Gymnasium), which provides general education and prepares students for the Matura(Maturité) exam, which entitles


115

admittance to university. A five-year teacher-training program for primary school teachers serves as an alternative for approximately 2 percent of a cohort of Swiss students. Upper-Secondary Academic and Professional Education. Schools that grant intermediate-level diplomas and similar full-time schools stress both professional and general education in their three- to four-year programs. These schools prepare students to enter the University of Applied Sciences (Fachhochschule) at the postsecondary level as well as professional life. Upper-Secondary Vocational Training and Education: The Dual Apprenticeship System. Switzerland attaches great importance to vocational education at the uppersecondary level. At the age of 16, the vast majority of young people (approximately 61 percent) engage in VTE as apprentices. The education of apprentices takes place at two places of study—on the job and in the classroom. Enterprises train apprentices at their places of work for three or four days each week— partly in special apprentice shops and partly at real commissions —according to a curriculum regulated by the Swiss federal government. Courses in more than 200 different professional fields are offered. The participation of enterprises in VTE has little to do with their size. About one-third of all enterprises in the secondary and tertiary sectors of the economy with more than one employee have at least one apprentice. One or two days each week, trainees acquire both occupational knowledge and further general education at a vocational school. During the course of their apprenticeships, which usually last three or four years, apprentices follow one of two different courses of instruction, according to their capacity. Most students completing an apprenticeship receive a federal professional diploma. Students whose proficiency and competence are rated as significantly above average have the opportunity to take an additional exam and to pass the vocational Matura. Students prepare for this exam through additional courses at vocational school. The vocational Matura entitles admittance to the University of Applied Sciences (Fachhochschule) at the postsecondary level, but it does not grant admittance to traditional universities. After VTE, apprentices begin their professional lives with productive employment and are considered to be experts either immediately following the apprenticeship or after only a short period of training. Tertiary Education. The tertiary level includes four types of institutions. These are (1) universities, which represent academic graduate schools; (2) University of Applied Sciences, or specialized colleges, which focus on areas such as engineering, business administration, social work, and, increasingly, teacher education for primary school teachers; (3) several forms of continuing vocational education; and (4) the Gymnasium for adults. Swiss Host Report and Findings. The Swiss educational system can be characterized as a unique balance between two overlapping parts, general education and VTE. General Education Is Important, though Differentiated Although nine years of general education are compulsory in Switzerland, most Swiss accept the common twophase differentiation. The first occurs in grade 7, dividing students according to their level of academic achievement. The second differentiation splits students into VTE or Gymnasium, and their path is also determined by academic achievement. For VTE, the differentiation occurs in grade 10 and lasts through grade 12 (or in some cases, grade 13);


116

for Gymnasium, the differentiation occurs at grade 9 and lasts through grade 12. Unlike the experience in the other countries, excessive social pressure to attend a Gymnasium and to acquire a university degree at all costs is not yet observable. Nevertheless, the desire to transfer to a Gymnasium is common among students of Sekundarschule, who anticipate better career opportunities and higher social prestige to accompany such a change. In particular, parents who themselves attended a Gymnasium and then university tend to prefer that educational path for their children; they consider an apprenticeship to be a second best, albeit acceptable, alternative. Managers in companies that train apprentices and teachers at vocational schools express a similar attitude. It is interesting to note that both Gymnasium teachers and students think that only a small proportion of students each year should enroll in a Gymnasium. The VTE Dual System of Apprenticeship Is Still Highly Valued in Switzerland All who are involved in the dual VTE system remain convinced that it is well suited to meeting the needs of the majority of Swiss students. They point out a number of advantages. First, participation in an apprenticeship seems to further students’ selfconfidence. They believe that they have received a good education that will prove to be valuable and useful in the future. This positive self-image is especially apparent in students of the University of Applied Sciences. Second, employers who train apprentices continue to emphasize the dual system’s value. They see the apprenticeship system as providing an economic benefit, in the same way they believe participation in the education system is part of their responsibility toward society. Third, the introduction of the University of Applied Sciences is widely considered to represent an improvement of the status of VTE in Switzerland. While these new schools are seen by many as a true alternative to traditional university education, however, others still think that a university degree represents a higher qualification—despite the fact that, in various fields (for example, law and medicine), this alternative degree is clearly indispensable. The Apprenticeship System Faces Several Difficulties or Challenges Visisitors repeatedly expressed their astonishment at the fact that, although parents, teachers, and vocational counselors provide some support, the responsibility for locating and arranging an apprenticeship rests solely on young people. Three emerging factors challenge this rather independent role. First, depending on macroeconomic and social factors, the supply of apprenticeships is subject to considerable change, and at least some government regulation seems to be warranted. Second, it is true that most students do ultimately arrange an apprenticeship, but often not in their chosen professional fields, and they must be content with their second or third choice. Third, not only the visitors but also the young people themselves (as well as their parents and school teachers) find it problematic that the decision to enroll in VTE and the choice of a profession must be made at the early age of 14. A related challenge is the relative difficulty in finding an apprenticeship for students at different levels within the VTE system. Students at the lower-secondary level (Realschule) face decidedly greater difficulties in finding an apprenticeship than those in upper-secondary school. In part, this difficulty relates to the fact that a substantial percentage of the students in Realschule are from foreign countries and are less proficient in the Swiss national languages. Clearly, this trend in VTE has its basis in broader social problems that Switzerland is now challenged to address. Third, rapid technological development, shifts in the requirements of various professional fields toward knowledge-


117

based skills, and widely ranging training practices in Swiss firms have begun to render the provision of apprenticeships less relevant. These factors have also begun to change the mix of school- and company-based education that is indispensable. For a description of ongoing reforms see also Dubs (1999). In particular, firm-based training is less desirable—and even less applicable—in growing high-technology fields than in the manufacturing or service industries. Based on the visiting team’s observations and his own expertise, the Swiss host arrived at the following conclusions about his country’s VTE system. Switzerland still has a strong VTE system that maintains an excellent link between the educational and economic domains. The system is challenged at the low end, however, through the difficulties facing academically or socially disadvantaged students in obtaining apprenticeships, and at the high end through increasing skill requirements by an increasingly high-tech and global economy. The interaction between the visitors and those involved in the Swiss VTE system made apparent to the host that the school-to-work transition in Switzerland is driven by three primary underlying factors that have influenced the structure of the Swiss system and how that system is perceived by the Swiss citizenry. First, while the Swiss education system is designed to provide all students with an equitable start in primary education, equity thereafter is defined by offering not the same types of opportunities but opportunities that have the same value. Students display a marked differentiation according to ability and performance over time. Four primary reasons are given for this differentiation. One, while few would explicitly declare a belief in the regular distribution of ability among students, it seems to be a widely held opinion in Switzerland that gaps in achievement cannot easily be closed. The average level of education cannot be indefinitely increased—if only because society is becoming increasingly heterogeneous (for example, in terms of language and socioeconomic background, etc.). Two, the current movement in the making of educational choices is for students to pursue higherranking certificates, despite the fact that many believe it is economically undesirable to produce an even greater number of university students. Three, many fear that massive levels of enrollment in higher education will inevitably lead to lower standards at the universities. Four, this fear may simply reflect the concerns of a minority of academics who want to preserve the status of their qualifications. Be that as it may, the effort to facilitate upward mobility within the education system cannot be ignored. For those who initially fail to qualify for the next higher track, there is always a second opportunity to do so later on, although greater effort may be necessary. The second underlying factor is that, on the whole, all of those involved in VTE believe it has true educational value that goes beyond the mere training of specific skills. That value encompasses professional knowledge, general competencies, and socialization within professional life. Handed down over generations, strong values connected to the concepts of work and the professions certainly contribute to this attitude. At the same time, the introduction of the vocational Matura signals the growing importance given to academically oriented education within VTE, with the intention of ensuring that students in the vocational track have the ability to fulfill the requirements of the University of Applied Sciences. Third, to all visitors, the extent of the cooperation between the state and the private sector in the education of young people at the upper-secondary level—a cooperative


118

effort around organization, curriculum, and finance—seems unique. The dual system continues to be seen as relevant and worthy of preservation. However, neither the visitors nor their host failed to observe that, by far, the entire economy is not taking part in this cooperative responsibility. Just as consistently, companies engage in intensive in-house training and education while taking advantage of their employees’ professional education, even if that education was not in their present or future field of activity. Japanese Visitor Report on Switzerland. Current social changes such as economic globalization and innovation in information and communication technology are restructuring the mode of business and the workplace, shifting the knowledge base for education and work, and raising questions about the validity and efficiency of institutions guiding the school-to-work transition. Switzerland—like Germany, which has enjoyed the unique dual apprenticeship system to educate a great majority of its young people—is no exception in this respect. The student apprenticeship system, which links education and training with the job market, is historically rooted in the Meister system as well as functionally and culturally aligned with the Swiss business/labor structure. Although this purposeful and tightly linked system seems to be functioning well and is widely supported, it also faces pressures driven by technological innovations in the workplace, the expansion of labor mobility, the growing concerns regarding educational credentials, and intensified economic competition and globalization. The Educational System in Switzerland Is Stratified Tracking begins in the lowersecondary level, and the dual apprenticeship starts from the upper-secondary level. After finishing primary education and based primarily on their levels of achievement, students are placed into three types of secondary schools: three-year Realschule, two- or threeyear Sekundarschule, or six-year Gymnasium. Some of the Sekundarschule students enroll in a Gymnasium for four years after finishing a two-year program of Sekundarschule. At the upper-secondary level, approximately 19 percent of the cohort attend Gymnasium. Roughly 7 percent attend either an intermediate diploma school or a teacher-training school for primary school teachers after finishing two- or three-year programs at Sekundarschule. Approximately 60 percent are placed in the apprenticeship system after finishing either Realschule or a three-year program of Sekundarschule. University education is open only for those who attended Gymnasium and passed the Matura examination. Those who finish upper-secondary schools other than Gymnasium either enter the University of Applied Sciences or enter the job market. This highly stratified and tracked system is distinctively different from the systems in Japan and the United States. As this chapter suggests, Switzerland places a great emphasis on vocational and professional education and training. Its stratified tracking system functions as a social sorting machine as well as an apparatus of sociocultural reproduction. Although this system has deep historical roots and traditions, it is questionable whether and for how long this system can be maintained in the face of various pressures caused by a changing economy and culture. There Are Close Links between VTE and the Job Market Vocational and technical education in Switzerland is closely aligned with the job market and is provided by the dual apprenticeship system at the upper-secondary level. Roughly 60 percent of the cohort belongs to this system. As apprentices, the students receive on-the-job training at a company for three or four days a week; are paid for their work even though it is


119

considered training; and, for the remaining one or two days each week, are involved in attaining general and professional knowledge at the vocational school. Like a job-search activity, students must identify companies to provide their apprenticeship placements, and only those who are accepted as an apprentice can attend the vocational school. Through the training and learning experiences at these two places, the students develop their labor capacity and career perspectives. Most obtain a federal professional diploma when they finish their apprenticeship. Companies regulated by a contract that involves labor unions, government authorities, and apprentices assume a major responsibility in training apprentices. Standards and quality of training are established and maintained by each company and their respective labor unions and are highly dependent on the morale and commitment of these companies. With all of these features, VTE in the apprenticeship system is not simply vocational education provided and regulated by the state, but a comprehensive joint venture of business companies, unions, and the government. All assume some responsibility for providing young people with vocational training, developing their career perspectives, taking part in job placement, and ensuring the maintenance and quality of the labor force to keep pace with the industrial and technological innovations. The comprehensive joint venture that characterizes the Swiss VTE system differs from the Japanese model, which maintains a division between the education and the business sector. For All Its Success, the Swiss System Is Having Difficulties The Swiss dual apprenticeship system seems to be challenged by recent social and economic changes such as technological innovations in the workplace, expansion of labor mobility, growing concerns with educational credentials, intensified international competition, and economic globalization. Addressing the first two challenges necessitates updating the training process, making the apprenticeship system more open and flexible, and extending it as a lifelong and recurring training and education system. Although this task is not easy, it can be achieved successfully because it is a rather technical reform. The latter three seem to be more difficult. For example, several of the students whom we met at University of Applied Sciences said that they wanted to attain a higher university degree, which they consider valuable for working in a global economy. If these concerns continue to grow, educational aspirations may increasingly shift toward general academic education and away from vocational training. I also was informed that it has become increasingly difficult for some young people to find apprenticeships. This in part is because of the economic recession and the reluctance of some companies to accept as many apprentices as they did previously, and in part is due to their growing concerns about enhancing international competitive capacity. If these concerns persist, it will undermine the functional basis of the entire apprenticeship system. In this sense, Switzerland may now be faced with the question of reconsidering the societal costs and benefits of the apprenticeship system, along with the task of regenerating the morale and culture associated with it. Singaporean Visitor Report on Switzerland. I noticed several key distinctions of the Swiss dual apprenticeship system, as well as the challenges it may face in a changing economy: The Dual Apprenticeship System Is Highly Entrenched With traditions dating back to the early 1900s, the dual training system represents Switzerland’s approach in preparing new entrants for the workforce. Highly valued by employers and widely accepted by


120

parents and students, apprenticeship training provides a solid system of VTE for the majority of young people. At the same time, the values of good work attitudes, professionalism, and quality work are imparted to apprentices through direct involvement in real work and in dealing directly with customers. This particular strength of an apprenticeship program is difficult to emulate in an institutional training environment. Self-Regulation Is Highly Evident in the Dual Apprenticeship System Employers take primary responsibility for training and, together with labor unions, ensure that training standards and quality are established and maintained. Bühler Uzwil represents a good example of a manufacturing firm with a well-structured apprenticeship training system. Not only does the company possess a well-conceptualized training program that advances an apprentice through each level of training, but it is also able to incorporate the skills acquired by apprentices at different stages into productive work. This advantage enables the training function to achieve close to cost neutrality in apprenticeship training activities. The Meisters, who form the backbone of the apprenticeship system, are highly respected and in our view have a status akin to one who possesses a Ph.D. in the academy. Aspiring, career-oriented apprentices have good chances of fulfilling the dream of becoming a respected Meister some day. The composition of senior management at Bühler Uzwil and St. Gallen State Bank bears strong testimony to the opportunities for apprentices to move into senior positions. The avenue for further education through the University of Applied Sciences UAS provides another boost in status for those who pursue the apprenticeship route. Switzerland Also Has a Well-Accepted Educational System With 60 to 70 percent of a school cohort electing an apprenticeship after nine or ten years of general education, the dual system produces much-needed and well-trained manpower at a relatively young age. Although students also aspire to be among the 30 percent who take the academic track in senior secondary, the desire to be in this cohort and the pressure to earn a university degree are much less in Switzerland as compared to Singapore. The main reason, we believe, is the general social acceptance of apprenticeship as the mainstream of education. One proud parent said: Switzerland is a country with the world’s highest per capita income but the lowest population of academics. What is unique is that we make our students available at a young age for the economy. The onus is on each individual to decide what career to pursue versus enrolling in a fulltime course at an institution to achieve paper certification. In addition, it is the responsibility of young people to apply to enterprises of their choosing for an apprenticeship placement. The Relevance of the Apprenticeship Training System Is Declining in a KnowledgeBased Economy Knowledge, technology, and the nature of work shift rapidly as a country moves from a manufacturing- to a knowledge-based economy. Meisters in Switzerland’s vocational schools conceded that new occupations are constantly being created. One commented that, in some small and medium-sized companies, owners are under tremendous pressure, faced with solving the problem of the lack of Meisters to train apprentices in new occupations. They also indicated that today’s apprentices do not


121

remain in their professions for life. Opportunities abound for them to learn another occupation or to further their education abroad. Structural changes cause apprentices who are trained too narrowly to be unable to find subsequent, alternative employment. Bühler Uzwil executives commented that even large companies are finding it increasingly difficult to employ all of the apprentices they train. Because the apprenticeship system is anchored on the role of Meister for imparting skills, their dwindling numbers, coupled with the introduction of new skills and occupational areas, pose a real challenge for Switzerland. The issue is whether apprenticeship, in its current form, will continue to retain its relevance as the economy becomes increasingly knowledge based. U.S. Visitor Report on Switzerland. A decade ago, commentators, analysts, legislators, and even successful presidential candidates in the United States were celebrating the virtues of a European school-to-work system. The system was praised because it stressed societal responsibility, the purposeful linking of schools and employers, and the success of an historic apprenticeship system guaranteeing both an educated and a skilled labor force. The dominant models for such apprenticeships came from Germany and Switzerland. Imagine, then, the perplexity, even consternation of this visitor to Switzerland in the fall of 1998 in discovering that the apprenticeship system was, if not under assault, at least subject to a renewed set of questions about its effectiveness and hence its future. What Switzerland seemed to be realizing was that it was not immune to the social and economic forces that were reshaping school-to-work transitions across the industrialized world. A Tide of Rising Social Ambitions That Often Equates a University Education with Social Status and Mobility Like most members of the visiting team, I was struck by the escalating ambitions of young Swiss and their parents—as well as their sense that good jobs demanded advanced education. An Increased Linking of Economic and Educational Opportunities with Ethnic Identification I could not help but notice how the influx of immigrants into Switzerland was helping to reshape definitions of educational quality and occupational status. Though reluctant to discuss the fact that some employers with highly sought-after apprenticeships were not likely to offer them to the children of recent immigrants, many of those responsible for the system did acknowledge that trouble might lie ahead. An Economic Restructuring That Is Redefining the Nature of Work One of my more enduring memories of the site visit involved a major manufacturing firm with a wellarticulated and richly supported apprenticeship program. Once the formal tour and interviews were completed, the skills this firm knew it needed for its success in the future became clear. This future, increasingly being shaped by the globalization of its market and the rapid emergence of new technologies, is not being taught in its apprenticeship program. The firm’s leadership knew that it was training workers who, within a decade, would have truly obsolete skills. This impression was reinforced by our visit to a major bank—traditionally the site of one of Switzerland’s most prestigious apprenticeships. Even here, managers who themselves were once apprentices talked openly about the fact that they expected to look increasingly toward hiring university graduates with the financial and money management skills modern banking now demanded. A Shifting Context That Is Redefining the Nature of Apprenticeships In a sense, Switzerland’s apprenticeship system is being squeezed from both above and below. Big firms, particularly as they become part of multinational aggregations, are questioning the


122

magnitude of resources they are expected to devote to an apprenticeship system that their international partners neither understand nor appreciate. At the same time, the country’s small firms, the traditional backbone of the apprenticeship system, are becoming less able to provide the broad range of experience workers will require in the future. Here, the options being discussed included both increased time in school and rotating apprenticeships. Finally, How Are Young Swiss Preparing for University Likely to Learn about Work? In the United States, university-bound youth learn about work by working as teenagers. It is a messy, often unsatisfactory system that somehow gets the job done. Will Switzerland develop a similarly undifferentiated youth labor market? Will firms then turn to university-bound youth as part-time workers instead of offering apprenticeships? Will the introduction of a youth labor market that explicitly includes the country’s best and brightest students further accelerate the patterns of ethnic differentiation already present in the vocational/technical education system? These are tough questions. The good news, it seems to me, is that they are being asked in a country with substantial educational assets, an extraordinary tradition of school and employer partnerships, and an economy that understands its dependence on developing a truly skilled workforce. United States of America The educational system in the United States is primarily one of local, state, and private responsibility. Of the more than $600 billion spent annually on education of all types, 91 percent comes from state, local, and private sources—including the substantial tuition, even in the public sector, that students pay to attend a college or university. Nominally, the American education system is composed of three principal segments: elementary (grades 1–6, in some cases preceded by one or two years in preschool and/or kindergarten), secondary (grades 7–12, with the first three often spent in a separate middle school), and postsecondary. Education is generally compulsory until 16 years of age, although approximately 90 percent of American students graduate from high school. Most students complete grade 12 by age 17 or 18. More than 60 percent—and in many communities more than 80 percent—proceed to some form of postsecondary education. This occurs either at a community college (offering both the first two years of a baccalaureate program and/or vocational skills training), a technical institute or school (primarily offering occupation-specific training), or a four-year college or university. Traditionally, Secondary Schools Have Included Both an Academic or College Preparatory Track and a General Track In the United States, VTE is offered through vocational/technical (vo-tech) educational programs that are provided sometimes within the general high school program, sometimes in conjunction with a regional vo-tech institution, and sometimes in stand-alone programs and facilities. Over the past decade, enrollments in vocational secondary education have declined significantly, while those in the general and academic tracks have increased. A Fair Proportion of the U.S. Population Attains a Bachelor’s Degree or Beyond Most young people in the United States who graduate from high school pursue some form of postsecondary education. On average, 26 percent of students starting a postsecondary education persist through the awarding of a bachelor’s degree. After


123

receiving this degree, 25 percent will likely seek advanced coursework immediately following graduation. Some 12 percent of baccalaureate recipients will eventually obtain an advanced degree at either the master’s or doctoral level (National Center for Education Statistics 1994, 1995, 1996). To a significant extent, the nature of the institution at which students earn their baccalaureate degrees determines whether they are likely to seek an advanced degree. The paths that young people in the United States actually follow through this loosely coupled system of education and employment can be broadly characterized as “swirls” or “pipelines.” The latter reflects the customary metaphor used to depict the progress of students through education to productive employment—a linear, full-time, and steady progression through subsequent levels of education to degree completion and then entry into the workforce. This pattern describes the experience of most of the nation’s advantaged students, those coming from middle- or upper-income families with clearly defined aspirations and the means to invest in a postsecondary education. Following high school graduation, these students “go away to college,” attending full time, graduating in four or five years, and then proceeding on to graduate or professional study. The majority of postsecondary students, by choice or necessity, however, follow different patterns through their education careers, swirling in and out of a variety of educational institutions at different times in their lives. It is increasingly common for students to interrupt or combine schooling with work, proceeding intermittently from high school to part-time enrollment in a community college and through several phases of education and employment before completing a tertiary degree program. Essentially, “swirling” is a model describing a network with a variety of points of entry, transition, and passage, with each node or institution serving as both an entry and exit point that provides a steady supply of students to other nodes in the network. In the United States—whether or not the student is advantaged, following a welldefined educational pipeline, or swirling through the system—most young people begin working before completing their educational careers. In the beginning, most of that work is part-time and sporadic. As the student grows older, however, the number of hours worked tends to increase, so that many postsecondary students consider themselves to be full-time workers first and students second. Given the variety inherent in the American educational system, the visiting team chose to focus on how its principal aspects play out in the Lehigh Valley, an older, industrial community in Pennsylvania that has undergone substantial economic restructuring over the past decade. Emblematic of these trends has been the demise of the company Bethlehem Steel, whose massive capital investments have been either abandoned or demolished and whose slick company headquarters have been converted to an extension of the local university and an incubator site for new start-ups. Since 1970, each decennial census has marked a decline in both population and manufacturing jobs in the region, as well as an increase in the ratio of older to younger people. Underlying these numbers is a steady exodus of young people from the Lehigh Valley. They—and, to a surprising extent, their parents—have sought educational and economic opportunities elsewhere. As in most parts of the nation, the educational attainment of young people has been rising in the Lehigh Valley. High school dropout rates have been


124

reduced, and many school districts now report that approximately 70 percent of their high school graduates proceed to postsecondary education rather than to full-time work. U.S. Host Report and Findings (Zemsky et al 1998). The Lehigh Valley story embodies how technological advancements and global competition translate into a restructured economy that seems increasingly at odds with an area’s historic ambitions (Hendrick 2001). It is a story about how young people, amid this restructuring, make career decisions by determining what is socially valued and what is demeaned. The story tells what happens when a culture places an inordinate emphasis on educational attainment in the form of a college degree, ignoring whether the local economy needs all or even most of those graduates and whether these graduates achieve the level of economic opportunity and security they sought. Two images from the team’s visit summarize the tensions surrounding these issues in the Lehigh Valley. The first was what the site team came to call the “vo-tech shuffle”— the morning departure of students from Emmaus High School for the Lehigh County Vocational-Technical School. The school district, wanting to communicate that the vocational track was as important as the general high school and college-preparatory tracks, had mandated that VTE students take their general education courses at their local high schools and their vocational courses at the county’s vo-tech institution. So, each morning, VTE students in the Emmaus High School district arrived at their home-school building, attended classes with students in the other two tracks, and then went their own way—out to the buses waiting to take them to the Lehigh County Vocational-Technical School. This shuffle was repeated in the afternoon, with half of the VTE students returning to take their afternoon general education courses and the remaining half being bussed out to the regional vo-tech center. The result was that twice a day the VTE students paraded through the halls of Emmaus, making clear that they were different and going to different places to seek different goals. It was hardly a message that was lost on Emmaus’s students, particularly those in the college-preparatory track, who stayed behind. “There go the techers,” they would say, deeming VTE students as those who were not good enough or smart enough, not disciplined enough to take the college track. In fact, when asked to describe the typical “techer,” college-preparatory students resorted to a variety of worn clichés: the “techers” were like, you know, the cast of the movie Grease—they dressed funny, were funky, a little wild and enviably free. The second image derives from the site team’s visit to the Lehigh County VocationalTechnical School itself. Regardless of their decorum when boarding the bus, these students were almost embarrassingly neat by the time the site team met with them in their classes. Many wore uniforms, and they were invariably polite. The hallways were sparkling clean. The entire operation had the look and feel of a military camp—and, indeed, many of the school’s instructors had spent time in the military. Students and staff were demonstrably proud of their school and the fact that most graduates found good jobs in the careers for which they were trained. At the same time, the school seemed empty. Despite better marketing and the involvement of the Lehigh Valley business community, VTE enrollments have not recaptured the ground lost in the 1980s. In the view of too many both within and outside the vo-tech environment, VTE continues to be viewed as a dumping ground for poorly


125

performing students, those with behavioral problems, and those not academically inclined. The distance between the two institutional images frames the dilemma facing the Lehigh Valley and, by extension, most industrial communities in the United States that see their futures more in terms of service and technologically based industries. In the Lehigh Valley, school-to-work transitions may not necessarily be about transitions but images of work and the brand of information young people receive and act upon when choosing when and how to invest in their own skills. The Lehigh Valley’s youth place the greatest value on a college education, a good job, and a high wage, in precisely that order. As high school students, they (as do their parents) define good jobs principally in terms of professional and management occupations. They have neither interest in nor tolerance for manual work, including the skilled jobs that demand high levels of manual dexterity and hand-eye coordination. Most of their teachers regularly reinforce the “one way to win” mentality that marks a college education as the only path to success. VTE programs are seldom presented and, hence, rarely perceived as matching the rigor of academic programs. It would be nice and indeed reassuring to conclude that “where there is a will there is a way.” It would be nice to believe that the traditions of the Lehigh Valley, the strength of its civic leadership, and its historic commitment to business-school partnerships will yield a coherent strategy for guiding economic development and, by extension, the local system of secondary and postsecondary education. More likely, however, the Lehigh Valley faces more of the same: more economic dislocation, more young people moving away, a stronger push for college-preparatory courses, flat or declining enrollments in the valley’s vocational-technical schools, and no lessening of the stigma that is now attached to VTE. Given this future, a set of questions arises: • Will the Lehigh Valley’s tradition of cooperation and the community focus of its school systems yield the kind of adaptations that can ameliorate the worst effects of economic restructuring? • Or, will a tradition-bound system that made VTE a wholly separate, often stigmatized endeavor fail to make the necessary adjustments? • Will the result be further declines in the economic vitality of the valley, with a greater number of the community’s young people seeking their futures elsewhere? Together, the visiting team and the host arrived at the following conclusions about the role and value of VTE in the United States and the forces that are reshaping it. VTE in the United States Is Being Reshaped by Several Forces VTE is being shaped by the escalating social ambitions on the part of students and their families (“college mania”), by the fact that young people increasingly learn about work by working, and by the same market forces that have led to the restructuring of the American economy. Vocational training is becoming less formal and more attuned to the needs of an economy increasingly dominated by service firms. Formal vocational training is being seen less


126

and less as a viable educational alternative, although the VTE schools themselves have exhibited remarkable flexibility and their graduates readily find jobs. Increasingly, a stigma is being attached to skilled handwork, to the manufacturing enterprises that require such work, and to the schools and students whose curricula stress manufacturing and related vocational skills. At the same time, local manufacturing employers increasingly are frustrated at the failure of local schools to produce enough graduates who want to work in the jobs they have to offer and at the wages they can afford to pay in order to remain economically competitive. At the same time, while local businesses have a need for young workers, they do not exhibit a strong sense of institutional responsibility for the success of the educational system. This finding was particularly apparent to the members of the visiting team most knowledgeable about traditions of employer responsibility in Europe. VTE is not seen as having a substantial social role—neither in providing expanded educational access nor in knitting together companies and communities. The VTE system is characterized by both free choice and postponed training, particularly when compared with Switzerland and Singapore. Young people in the United States are given wide latitude regarding when and how they acquire job skills. Their first introduction to work probably occurs through a part-time job, where there is little—if any—training and even less of a career or occupational track. Frequently, specific job training does not occur until after graduation from high school. On the other hand, by the time most young people reach their thirties, they have engaged in a wide set of occupational and work experiences that they often successfully meld into productive careers. Japanese Visitor Report on the United States. As one of the leading countries in the world, the United States has expressed confidence in the strength of its economy, scientific research, technological advances, and education systems even though its political leaders and social critics have expressed strong concerns at different times about the extent of these various strengths. This confidence is, of course, rooted in the United States’s substantial economic capacity, but it also seems to be derived from a belief in market mechanisms and democracy. Reflecting this fundamental belief, education in the United States is decentralized, flexible, open, and competitive. Education is largely funded and provided by state and local governments and is not regulated by the central government. Many educational institutions are competing with each other both for students and for funding from various sources. In general, this system seems to be functioning fairly well, but it also seems to be facing some dilemmas and problems. Vocational education at the secondary level is one of the areas around which these dilemmas and problems are centered. School-Based Education in the United States Is Decentralized but the Overall Structure Is Similar across the States Although the formal compulsory years of schooling differ from state to state, elementary and lower-secondary education (nine or ten years) is universal and not differentiated in terms of fundamental curriculum. Uppersecondary education is mostly offered at comprehensive high schools, where general education is emphasized and a great majority of students pursue academic courses. Vocational courses attract only a small portion of students. Although some specialized high schools do provide vocational and specialized education, most of their students tend to enroll in colleges and universities. Vocational and technical education is offered at


127

community colleges, which are at the postsecondary level. A wide range of opportunities exist for postsecondary education, and these opportunities are open to everyone who satisfies the entrance requirements. Mobility from one institution to another is fairly common. Two points are noteworthy about the American education system. First, this open and diversified system often makes it difficult for many students to make appropriate choices, therefore making the role of guidance counselor important. Second, an informal but tangible tracking of students begins at the upper-secondary level, even though the opportunities for postsecondary education are quite open. Students Involved in the VTE System in the United States Face Isolation and Stigmatization from Those Outside the System Vo-tech students tend to experience threefold isolation. First, they seem to be isolated in their everyday learning because academic and general education are emphasized at high schools and because curriculum tracking overlaps ability tracking, thus making vocational students seem less competent than their peers. Second, they also tend to be physically isolated from the regular high school culture—which emphasizes comprehensive learning and extracurricular activities of various kinds—because their lessons often take place in settings outside of the high school classroom such as a vocational center. Accordingly, the educational cultures of students in the academic and vocational tracks are often divided. Third, they tend to be isolated in terms of career perspectives because vo-techs tend to prepare their students for manual labor and low-status jobs. On the other hand, VTE delivered at community colleges seems to be more preferable and attractive than vo-tech at the secondary level. Community colleges tend to prepare their students for a wider range of more desired jobs. They attract more positive and purposeful students, partly because the standards and quality of education are substantially higher and partly because they provide their students greater opportunities to participate in the labor market and to transfer to four-year colleges and universities. Vocational and technical education in the United States faces another dilemma, that of relating to local communities and employers in such a socially diversified and highly mobile society. The students of academic high schools tend to move away from their local communities to attend colleges and universities, while vo-tech students tend to stay in the local area. This tendency to remain in their hometowns is more the case in nonmetropolitan areas and among less academically inclined and less ambitious students. Accordingly, local business leaders and employers seem to relate their worries about the quality and function of vo-techs to their concerns about recruiting good workers and enhancing the vitality and morale of the community. I found that such a concern is strong for Lehigh Valley business leaders and teachers/instructors, both of whom are dedicated to making educational experiences better and more stimulating. The dilemma and difficulties continue to exist partly because the ability to recruit a good workforce and the attractiveness of a local job market depends significantly on the economic structure of a wider area, including neighboring cities. It is also partly due to the reputation of an entire local school system and of the high school system in particular. Furthermore, the more vocational training is specialized to respond to local labor needs, the more isolated its students will be, both in terms of career prospects and social life at the high school. This dilemma seems to be common among affluent industrial nations with a highly expanded system of higher education.


128

Singaporean Visitor Report on the United States. These are my observations on choice and opportunity, community colleges, and training standards during my visit to the United States. Choice and Opportunity in Education Education in the United States, as we saw it in Pennsylvania’s Lehigh Valley, is liberal and open. It provides choices and many opportunities to young people. Each school exercises autonomy in setting standards for curricula, with minimum guidelines from the district board of education. Each school sets its own exams. The learning environment appears to foster less pressure and stress on students and teachers than our schools in Singapore. The college-prep and VTE options become relevant in senior high school at grades 10, 11, and 12. Generally, the academically weak students gravitate toward the VTE track. Each day, VTE students in the Lehigh Valley travel in buses to a vocationaltechnical school for a half day of lessons on the VTE portion of the high school curriculum. Students are given one month to explore several occupational clusters before selecting a trade. The training standard, in our judgement, is at a semi-skilled level. Therefore, VTE suffers from a low image and stigmatization because it is associated with lower levels of skill for low-ability students. These students do have opportunities to obtain further education and training at community colleges, however. Upon graduation, high school students who are not college bound generally wander in and out of a variety of job experiences before settling on a career and returning to a community college to acquire useful technical skills. Others will begin the pursuit of a four-year college degree by first attending the two-year community college and then trans-ferring to a four-year school. American youths certainly do not lack the spirit to try and take chances. This recycling process, while it may appear to be inefficient and wasteful, reflects the strength of a system that provides free choice and opportunities for doing what an individual student wants to do. Community Colleges Vocational and technical education at the postsecondary level is mainly provided by two-year community colleges. They offer a variety of further education and training programs for high school graduates and adults. The two primary formal programs are the two-year associate’s degree and the two-year academic program for transferring to a four-year college or university. Pursuing studies at a community college is a less-expensive option that many students choose when preparing for jobs or for a transition to a four-year institution. These colleges also provide a second chance for older students who did not pursue or complete postsecondary education after high school. I noted how it was necessary for Northampton Community College to provide a great deal of remedial education for its students because they had not achieved, in high school, the educational standards necessary for college-level performance. U.S. community colleges maintain quality and standards by undergoing accreditation reviews by one of several regional bodies, for example the Middle States Association of Colleges and Secondary Schools. A professional body may accredit individual courses; for example, a medical assistant course may be reviewed and accredited by the American Association of Medical Assistants. Generally, community colleges are perceived to be good suppliers of technology skills as well as strong partners with business and industry. These colleges do not have the same low image as vo-tech schools at the secondary level. However, in trying to be comprehensive, I think, community colleges may suffer from a lack of focus in their training missions.


129

Training Standards Independence and diversity characterize American educational institutions. They eschew uniformity and standardization. Although a lack of standardization is a mark of strength, it also has its weaknesses. Academic standards vary, and there is a lack of coherence at the state and national levels. Although there may be pockets of excellence, there is inconsistency in the quality of the workforce. In addition, less attention appears to be paid to human resources planning and development. Instead, market forces prevail. Unlike education in the United States, Singapore’s system is highly structured with a curriculum geared toward national standards. Swiss Visitor Report on the United States. Fascinated by the strength of the U.S. economy in general, I was nonetheless bothered by the loose connection that seems to exist between economic needs and VTE. General Education Is More Highly Valued and Emphasized than Is VTE All stakeholders seem to consider that attending general high school and not VTE is the best course for the vast majority of young people, for two primary reasons. First, students seek to secure their transition to university, as a bachelor’s degree is increasingly considered to be the minimum credential necessary to meet higher skill requirements in professional life and to advance in a career. Second, young people are spared an immediate decision on their choice of profession. Vocational and technical education is stigmatized within the American high school system and does not meet the skill requirements of a rapidly changing economy. In the Lehigh Valley, as elsewhere, only a small proportion of all students (approximately 20 percent) follow courses for a half day at a high school especially designed for VTE, while still attending classes at a general high school (a “home school”) during the remainder of the day. This school-based VTE (called “vo-tech”) is intended to assist in the transition from school to work for the academically weakest students, often called “students at risk.” Given this concept, it is not surprising to me that school teachers, students, and administrators, as well as business people and parents, stigmatize VTE. Fortunately, VTE students themselves express positive feelings about their experiences. They believe that they can study according to their work-oriented inclination, that they are well cared for at these schools, and that they will find reasonably good jobs in the private sector after graduation. To this visitor, vo-tech seems to be similar to the Swiss dual system of VTE, as well as to be a step in the right direction. However, the vo-tech system raises two specific concerns. First, it is focused on less-demanding skills and jobs. Second, vo-tech schools do not seem to provide the key elements of VTE—namely, daily experience in the enterprise, production under real market conditions, and socialization within professional life. VTE in the United States Becomes Important and Recognized Only at the Postsecondary Level The primary role of community colleges is not only to prepare students for a four-year college, but also to serve as the primary provider of VTE at the postsecondary level. Here, the students can make up for the aspects of vocational education that the system denied them during secondary education and can pursue an associate’s degree, which increases both their employment opportunities and social status. Comprehensive and High-End VTE Is Missing in the United States Although the community college provides a relatively good quality of VTE, two key elements are


130

missing. First, unlike the dual apprenticeship system, workplace-based experience is not built systematically into the curriculum. Second, the U.S. system actually lacks an institution like the University of Applied Sciences, which provides high-end VTE and preprofessional experience to their students. Employers Play a Small Part in American VTE In the United States, the education of young people, including through VTE, is chiefly seen as a public function despite the fact that private institutions play a significant role in postsecondary education. Employers do not feel any responsibility for VTE. Consequently, employers’ in-house training and education is strictly market oriented, organized according to the supply of human resources provided by the education system on the one hand and the company’s shortterm goals on the other. The School-to-Work Transition Is Driven by Two Primary Underlying Factors The structure of the U.S. system, as well as how it is perceived by relevant stakeholders, has two clear roots. First, U.S. society postulates very clearly the mandate to provide equitable educational and socialization opportunities to all students. Second, general educational knowledge, combined with cognitive competence, has a much higher status than the development of vocation-oriented skills and knowledge, as well as socialization in the world of work. To the visitor who is familiar with a strong, well-structured VTE system, VTE in the United States seems to be quite weak, at best. Nevertheless, it does have its relative strengths as well, embedded in specific conditions. Are young people prepared to work in an economy that demands an increasing degree of flexibility and mobility by working in part-time jobs from high school to university? Does a longer period of general education restrict the ability of young people to learn new skills and knowledge on the job or through continuing education? In economic terms, does the American labor market not require the same quality of work—and, therefore, not the same quality of VTE—that is necessary in small countries such as Singapore and Switzerland? References Bogdan, R.C., and S.Biklen. 1998. Qualitative research for education. Needham Heights, Mass: Allyn & Bacon. Chiang, M. 1998. From economic debacle to economic miracle: The history and development of technical education in Singapore. Singapore: Times Editions. Dubs, R. (1999). Auf dem Weg zu einem Berufsbildungsgesetz in der Schweiz [On the way towards a new federal law of vocational education]. Zeitschrift für Berufs-und Wirtschaftspädagogik 95(3), 363–372. Federal Statistical Office, and Federal Administration of Finance. 1991. The Swiss educational mosaic: A study in diversity. Berne: BFS. Frommberger, D., and H.Reinisch. 1995. Ordnungsschemata zur Kennzeichnung und zum Vergleich von “Berufsbildungssystemen” in deutschsprachigen Beiträgen zur internationalvergleichenden Berufsbildungsforschung: Methodologische Fragen und Reflexionen [Schematas to describe and compare systems of vocational educational in german-language comparative studies on vocational education: Methodological issues and reflections]. Zeitschrift für Berufs-und Wirtschaftspädagogik 95(3):323–343. Fujita, H. 1997. Kyoiku kaikaku: Kyosei-jidai no Gakkoou-zukuri (Education reform: Schooling in a new symbiotic age). Tokyo: Iwanami-shoten.


131

Fujita, H. 2000. Education reform and education politics in Japan. The American Sociologist 31 (3):42–57. Fujita, H., and S.Y.Wong. 1999/2000. Post-modern restructuring of the knowledge base in Japanese mass education: Crisis of public culture and identity formation. Education Journal (A Journal of Hong Kong Institute of Educational Research, The Chinese University of Hong Kong) 26, 27(2, 1):37–53. Hendrick, J.A. 2001. A community responds to economic change: A case study of the Lehigh Valley. Philadelphia: Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania. Institute of Technical Education. 1996/1997 to 1999/2000. Annual report. Singapore: Author. Law, S-S. 1996. Dynamics and challenges of a vocational training system—The Singapore experience. ITE Paper No. 2. Singapore: Institute of Technical Education. Law, S-S., and S.H.Low. 1997. An empirical framework for implementing lifelong learning systems. Singapore: Institute of Technical Education. Metzger, C., H.Fujita, S.S.Law, R.Zemsky, J.E.Berset, and M.Iannozzi. 2001. Different paths, similar pursuits: The economic and personal potential of vocational training and education in an international context. Vol. 12 of Studies and reports, edited by D.Euler and C.Metzger. St. Gallen, Switzerland: Universitat St. Gallen. Müller, W., and Y.Shavit. (1998). Bildung und Beruf im institutionellen Kontext. Eine vergleichende Studie in 13 Ländern. [Education and vocation in the institutional context: a comparative study in 13 countries]. Zeitschrift für Erziehungswissenschaft 1(4):501–533. National Center for Education Statistics. 1994. High school and beyond: 1980 Sophomore Cohort, 1980–1992. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Education. National Center for Education Statistics. 1995. 1990 Beginning postsecondary students longitudinal study—Second follow-up (BPS: 90/94), data analysis system. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Education. National Center for Education Statistics. 1996. Baccalaureate and beyond: 1993/94, data analysis system (highest degree program after BA completion). Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Education. Tan, J., S.Gopinathan, and W.K.Ho, eds. 1997. Education in Singapore: A book of readings. Singapore: Prentice-Hall. Zemsky, R., R.Shapiro, M.Iannozzi, P.Cappelli, and T.Bailey. 1998. The transition from initial education to working life in the United States of America: A report to the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) as part of a comparative study of transitions from initial education to working life in 14 member countries. Palo Alto, Calif.: National Center for Postsecondary Improvement.

Chapter 5 Higher Education Reforms: Determinants and Directions AKIRA ARIMOTO Japanese interest in research on higher education was expressed at the first organizational meeting of the Six Nation Education Research Project (SNERP) in December 1993. At the second meeting, at the end of May 1995, the delegation from Japan delivered an outline for a proposal to study how higher education institutions respond to social and economic change. This interest, and the rapid work of the Japanese team in developing a proposal for research, can be attributed to conditions present in Japan at this initial stage. Several factors were at work. First, by the early 1990s Japan was aware of a slowdown in economic growth and was beginning to think about implementing a major shift in higher education. The Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology (MEXT) judged that it was important for Japan to take part in a higher education study. MEXT also thought that it would be useful to involve the Research Institute for Higher Education (RIHE) at Hiroshima University. This institute had become a leading agency in the field of higher education research. The director of the institute had already made contributions to such research. Furthermore, he had participated in two multination projects: the Comparative Study on Higher Education Policy, sponsored by the OECD and Twente University, and the Comparative Academic Profession study, sponsored by the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching (Altbach 1996; Goedegebuure et al. 1994). MEXT chose a higher education study as Japan’s responsibility because Japan was facing a critical point in higher education policy: emerging economic retrenchment. The national government worried about this issue to a considerable degree in the early 1990s because, since the 1980s, rationalization and structural reforms of Japanese society had become part of the agenda of councils such as the Ad Hoc Council for Education and the University Council. The imminent burst of the bubble economy was, by the early 1990s, thought to be inevitable. Economic retrenchment was such a concern that Daigaku Shingikai (University Council) and the national government released new proposals for the university to become an essential factor for economic growth (Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology 2001; University Council 1998). The University Council recommended reform of higher education in 1991 and again in 1998. The first recommendation led to a policy of government control deregulation of universities and colleges and stimulation of curriculum and organization reforms. Among the various reforms, the most important were integration of curriculum between general education and professional education, and introduction of self-review and evaluation in universities and colleges.


134

The 1998 recommendation proposed a twenty-first-century image of universities and colleges, consisting of four parts: 1. Reconstruction of knowledge 2. Development of teaching and research 3. Rationalization of administration and management 4. Diversification of academic evaluation and assessment The logic of rationalization and use of the market mechanism to operate universities and colleges on the basis of “demand and supply” was the foundation for these basic reform plans of 1991 and 1998. This direction of higher education policy is evident in the Council of Education plan released by MEXT in 2001. The policy expressed clearly that universities and colleges are strongly expected to become centers of excellence for economic growth by conducting research and mounting innovative enterprises useful for industrial as well as economic development. The second reason for undertaking a higher education study was that the researchers were interested in the topic itself. The RIHE director wanted to examine the relationship between society and academia from the perspective of the sociology of education as well as that of the sociology of science. It was hypothesized that a strong relationship exists between social development and academia. This relationship is based social conditions, social functions, and social structures. According to this point of view, social development necessarily impacts upon the university’s ideal, function, and structure. As Table 5.1 shows, societies develop from an “agricultural society” to an “industrial society” and then to a “knowledge-based society.” Parallel to the development of society, the university develops from the “Middle Ages university” to the “modern university” and then to a “future university.” We now are in the transition from an industrial society to a knowledge-based society.

TABLE 5.1 Social Change and University Image Type of university

Middle Ages Modern University University

Type of Agricultural Industrial society society society Main function Dissemination Discovery of of knowledge of knowledge knowledge Key function Teaching Research of university Typical form University Multiversity of university Access Elite Mass Major actor Teacher Researcher Teaching Lecture Seminar style Management Guild type Rector type and

Future University Knowledgebased society Understanding of knowledge Learning Virtual university Universal Student Personal President type

Higher education reforms: determinants and directions administration Evaluation Peer review and assessment Model of European university university

Peer review

135

Nonpeer review

German/American New university university

First Conceptual Model of the Higher Education Study Academia’s activity is based on knowledge. In the Middle Ages, the priority of the university was dissemination of knowledge, while in the modern university it is discovery of knowledge. At the next stage, dissemination and discovery are to be rethought and understanding stressed. Learning will become more important because of massification and diversification of the student population. Accordingly, a core function of academia will be shifted from teaching, as in the university of the Middle Ages, to research in the modern university, and to learning in the future university. As for university organization, it has shifted in the modern society from university to “multiversity” as Clark Kerr (2001) conceptualized it, and in the future it may shift to the “virtual university.” Access of students to the university shifts in accordance with Martin Trow’s (1973) prediction, from an elite to a mass and later to a universal stage. The major actor shifts from teacher, to researcher, and then to student. The dominant style of teaching moves from lecture to seminar and to personal instruction. The method of management and administration shifts from a guild type of control to rector-type control, as seen in European universities, and to president-type control, as seen in American universities. The dominant methodology of assessment and evaluation shifts from peer review to nonpeer review. At the institutional level, certification shifts from “chartering” in traditional European universities to “accreditation” in modern American universities and finally to a mixed type in the future. The most common type of university shifts from the European continental type (collegiate bodies in an agricultural society), to the German university (the model for undergraduate courses), and to the American university (a model for graduate study in the industrial society). The next stage is a new innovative university type including a virtual university in the knowledge-based society. This viewpoint was presented in the RIHE director’s keynote paper presented to the initial meeting of the study participants (Arimoto 1997a). In addition, the perspectives of academic disciplines and comparative research were considered. In the discipline of higher education research, academic reform is a central theme that can supply the necessary framework for basic and applied research. As noted earlier, the study uses the knowledge model as its hypothesis. Another hypothesis adopted was related to student population and its enrollment in the universities and colleges, based on Trow’s (1973) hypothesis. As an initial hypothesis, the study proposal drew upon research in the United States that linked changes in university organization and structure with growth of enrollments. Trow (1973) described the process of enrollment growth in these terms:


136

Countries that develop a system of elite higher education in modern times seem able to expand it without changing its [the system’s] character in fundamental ways until it is providing places for about 15% of the age grade. At about that point the system begins to change its character; if the transition is made successfully the system is then able to develop institutions that can grow without being transformed until they reach about 50% of the age grade. Beyond that, and so far only in the United States, large sections of the population send nearly all their children to some kind of higher education, and the system must again create new forms of higher education as it begins to move rapidly toward universal access. (p. 63) In Table 5.1, with respect to the “access” portion of the table, the “elite” stage means fewer than 15 percent of the eighteen-year cohort attend universities and college; the “mass” stage means more than 15 percent and fewer than 50 percent attend; and the “universal” stage means more than 50 percent enroll. The Trow hypothesis was accepted by researchers from the six countries of SNERP as one suitable for an international comparative perspective on higher education. In the late 1970s the model had been translated and introduced into Japanese higher education research by Ikuo Amano and Kazuyuki Kitamura (Trow 1976). Consistent with American experience, Japanese higher education also had developed linearly from an elite to a mass stage. The model enjoyed a certain popularity in Japan and was seen as a valuable macro-level perspective. From the outset, however, the study recognized the importance of making an international comparison among the six nations in addition to academic hypotheses based on the knowledge function. The following viewpoints guided the research: • Together, the higher education reforms of the six nations provide a dialogue for comparison between West and East. • Individually, the reforms identify a spectrum of national criteria for higher education. • In addition, there are important subthemes shared by the national groups, such as higher education reform, post-massification higher education, academic governance, and higher education and economic growth. Recommendations for higher education reform can be derived from the logic of academic disciplinary development and the logic of social development. The initial working hypotheses for the study were the following: 1. Overall, higher education reform deals with problems of systems and institutions from a perspective of international similarity. 2. Individual reform projects, however, deal with specific problems of systems and institutions from a perspective of national particularity. 3. A positive relation exists between higher education and social development. These hypotheses remained unchanged throughout the project. The essential objectives were:

Higher education reforms: determinants and directions

137

• A comprehensive study of academic reforms in the areas of higher education systems in which research, teaching, social service, and management and administration constitute an overall objective • A study that, while dealing analytically with academic organization for each of the four areas, makes academic governance the focal point Over time, however, changes took place in the balance of areas of research within the theme. The initial emphasis on areas such as research, teaching, service, and linkage between university and society was gradually overtaken by a focus on administration and management and on academic governance as central to the issue of higher education reform. At the same time, the relationship between university and economic growth as a major issue received less emphasis than was expected at the commencement of the study, even though it necessarily attracted substantial discussion in the seminars. Use of the Framework for Comparative Research An initial classification of stages of development of higher education was used for the purpose of comparing developments in higher education in the six countries. As previously pointed out, Trow originally developed this classification. The model identifies three stages of development for higher education as a function of enrollment growth: elite, mass, and universal. Trow’s model was seen to not describe what was happening in European countries whose higher education was not evolving from the elite to the mass stage as smoothly as expected. Trow was compelled to modify his hypothesis and wrote: But still other sections, especially my analysis of the movement of European systems toward an American-style system of mass higher education, were, I believe, simply wrong in the light of what has happened since 1973, and perhaps were visibly wrong even then. It is these erroneous predictions in the paper that I want to discuss first. (Trow 1978, p. 5) A study such as that proposed for the Six Nation Project had never been made, that is, there had not been a comparative study of several countries. This study was intended as a first-time cross-national examination of the fit of the Trow hypothesis. Applying Trow’s criteria, the United States and Japan can be categorized as being in the universal stage; Germany, Switzerland, and Singapore are in the massification stage; while China remains in the elite stage. In the organization of the research teams, however, it quickly became obvious that the classification of higher education systems solely on the basis of quantitative indicators—such as proportion of age group enrolled— obscured important differences and similarities. Restatement of the Research Hypothesis The research directors decided, therefore, to add a qualitative dimension to the research. This qualitative approach was taken from the sociology of science, or sociology of


138

knowledge. The approach focuses on knowledge, or academic work on the basis of knowledge, as the major determinant of university structure and operation. Such an approach emphasizes that academic work such as learning, teaching, research, and service basically consist of knowledge, or application of knowledge as material and mediation. In other words, we need to pay attention to the nature of knowledge, to scientific knowledge, and to academic disciplines. The function of knowledge is divided into five parts: understanding, discovery, dissemination, application, and control of knowledge, as indicated by Table 5.2. In addition, it is important to analyze reforms in four phases— research, teaching, social service, and administration and management organization (Arimoto 1997b).

TABLE 5.2 Knowledge Functions and the Corresponding Academic Organization Knowledge Function

Equivalent

Academic Organization

Understanding Learning

Learning/study organization Discovery Research Research organization Dissemination Teaching Curriculum organization Application Social service Social service organization Control Administration Administration and management

Based on an analysis of academic organizational reforms in Japan, six indicators were adopted as showing the direction to be sought in academic reforms responding to social change. These are high qualification, cooperation, socialization, internationalization, interdisciplinarization, and information orientation. These six indicators are related to the four areas of research, teaching, social service, and administration and management. These can be used to describe the extent of academic organizational reform. The following four indicators were used to describe changes in each of the four areas: diversity, flexibility, openness, and efficiency. Combining these four indicators with the four phases of reform, we sought to describe the extent of academic organizational reform. In analyzing the present situation of reform of Japanese universities, we introduced the following scheme of analysis based on three perspectives. In the first perspective, two terms are important. The first term, high qualification, would be used to describe a process of improvement of the organization of teaching and research, reforms of graduate school, improvements of curriculum and educational methods, and changes in admission to undergraduate and graduate programs. The second term, cooperation, would be used to refer to cooperation and interaction between universities that improve the interchange of students, credits, and social services at the educational and social service level.


139

The second perspective is regarding the level of university organization. The characteristics and individuality of university organization have many different dimensions. As the university moves into the post-massification stage, university organization will become more complex and diversified. University organizations will have to diversify and become more flexible, open, and efficient. Accordingly our attention in examining reforms was on diversifiation, flexibility, openness, and efficiency of university organization. The third perspective is regarding self-evaluation on the “accountability” and “credibility” of the university (Yamanoi 2001, p. 13). Table 5.3 summarizes these perspectives.

TABLE 5.3 Framework for Analysis of Academic Reforms Response to Social Identity of Changes Inside and Outside University University Organization and Function of University 1. diversity 2. flexibility 3. openness 4. efficiency 1. High qualification Teaching organization and function 2. Cooperation Research organization and function 3. Socialization Managerial organization and function 4. Internationalization Social service organization and function 5. Interdisciplinary relations 6. Information orientation

Methodology Data was obtained from a variety of sources: questionnaires, interviews, seminars, and the contributions of researchers and expert advisers invited to attend research meetings and to contribute papers and reports. Surveys by questionnaire were submitted to university presidents and deans of faculties of education in Japan. These are described later. Data were collected in seminars and conferences from the country reports, other reports, and discussions.


140

The first seminar, entitled “Academic Reforms in the World: Situation and Perspective in the Massification Stage of Higher Education,” was held in Hiroshima in February 1997. Researchers and policymakers came from China, Germany, Japan, Singapore, Switzerland, and the United States (Research Institute for Higher Education 1997). The second seminar was on “Higher Education Management in the 21st Century: Economic, Technological, Social and Political Forces Affecting Higher Education.” This was also held in Hiroshima, in September 1999. More than 100 people participated in this seminar, among them university presidents, researchers, sponsors, patrons, policymakers, administrators, and observers from academia, industry, and commerce, representing the six countries of SNERP and Thailand as observer (Arimoto and Morgan 2000). The third seminar was held in the Research Center for University Studies, University of Tsukuba, Tokyo, in February 2000. The topic was “University Reforms and Academic Governance.” Three countries participated in the seminar: Japan, Switzerland, and the United States (Arimoto2001). The Japanese study team sent researchers to the six countries of SNERP and to Britain, Australia, France, and Thailand, to meet with relevant experts and gather materials related to this study. The Japanese team carried out interviews with people in the relevant six countries who included representatives of a wide range of academics, administrators, politics, industry, and commerce. In the United States, researchers were sent to the following universities: Harvard, Pennsylvania, Pennsylvania State, California at Berkeley, California at Los Angeles, New York, Hawaii, Boston College, Maryland, Stanford, and Texas. Visits also were paid to the National Foundation and the American Association for the Advancement of Science. Material from researchers and specialists who knew the problems of higher education in relevant countries was collected at research meetings held by the Japanese team. These results were published in two books in Japanese. The first included seven papers and the second contained ten papers (Arimoto 1997a, 1999). The linkage between the knowledge-based society and academic productivity was considered a key concept from the beginning of the study. Emphasis was given to the nexus of the knowledge functions of discovery (research), dissemination (teaching), and understanding (learning) as indispensable both for academic work and for economic growth (Arimoto 1997b). In this context, the social contribution of academic work was explored in a series of seminars, especially in the second seminar, and related reports just described. These seminars discussed and analyzed university reform for economic growth in relation to a range of factors: massification and post-massification structures, the relation between management and administration and market principles, privatization, academic productivity, institutionalization of graduate schools, studies of centers of learning, knowledge-based society, and globalization. Data Collection Surveys The original proposal called for surveys to be conducted in the six member countries. The survey questionnaires would be directed to university presidents and deans of faculties.


141

System-level development was to be assessed through a wide range of indicators. These included access; number of higher education institutions, students, and teachers; reform curricula; faculty development for teachers; differentiation of students in terms of scholastic aptitude and learning ability; institutionalization of graduate schools; and educational pathology reflecting conflicts between quality and quantity. The administration and management topic was examined intensively and extensively, looking at relationships among nation, society, and university; deregulation and market principles; top-down and bottom-up administration; current state of reforms in terms of benchmarking; the roles of government; budgetary controls; evaluation and assessment; and the importance of structures of governance. A basic survey of universities and colleges in Japan was conducted in 1996. Questionnaires were mailed to a sample of 561 universities (presidents) and 1,034 faculties (deans) taken from The List of Nationwide Universities (Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology 1996). A deadline of two months for return was fixed. The final response numbers were 349 universities (return rate, 62.2 percent) and 647 faculties (62.5 percent). Not all countries were able to do the surveys. Besides Japan, only the American and Swiss teams were able to conduct surveys. The American team, after coordinating with the Japanese team, modified the questionnaire to fit with universities and colleges in the United States. The U.S. study converted those surveys to a pair of computer-administered telephone instruments that were subsequently administered to a sample population of U.S. colleges and universities. By this process, two surveys took place in the summer of 1999. The first protocol (Survey A, following the Japanese team’s nomenclature) focused primarily on changes to governance and administrative structures. The second protocol, Survey B, focused on changes to the institution’s educational enterprise and was administered to chief academic officers who (in the United States) typically hold the titles of “provost” or “vice president for Academic Affairs.” In all, 130 chief academic officers participated (Zemsky and Dubrow 2001, p. 112). The Swiss team found it difficult to use the questionnaire in their context. They reported the following: The questionnaire is, indeed, a “difficult” one as questionnaires go, because it refers to the three principles investigated, namely responsiveness, responsibility, and accountability, and is couched in terms of the manifestations of these principles in specific acts of governance. These three principles, which (under these or similar designations) are fairly common currency in specialist research, are not necessarily familiar to all university professors, despite the fact that they are arguably central to the operations of the institutions from which they draw their salary. In other words, there is certain degree of risk involved in issuing questionnaires structured in terms of these concepts…. Given the difficulty of the questionnaire, we regard as acceptable the response rate in excess of 25%, yielding a final sample of N=263. (Grin, Harayama, and Weber 2000, pp. 71–72)


142

The United States paid attention to accountability, and the Swiss survey to responsiveness, responsibility, and accountability. The U.S. team stated: Central to our analysis are two assumptions made with respect to accountability in public and private higher education institutions. During the late 1980s and early 1990s, state legislatures began stepping up their oversight of public colleges and universities while at the same time enacting budget cuts. Increasingly, public colleges and universities were being asked to justify the public’s investment of tax dollars in their institutional operations. They were expected to be more efficient with their funds and more accountable to the world outside their campus walls. Concerns raised by state legislators and governing board authorities included student, learning, the preparation of graduates for the workforce, and teaching loads. (Zemsky and Dubrow 2001, p. 113) With respect to accountability, the Swiss team reported: Rather, we are interested in how the joint presence of responsiveness and responsibility is accommodated in university management and in particular, whether the joint exercise of responsiveness and responsibility allows for accountability. (Grin, Harayama, and Weber 2001, p. 61) Impediments to conducting surveys included insufficient financial support, constraints of time, and inapplicability of the questionnaire due to differences in the stages of development of higher education. If it had been possible to use a similar questionnaire in all countries, quantitative analysis of the responses could have been informative. The outcome nevertheless yielded valuable qualitative data to augment participants’ discussions in seminars. The questionnaire surveys provided descriptive information about higher education institutions. Each country participating also prepared reports based on statistics, materials, and any suitable previous studies available for their own countries. These country reports were used later in the seminars. Interviews In addition, the Japanese team conducted interviews with appropriate individuals— including bureaucrats, policymakers, academic researchers and staff, and university presidents—and with representatives of official bodies and institutions, including ministries of education, universities, and research institutions in member countries. The process of discussion among researchers in the study team led to the selection of people for interviews; the selected people in each country were then interviewed by researchers who were sent to meet with them. Results of these interviews as well as gathered data related to the interviews were described in the reports mentioned previously (Arimoto 1997, 1999).


143

Seminars Country reports included data from questionnaires and from interviews and were discussed by participants in seminars. Explanations of country situations and trends were presented from various points of view. These presentations dealt with definitions of and trends in massification, composition of student bodies, direction of reforms of teaching, changing relationships between higher education and society, and internal administrative changes. The German and Swiss country studies refer only to course programs lasting at least four years and to students actually studying more than six years on average before being awarded a degree, whereas the Japanese and U.S. country reports address also short-cycle programs requiring only two years of study. The director of the study, as well as the authors of the U.S. country study, employed the term post-massification to identify a higher education system that provides access to more than half of the respective age group. In contrast to the term universal higher education, coined by Trow, post-massification suggests that this stage might better be explained by changes that occurred in the past rather than by new characteristics. We return to this point later. At present, private higher education accommodates about 75 percent of students in Japan, about one fifth in the United States, and only a marginal fraction of the students in the remaining four countries. No significant privatization trends can be observed in these countries. The China study reports that a few “nongovernmental” institutions have been established recently. Differences of methodological content accompanying this material revealed complementary relationships. It was fairly difficult for the research director to use unified comparable statistics on privatization, for instance, because of the different developmental stages of the countries. In this case, combined use of descriptive and explanatory methods is valuable for understanding systems in both a domestic and an international perspective. For example, in an interview with the minister of education in China, the current enrollment rate of the eighteen-year-old cohort was reported as 11 percent, but the study showed that the rate was already more than 20 percent in Shanghai. Also, Chinese higher education passing through the elite stage has many similarities with Japanese higher education passing through post-massification. These similarities include declining student ability to learn, pressure to institutionalize faculty development, student evaluation of teachers, curriculum innovation in general and in professional education, introduction of a contract system in faculty recruitment, and others. Findings The full results of the research inquiries are published in the relevant reports listed in the “References.” The findings can be summarized in the following points. Adapting Trow’s model to six countries, it is clear that Germany and Singapore are passing through the massification stage, while the United States and Japan have reached the universal stage, and China is still at the elite stage. Switzerland is in the midst of moving from the elite to the massification stage. Academic reforms taking place in organizations of research,


144

teaching, service, and management are responding to knowledge functions of discovery, dissemination, application, and control. Administration and Management Results from the Survey of Japanese Universities by Questionnaire. Complete responses were obtained from 327 university presidents and 576 deans of faculties. The following results were obtained with respect to “academic reforms of university governance and systems of management” (one of the principal topics addressed by the questionnaire). First, a clear trend is related to the advisory system supporting presidents and deans concerning university governance and management. Some 36 percent of presidents expect to establish administrative supports such as a vice-president or an advisory support system. Furthermore, 25 percent of the presidents hope to get strong and wide powers for university management. Overall, more than half the presidents expect to strengthen their leadership role in regard to university governance. Deans are less likely to expect to strengthen their powers of leadership within their faculties or adopt a role of faculty managers, although 29 percent of the deans expect to establish a committee structure for faculty management. The following results are reported in Yamanoi (2001). With respect to trends in academic fields, 60 percent of deans of humanities and social sciences hope to reform faculty management, while only 38 percent of deans of natural sciences expect to establish a supporting system for faculty management, such as a committee. In the case of humanities and social sciences, the German style of university autonomy influences the faculties of these disciplinary fields. In general, the Japanese faculty has kept a much stronger power, like that of the German-type senate, since the Meiji era. Improvements have been made in senate and faculty meetings, according to the statements of presidents and deans. It is important to distinguish between presidents or deans and a senate or faculty meeting. The former are executive bodies, and the latter are deliberative bodies. The University Council in 1998 asked universities to shift to a management style of top-down from a style of bottom-up. The Japanese Ministry of Education, Science and Culture amended the roles of presidents and deans and the functions of the faculty senate following the recommendation of the council. After 1999, it was relatively easy to reform the roles of presidents, deans, and/or functions of the senate. Academic reforms such as listening to public opinion and public disclosure of information were carried out in response to social expectations of accountability. Private universities, which have governing boards similar to those in the United States, already have boards of trustees open to society. National universities have now started to have this kind of governance mechanism. New national universities founded in the 1970s began to establish a kind of university administrative council for listening to public opinion (Sanyokai) such as a new vice-president system. Old and traditional national universities began to establish administrative councils in the late 1990s. These trends, gradually recognized in the 1990s, became clear in the 2000s. National universities were required to become national university agencies (Kokuritsu Daigaku Hojin) by 2004, but that goal is not yet reached. Focusing on academic governance, universities and colleges in Japan are increasingly stressing responsibility and accountability toward their outside environments. A similar


145

trend is also recognizable in the survey results from the United States. The questionnaire used there asked: In the last five years, has your institution implemented a strategic plan to increase general accountability to any of the following constituents (students, parents, funding agencies, employers, local community, government/regulatory agencies, general public)? Responses to this questionnaire are particularly notable; almost 75 percent of responding institutions (both public and private) reported that they had taken steps to increase the level of accountability to students and to government agencies. These two groups are certainly among the most important stakeholders to whom institutions must answer (Zemsky and Dubrow 2001, pp. 114–15). Over all, more public, research/doctoral comprehensive institutions are reporting increased accountability. Despite losing market share, liberal arts colleges and private institutions are staying insular (Zemsky and Dubrow 2001, pp. 116–19). The relevant social expectations and actual situations facing the universities and colleges in Switzerland are described as follows: two general patterns can be noted. First, the university’s capacity to deliver responsibility and, to a lesser extent, responsiveness, is certainly inadequate, but not abysmal; by contrast, its ratings in terms of accountability are poor; accountability therefore emerges as a priority issue in future reforms. Second, the higher up in the university hierarchy, the more pleased respondents are; conversely, professors who do not and have not held decision-making posts in this hierarchy tend to be consistently more critical (Grin, Harayama, and Weber 2000, pp. 94–95). Results of Seminars. Academic Reforms Seminar The papers presented to the academic reforms seminar held in 1997 describe changes in academic governance and management as follows: Japan: Academic control by the national bureaucracy has been weakened somewhat by introduction of the policy deregulation since 1991. Individual institutions have begun to pursue UI (University Identity) and individuality, though it is undeniable that government control is still working to a considerable degree especially in the national sector where the secretariat functions as an arm of the national government. United States: Many in the academy still wish they could enjoy the respect once accorded institutions of higher learning. Indeed, the question most often asked within the academy is still: “how can society be made to recognize and support the value of what we do?” However, the question now regularly asked by legislators, employers, parents, and students is “In what ways can post-secondary education serve us better?” Bridging these disparate perspectives will be one focus of American discussions to resolve the challenges posed in the era of post-massification. Switzerland: One deals with the autonomy and accountability of universities, both of which are expected to increase as a result of a general trend whose driving force is a concern with the efficiency of institutions. The principles of “new public management” are brought to bear on the


146

functioning of institutions of higher learning, with major organizational consequences. Singapore: The most pertinent factors in the Singapore context are those relating to the growth in complexity, the need for accountability and efficiency, and the assurance of quality in program and process. Thus, the universities have embraced the quality framework. China: Some research universities in China have used the experience of management of Western universities as a reference point for change in their university-department “two-level-model” into the university-college[faculty]-department “three-level model” so as to rationalize the internal structure of the universities. The purpose was to change a situation in which the management span was too wide, the transmission of information was unsmooth, the efficiency of management was too low, and the burden of the president was too heavy. Germany: Considerations of installing trustee systems and appointing governing boards in which members come from outside the university, from industry, commerce, politics, trade unions, and the like, are gaining ground in today’s discussions in Germany. Many professors and students are afraid that, especially in a time of negative financial growth, boards with outside members would be likely to make decisions in favor of chairs or institutes with an immediate relevance of economic success rather than to care for basic research, especially in the humanities. The seminar made it evident that every country is conducting academic reforms that include elements of the business model embedded in industrial society and that also increase the use of market mechanisms. Teichler (1997) has summarized these trends from a comparative perspective: All countries analyzed seem to experience some internal change. Models borrowed from management changes in private enterprises gained some popularity. The author of the U.S. study wrote “Higher education has begun to borrow new business models from industry by downsizing, outsourcing, and reengineering.” In countries where the government played a strong supervisory role in the past, strong efforts have been made to strengthen the power of the most senior managers in higher education (i.e. the rectors or presidents), and possibly to introduce boards. Though the changes in the management of higher education, summarized as a “stronger top-down mode in academic organizations,” are less dramatic in Japan than in some other countries, the stress put on the academic profession seems to be most strongly felt in Japan. This is shown by the comparative study on the academic profession undertaken in 1992. It may be that the tensions between the surviving classical ideal of academics and the changed conditions are most prominent in Japan. (p. 230) The Presidents’ Summit. The summit did not focus on the Japanese questionnaire survey because the two countries using the questionnaire, the United States and Switzerland, had not yet carried out their surveys. The main theme was “Higher Education Reform for


147

Quality Higher Education Management in the 21st Century: Economic, Technological, Social, and Political Forces Affecting Higher Education.” Papers presented international comparisons of problems related to academic reforms. The summit had four additional themes: 1. Frameworks for higher education policy and strategic management for universities 2. Higher education and society 3. The role of universities in economic growth, higher education, and technology 4. When will technology really change how universities teach and students learn? The content of the seminar developed out of the study’s research. Kenneth P.Mortimer, president of the University of Hawaii, presented the keynote paper titled “Governance in the 21st Century University: The World is Changing Faster than the Governance System Can Accommodate.” This paper defined the context of the discussion to be made by participants in the Presidents’ Summit. It covered the following points: (1) the rising importance of market forces, (2) globalization of science and technology, (3) increased importance of technology, (4) increased emphasis on educational outputs, and (5) integration of the university into the larger society. Emphasizing the political role of the university president, Mortimer offered four concluding suggestions: (1) be mission centered but market smart; (2) realize that governance restructuring is radical treatment; (3) make sure you understand your clients; and (4) use assessment to create change, not simply to record it. Reactions to Mortimer’s speech and other papers emphasized a variety of aspects of academic governance. In his concluding address, Robert Zemsky commented that those from the United States were more likely to embrace or be resigned to a world of markets in which enterprise is rewarded, students are treated as customers, and attention is focused on educational outcomes as much as educational processes. Those from western Europe were more likely to define the same set of basic problems in terms of established practice and precedent, on the one hand, and of law, decree, and government regulation on the other. Those from Asia, in general, and Japan, in particular, were more likely to define basic issues in terms of the operational role of government and whether or not universities ought to be independent of the ministries that heretofore have been responsible for their well-being. The Three-Nation Workshop on Academic Governance. This workshop analyzed findings from the questionnaire survey. As far as the three countries are concerned, in the structure of academic governance there is a clear distinction between change at the top level and at the lower levels. The Swiss team summarized the outcome of the Japanese survey. The main issues raised in the Japanese study are the following. First, the government and business have exerted major outside pressure on universities to reform, and in particular to demonstrate more social contributions and international openness. The two groups have asked the university to develop resource allocation procedures (both among and within universities) in which market-like mechanisms are put to use and to reinforce the cooperation between university and industry. Concretely, in 1998 the University Council proposed several measures such as the reinforcement of the president’s leadership, moving from a bottom-up style to a top-down style in university management, and the introduction of an external evaluation system. Also the transformation of national


148

universities into “independent administrative corporations” (dokuritsu gyosei hojin) is under discussion (Grin, Harayama, and Weber 2002, p. 48). In Table 5.4, governance structures are categorized into eight factors: board, president/rector, deans, departments, faculty governance body, professorate, general representative bodies, and the role of education ministries. Among these factors, in Switzerland and the United States boards of trustees

TABLE 5.4 Importance of Governance Structures United Japan Switzerland States Influence Influence Influence Trend Trend Trend Boards NA Low Up High Up President/Rector National (Japan) Low Up Private (Japan) High Down Swiss, United Moderate Up High Up States Deans National (Japan) Low Up Private (Japan) High Up Swiss, USA Moderate High Up Down Department National (Japan) High Down Private (Japan) Low Steady Swiss, USA Moderate Moderate Steady Down Faculty High Up Low Down Low Governance Down Body Professorate (as individuals) National (Japan) High Down Private (Japan) Moderate Down Swiss, United Low-Mod Moderate States Steady Steady* Education High Up Low Down Low Ministry Down *Note: Provided the professor is attracting grant funding.


149

usually are institutionalized in the academic governance structure, while such boards are not yet institutionalized in the Japanese national sector but are gradually becoming important. At the top level of governance, there is a manifest and general trend toward strengthening its influence. Boards in the United States are moving toward rising influence, even if they have already had high influence. Switzerland’s boards are going in the same direction as well, though they do not yet have as strong an influence as their counterparts in the United States. The Japanese national university sector is strengthening the presidents’ power. The coming national university agency will institutionalize a kind of board of trustees to strengthen power at the top of organizations. In contrast, at the middle level of governance, that is, the deans, the three countries are taking different paths. In the United States and Japan the middle levels are achieving greater influence, but in Switzerland their influence is decreasing. Even so, in general, a comparable trend in the style of academic governance can be recognized. Presidents and rectors are theoretically and actually expected to increase their roles of leadership and their direct influence on the administration and management in all three countries. This trend seems to show that the pattern of academic governance is now shifting. The trend is away from the “rectorship,” which incorporated the imprint of the academic guild into the traditional style of leadership in European universities, to the presidential type of leadership, which developed in American universities parallel to the introduction of corporate management into modern industrial society. One general feature emerging from this comparison is that Japan and, to some extent, Switzerland are clearly reforming, in the sense that hitherto “strong” bodies see their influence erode, whereas bodies that previously had comparatively limited influence are seeing their roles increase. By contrast, reform in the United States amounts to sweeping change neither in orientation nor in new priorities; rather, it reveals an essential reinforcement of the current inner logic of the system, with strong players strengthening their influence and secondary players being further sidelined (Weber, Harayama, and Grin 2001, p. 105). Based on these discussions, further comparative observations were made by some researchers inside and outside the six SNERP countries in the workshop report published in 2002. The following are comments from Germany, Switzerland, and Singapore. Germany “Moves toward the international trends of Reform patterns of governance started relatively late and were relatively slow and cautious in Germany. This also holds true in Japan” (Teichler 2002, p. 19). “Obviously, the new German system of governance in higher education heads in the same direction, as we noted in other countries. A stronger emphasis of government is on target setting and supervision of the outcomes instead of bureaucratic involvement, a managerial role of university and department leadership, as well as an increase of evaluative mechanisms serving both self-reflection and control” (Teichler 2002, p. 27). Switzerland With respect to the evolution of governance structures and procedures, the similarities and differences between Switzerland and Japan can be summarized as follows. The role of government is typically high in Japan, which has a strong Ministry of Education, and somewhat lower in Switzerland where, as we have seen, education is decentralized but local (cantonal) governments pay an important role. The influence of government is declining in Japan, particularly in regard to regulation, planning,


150

coordination, and general funding, but it is increasing with respect to targeted assessment exercises that reinforce competition among institutions. This pattern is quite different from that of the Swiss, where the role of the authorities has declined somewhat in terms of funding (with the relative share of other sources of funding being expected to increase). However, their role has increased in the sense that authorities are taking steps to alter the playing field in order to induce universities to be more competitive and to plan their development in a coordinated, mutually complementary perspective (Grin, Harayama, and Weber 2002, p. 48). Singapore From its infancy, the Singaporian state recognized the value of education to national prosperity and social cohesion and thus the need to have authority over it. Indeed, in both 1968 and 1980, senior cabinet ministers were appointed as vice chancellors of the university. This history and the lack of a private sector in education meant that the issues of governance and funding in Singapore play out differently from Japan or Switzerland. A second pertinent difference is that of massification. In the Singapore context, the state invested sparingly in higher education, preferring instead to build up a strong, well-resourced school and polytechnic system. Singapore’s second university was established only in 1991, followed by a third in 2000, with planning under way for a fourth (Gopinathan and Shive 1987, p. 54). Interpretations and Policy Implications The concept of development of mass higher education derived from Trow’s model can now be reexamined. According to the model, progression from massified to universal higher education could be considered a linear development. In reality, it appears that many conflicts emerge in quantitative and qualitative dimensions between the two stages. From a quantitative perspective, systems will probably shift from the elite to the mass stage. This shift is going on in European countries. The United States and Japan, the two countries among the six shifting from the mass to the universal stage, are facing difficulties with the process. This calls for a concept of “post-massification” instead of “universal access.” Furthermore, many similarities were found between the premassification and post-massification stages. Limitations of the Trow Model The Trow linear growth model fits the United States but does not match experiences elsewhere. Other countries have not followed the American model, even though they have attempted to follow the same path. For those countries currently with underdeveloped systems yet facing similar problems of globalization, a knowledge-based society, expectations of lifelong learning, and a desire for reforms similar to those implemented elsewhere, the reflective and critical reviews provided by this study will prove important. The model does retain substantial validity when limited to the teaching and learning function in universities and colleges. A developmental gap is reflected in introduction of readiness for teaching and learning, including such things as the elective system, modular courses, credit accumulation and transfer based on the transcript of grades, and so forth.


151

However, it does not necessarily correlate with the research function. The contributions of globalization, information technology (IT), and the development of a knowledge-based society, which have expanded rapidly since the 1980s, have become key factors in research. These knowledge components conform better to expectations derived from the knowledge-based model that appears to offer a more appropriate base for describing reforms of higher education across the six countries. Trow himself recognized recently that European countries are facing IT development even before realizing the mass and universal system of higher education. “The development of the new information technology over the past few years creates new possibilities and problems for European systems of higher education even before they have fully solved those associated with the creation of mass systems—a process that is still under way” (Trow 2001, p. 111). The Trow model does not account for the fact that all higher education systems are facing the problem of coping with the same kind of environment in the knowledge-based society. This is true despite large differences in levels of enrollment. At one extreme, enrollment in higher education in the United States surpassed the recognized maximum for “mass higher education” more than two decades ago. At the opposite extreme, China is likely to reach the recognized minimum level of mass higher education only around the year 2010. The enrollment quota at one extreme is more than ten times as high as at other extreme (Teichler 2000). While China is now in the middle of the elite stage, it is facing conflicts similar to those frequently seen in the post-massification stage in the United States and Japan. Altbach says higher education in the United States is now facing some critical changes such as introduction of IT, for-profit higher education, higher education as a “mature industry,” the demand for greater productivity, and the problem of basic research (Altbach 2001). The system in the United States and indeed all systems share such challenges more or less, regardless of their developmental stages. In other words, higher education reforms in all systems are being conducted in the realms of research, teaching, social service, and administration and management in response to challenges of market mechanisms and public accountability as well as globalization and the knowledge-based society. Higher Education and Economic Growth The study gave some consideration to the links between higher education and economic growth. The most direct discussion was that of Shinichi Yamamoto (2001): This rapid massification was caused both by the people’s desire for higher education and by the industry’s demand for a better qualified workforce in the field of engineering and related fields. As a result Japan succeeded in keeping a large number of engineers and technicians who contributed to rapid economic growth in 1960s and 1970s. The good combination of Japanese-style management and life-long employment of engineers and technicians helped the Japanese economy and industry far greater than had been expected. Uniformity worked much better than did individual creativity for the mass-production system of manufacturing industry at that time. (p. 47)


152

A knowledge-based society expects high academic productivity. Production of new knowledge will bring about social activity by creating new industries and promoting employment. In this context, it is clear that academia is increasingly indispensable to social development. This study paid attention from the outset to the nature of knowledge. From the viewpoint of the sociology of science, academia can contribute to society through the development of knowledge. Accordingly, higher education reform was thought to be the most effective way to link the contribution of academia to social development and especially to economic growth. Academics can contribute to social development by generating sufficient academic productivity in those realms of research, teaching, and social service that are considered as knowledge-based academic work. Academic productivity consists of productivity in the combination of research, teaching, and service, and therefore academic reform is needed to optimize such productivity. A comparative study of the six SNERP countries with respect to the relationship between university and economic growth shows similar characteristics in spite of their different stages of higher education development. The United States and Japan are now confronted with the post-massification stage; Singapore, Germany, and Switzerland with the massification stage; and China with the elite stage. All countries are addressing the reform of administration and management in higher education as an important step to promote the connection of academic productivity and economic development under the pressure of social change, especially that arising from globalization and emerging knowledge-based societies. For Japan, a close relationship exists among the factors of market mechanisms, deregulation of the national universities, the competitive abilities of institutions, and academic productivity. This extends not only to undergraduate reform but also to institutionalization and to reform of graduate schools. In this context, the focus of research should move away from the problems of massification and post-massification at the level of undergraduate education and move toward the problems of massification at the level of graduate education. In fact, the role of graduate schools is increasingly important for promoting academic productivity of both research and teaching. Increases in research productivity are perceived as linked directly to economic growth. Explicitly, in the coming knowledge-based society, research productivity closely related to discovery of new knowledge is identified as a means of enhancing economic as well as societal development. From previous studies in the sociology of science, the United States is now recognized as the world’s preeminent center of learning (Arimoto 1994; Ben-David 1977; Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology 1997). The reason for this preeminence is institutionalization of the graduate school in the higher education system, integrating research, teaching, and learning (Clark 1995). The graduate school, established at Johns Hopkins University in the United States in 1876, was based on the German model that integrated research, teaching, and learning. Japan imported the American graduate school model after World War II. Now, some fifty years after its introduction, substantial reform, based on the evolved American model, is being undertaken in Japan. The method of reform is a policy that seeks to strengthen graduate schools in some key institutions to promote academic productivity. This reform is expected to exert a significant effect on economic growth later in the twenty-first century;


153

this follows the precedent established by the United States in the nineteenth century, which led to economic growth in the twentieth century. Recent proposals by MEXT for structural reforms in universities and colleges are closely related to achieving reform of graduate education in response to the needs of globalization and a knowledge-based society. Three reforms have been proposed: developing the thirty best universities to achieve the highest international standards, strengthening links between academia and industry in order to create new industries, and providing training for professionals at graduate schools (Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology 2001). All these plans are connected to the linkages between higher education and economic growth. In sequence, the first reform is focused on academic productivity to the extent that it is comparable to and competitive with existing centers of excellence around the world. The second reform seeks to locate academia at the center of emerging knowledge-based society and intends to create new industries and jobs by way of connecting academic work based on the discovery and production of knowledge with industries and businesses. The third reform seeks even greater contributions from academia to social development, and especially to economic growth. Higher Education and Globalization The six SNERP countries face the same situations in terms of the impact of globalization and market mechanisms on academia’s function. In this context, it is said that, because of its size and rich experience in the post-massification stage, the United States significantly influences higher education policy in other countries. According to the comparative study on academic governance, early acceptance of market mechanisms by the United States provided it with a well-developed market-driven model, much in advance of the experience of other countries. Examination of this model has had explicit influence on the administration and management policies of other countries. Similarly, privatized and deregulated administration and management are well developed in the American system. This also has been influential in the academic reforms in other countries. An example is provided by recent higher education policy in Japan, where the central government has developed plans to introduce deregulated administration and management as a key concept in its higher education policy, strengthening top-down as opposed to bottom-up governance in every institution. Tensions between Quality and Quantity Conflicts between quantity and quality are increasing in every higher education system, despite different developmental stages. These conflicts are especially evident at the stage of massification, which is why this study discriminated between massification and postmassification. The quality of academic work has become a focal point of policy at the post-massification stage of development. Conflict between quantity and quality is resolved by establishing guarantees of academic work. The guarantees need to extend across the full range of academic work—research, teaching, and social service. Consequently, self-study, internal and external academic evaluation, and assessment have become more and more important.


154

Comments on Collaboration in Comparative Research Each country adopted the study’s theme and therefore was involved in the pursuit of the same purpose of international collaborative research. It is both a limitation and a source of strength that each country has had different approaches to the same theme, reflecting their own histories, cultures, and climates. A considerable body of research existed across the diverse topics embraced in this study. In this context, every team enjoyed abundant experience in terms of the background of discipline, culture, and environment. Every team could readily share the problems of higher education’s massification stage with all other teams, as the previous researches already provided a stock of relevant material for each country. For the postmassification stage, however, direct experience was restricted to the American and Japanese teams; although these two teams could easily share their experience, other teams found difficulties in appreciating some aspects due to their lack of experience. The fact that the collaborating researchers were drawn from different fields of study caused some difficulties in establishing a common approach to the theme and topic. Nevertheless, it is clear that a loosely coupled consensus was rapidly gained. For example, it was accepted that the theme and topic of the study should be approached from a methodology of sociology of science or sociology of education. At the same time, the opportunity was taken to employ other methodologies such as economics, management, history, comparative education, and psychology, where this offered an advantage. Differences of national cultures were evident in the research. For example, clear differences exist between those countries that have government-oriented higher education policies and those with market-oriented higher education policies. In this respect, it has become clear that differences in the relationships among government, university, and market (society) are closely related to policy and practice of higher education reforms. Considering this, every country has been able to observe their system’s identity with different cultures and environments by participating in the study with the purpose of applying a common framework across each system. Researchers do not mix a great deal with policymakers and practitioners in Japan. Of course, policymakers participated in the international conferences and seminars related to the study, but not much. More mixing seems to take place in the Unites States, Singapore, and China. Lower participation by policymakers did not appear to have any large effect on either the research process or the production of clear outcomes. In particular, there was no obvious impact on the amount of attention paid to education-economic links. Even though direct participation by policymakers was limited, financial support from the central government to the Japanese team was substantial. The terms on which this support was provided ensured that a great deal of attention would be paid to the educationeconomic linkage. The study’s outcome has some implications for policy making for higher education. The experience of countries already in or through the massification stage can help shape policies in countries approaching massification. This is especially relevant to the problem of reconciling the apparent conflict between quantity and quality that accompanies the development of a massified system. An international comparative study can generate relevant case studies that illustrate the kinds of conflicts already experienced in the advanced countries and suggest policies for academic reform in developing countries.


155

References Altbach, P.G. 1996. The international academic profession: Portraits of fourteen countries. New York: Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching. Altbach, P.G. 2001. The American academic model in comparative perspective. In In defense of American higher education, edited by P.G.Altbach, P.J.Gumport, and D.B.Johnstone. Baltimore, Md.: Johns Hopkins University Press. Arimoto, A. 1994. Study on the centers of learning. Hiroshima: Toshindo Publishing. Arimoto, A. 1997a. Cross-national study on academic organizational reforms in post-massification stage. In Academic reforms in the world, edited by Research Institute for Higher Education. Hiroshima: Hiroshima University, RIHE. Arimoto, A. 1997b. Cross-national study on post-massification academic organizational development (in Japanese). Review in Higher Education 46. Arimoto, A. 1999. International comparative study on academic reforms in the post-massification stage of higher education. Review in Higher Education 54:122. Arimoto, A., ed. 2001. University reforms and academic governance: Reports of the 2000 threenation workshop on academic governance. Vol. 7, RIHE International Publication Series. Hiroshima: Hiroshima University, Research Institute for Higher Education. Arimoto, A., and K.Morgan, eds. 2000. Higher education reform for quality higher education management in the 21st century: Economic, technological, social and political forces affecting higher education. Vol. 11, RIHE International Seminar Reports. Hiroshima: Hiroshima University, Research Institute for Higher Education. Ben-David, J. 1977. Centers of learning. New York: McGraw-Hill. Clark, B.R. 1995. Places of Inquiry.Berkeley: University of California Press. Goedegebuure, L., F.Kaiser, P.Maassen, L.Meek, F.v.Vught, and E.de Weert, eds. 1994. Higher education policy: An international comparative perspective. London: Pergamon. Gopinathan, S., and G.L.Shive. 1987. Scholarly access: Opportunities and problems in north-south academic relations. Comparative Education Review 31(4):490–508. Grin, F., Y.Harayama, and L.Weber. 2000. Responsiveness, responsibility and accountability: An evaluation of university governance in Switzerland. Berne: Office Federal de l’Education et la Science (OFES). Kerr, C., 2001. The Uses of the University (5th ed.). Cambridge: Harvard University Press. Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology (MEXT). 1996. Zenkoku Daigaku Youran (The list of nationwide universities). Tokyo: Author. Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology (MEXT). 1997. Wagakuni no Bunkyo Seisaku (Education white paper). Tokyo: Author. Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology (MEXT). 2001. Daigaku (Kokutitsudaigaku) no Kozokaikakuno Hoshin nitsuite (A structural reform plan of national universities). Tokyo: Author. Research Institute for Higher Education (RIHE), ed. 1997. Academic reforms in the world: Situation and perspective in the massification stage of higher education. Vol. 10, RIHE International Seminar Reports. Hiroshima: Hiroshima University. Teichler, U. 1997. Reforms as a response to massification of higher education: A comparative view. In Academic reforms in the world, edited by Research Institute for Higher Education. Hiroshima: Hiroshima University. Teichler, U. (2000). Reform for higher education in the 21st century. In Higher Education Reform for Quality Higher Education Management in the 21st century, edited by A.Arimoto and K.Morgan. Vol. 11, International Seminar Series. Hiroshima: Hiroshima University, Research Institute for Higher Education. Teichler, U. 2002. University reform and governance in Germany. In University reforms and academic governance reconsidered: Report of the six-nation Higher education research project.


156

Vol. 8, RIHE International Publication Series, edited by A.Arimoto. Hiroshima: Hiroshima University, Research Institute for Higher Education. Trow, M. 1973. Problems in the transition from elite to mass higher education. June 26–29, at Paris. Trow, M. 1976. Universities in highly diploma-centered society (in Japanese). Translated by I.Amano and K.Kitamura. Tokyo: Tokyo University Press. Trow, M. 1978. Elite and mass higher education: American models and European realities. Paper read at Conference on Research into Higher Education Processes and Structures, at Dalaro, Sweden. Trow, M. 2001. From mass higher education to universal access: The American advantage. In In defense of American higher education, edited by P.G.Altbach, P.J.Gumport, and D.B. Johnstone. Baltimore, Md.: Johns Hopkins University Press. University Council.1998. Vision for universities in the 21st century and reform measures: To be distinctive universities in a competitive environment. Tokyo: Author. Weber, L., Y.Harayama, and F.Grin. (2001). Responsiveness, responsibility and accountability in Swiss University governance. In University Reforms and Academic Governance: Reports of the 2000 Three-Nation Workshop on Academic Governance, edited by Akira Arimoto. Hiroshima: Hiroshima University, Research Institute for Higher Education. Yamamoto, S. 2001. The role of universities in relation with changing national economy from the case in Japan. In University reforms and academic governance: Reports of the 2000 threenation workshop on academic governance. Vol. 7, RIHE International Seminar Series, edited by A.Arimoto. Hiroshima: Research Institute for Higher Education, Hiroshima University. Yamanoi, A. 2001. Present situation of the university management. In University reforms and academic governance: Reports of the 2000 three-nation workshop on academic governance. Vol. 7, RIHE International Seminar Series, edited by A.Arimoto. Hiroshima: Hiroshima University, Research Institute for Higher Education. Zemsky, R., and G.Dubrow. 2001. Dimensions of comparison with a focus on importance of governance structure. In University reforms and academic governance: Reports of the 2000 three-nation workshop on academic governance. Vol. 7, RIHE International Publication Series, edited by A.Arimoto. Hiroshima: Hiroshima University, Research Institute for Higher Education.

Chapter 6 Education Evaluation and Indicators in the People’s Republic of China, Singapore, and the United States ZHANG LI Reliable evidence about the operation, cost, and effects of educational programs is essential for their improvement. Each of the countries in the Six Nation Educational Research Project (SNERP) spends considerable effort on the collection and analysis of data, and each country wishes that it had more information. The initial meeting of SNERP raised questions about the assessment of educational outcomes and the kinds of indicators that would be most useful for international comparisons. Table 6.1 shows the uneven status of demographic, socioeconomic, and educational level in the six nations as of 1995. Actually, the situations in China, Singapore, and the United States were so different that the SNERP participants had doubts about whether it would be possible to do a comparative study on national educational indicators. On the other hand, the topic of educational indicators and assessment is of high interest around the world. Few nations are content with their current system; many are considering fundamental changes to respond to new information technologies, new structures of governance, and fundamental changes in the organization of schools and instruction. In fact, more and more countries, as well as various international organizations, have paid attention to the improvement of quality of education indicators and assessment in recent decade. These factors motivated the decision to study indicators.

TABLE 6.1 General Indicators of Education in the Six Nations, 1995 China* Japan Germany Singapore Switzerland United States Population (in millions) GNP per Capita (U.S.$) Urban Population Ratio School Life Expectancy

1,220.2 125.1 81.6

3.3

7.2

267.1

620

39640 27510

26730

40630

26980

30%

78%

87%

100%

61%

76%

7

14

15.1

—

14

15.8

Learning through collaborative research (Years) Duration of 9 9 12 — Compulsory Education (Years) Net 98.5% 100% 100% 99% Enrollment Rate at the Primary Stage Gross 56% 98% 103% — Enrollment Rate at the Secondary Stage Gross 7.2% 40.3% 42.7% 33.7% Enrollment Rate at the Tertiary Stage Rate of 2.5% 3.8% 4.7% 3.0% Public Educational Expenditure in GNP *Note: Mainland China. Source: UNESCO World Education Report (1998).

158

9

10

100%

96%

91%

99%

31.8%

81.1%

5.5%

5.3%

Following the initial meeting of the project, a draft proposal was prepared by Robert Boruch of the University of Pennsylvania. In this proposal, the six SNERP countries were assumed to vary considerably in the way each approaches evidence and evaluation. Definitions of evidence, the political and administrative vehicles for generating evidence, and the use of indicators of implementation and outcome performance are diverse and at times difficult. The proposal made these statements of principle: • The cross-cutting focus on evaluation, evidence, and indicators would depend on the overarching topic of education and economic growth. • Narrative, qualitative, and quantitative information are necessary for this topic. • Emphasis will be placed on contemporary indicators including data issues by the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), and the AsiaPacific Economic Cooperation (APEC), and international achievement studies such as the International Association for the Evaluation of Educational Achievement (IEA). A collaborative research, it was argued, could address questions such as: • What groups or agencies are responsible for framing evaluative questions about programs and policies?

Education evaluation and indicators

159

• What resources are available for generating evidence in response to evaluative questions? • What approaches are used to generate evidence and assure its quality and relevance for decision making? • What is the social context and mix of values that influence decisions and understanding apart from formal evidence, for example, law, politics, moral values, and customs? • What mechanisms exist to assure credibility of evidence? • What has been the effect of increased and improved evidence on performance of children, teachers, schools, and others? The proposal suggested that a comparison of objectives, methods, and uses across countries would be helpful to all. The project would study international standards and approaches to assessing education using indicators, and it would analyze how national education indicators (NEI) reflect and affect education policy-making processes in China, Singapore, and the United States. The main objectives of the project were to do the following: 1. Describe the content and structure of NEI systems at the national level 2. Describe the process of collection and analysis of NEI data 3. Identify the implications of NEI for education policy making At the second SNERP meeting, held at the University of Pennsylvania in 1995, the representative from China proposed that “educational evidence and indicators” be one of the subprojects of SNERP and that the project be coordinated by China. Participants from Singapore and the United States expressed interest; the other three nations did not because their representatives at the meeting lacked knowledge about the topic. Organization and Process of the Study Teams were organized separately in China, Singapore, and the United States during 1995–1996. The members in various countries agreed to prepare papers describing the use of statistics in educational policy making at the national level. The team members in the United States were Robert F.Boruch, a member of the U.S. Department of Education (USDE) and its Advisory Council on Education Statistics; George Terhanian, a former fellow of the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES); and Erling E.Boe, a member of the technical advisory panel for the Schools and Staffing Survey (SASS) of NCES. In Singapore, the participants were Heng Tin Wee, director general of education of the Ministry of Education (MOE) and Lek Kam Meng, former official of the Management Information Branch of MOE now working within the MOE. The coordinating agency for China was the National Center for Education Development Research (NCEDR), the advisory institute devoted to education policy at the national


160

level. More than ten experts from the Departments of Planning (DP) and International Cooperation and from the Educational Management Information Center (EMIC) of the MOE, the National Institute of Education Research (NIER), and the Department of Social Development of State Statistics Bureau (SSB) were invited to be team members of the domestic project in China. In 1996, NCEDR drafted the action plan of the subproject or study that was shared with the teams in the other two nations. In the project’s first working meeting in Beijing in 1996, the teams from China, Singapore, and the United States discussed the structures and details of the action plan, including methods for data collection and analysis. All participants thought that a document survey and seminars should be the main methods for collecting data. An important limiting factor was the shortage of funds budgeted for the project. None of member country teams had specific or stable financial aid from either their government or the private sector. The China team conducted a domestic questionnaire survey in different regions of China in 1998–1999. After consulting with the other country teams, 700 questionnaires were sent to different organizations; about 500 questionnaires were completed and returned. These were analyzed and a country report was prepared. The other countries relied principally on document surveys to prepare their country reports (Boruch, Terhanian, and Boe 1997; Meng 1997). The three reports were shared with the teams in the other countries and were presented formally at a seminar on Educational Indicators and Policy Making held in Shanghai in 1999. At this Shanghai seminar the delegates from China, Singapore, and the United States, and observers invited from Singapore, Switzerland, Japan, and Germany discussed and communicated their opinions on the topics of education indicators and policy making. Following the third SNERP Steering Committee meeting and seminar on Educational Indicators and Policy Making in June 1999, the project team of China made a summary report of the seminar in Shanghai and introduced the main research results of the project to date. The report was discussed by ministers, directors of all departments of the national and provincial ministries of education, as well as the researchers throughout the country. At the same time, two proposed frameworks for the final report were designed by the China team and sent to the related experts of other countries. The final report was prepared in 2000, using feedback from the experts, case analyses of three member countries, and a review of the work being done on educational indicators and assessment by OECD, UNESCO, the World Bank, the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP), and other regional or national agencies. At the SNERP project directors’ meeting in Berlin in 2000, the coordinator of the team described the progress of project on educational evidence and indicators and discussed the further revision of final report with the participants from other project teams. Procedures and Methods of Analysis Each nation has its own definition of NEI, which makes comparison difficult. The OECD, in collaboration with UNESCO, has established a typology to classify national


161

programs in terms of three broad stages of education—primary, secondary, and tertiary. Table 6.2 sets out how the stages are defined. The project distinguished between educational statistical indicators and educational assessment indicators. While governments and schools are generally cooperative in collecting statistical data, educational assessment indicators are not always conducted annually. The World Bank and other international organizations have made some efforts to help to set up a national assessment system (NAS) in various developing countries since the 1990s. According to the experience of developed countries, this system should include not only regular statistical indicators but also assessment indicators. Table 6.3 shows the difference between the two sets of indicators. Assessment indicators are superior to statistical indicators for specific topics, lower cost, the combination of quality and quantity, the wide-cover investigation, and so on. They also have weak points, however, such as insufficient sampling and lower comparability data because of variations in methods. National education information (NEI) usually includes the regular educational statistical indicators that are used in the education management information systems (EMIS) at the national level and various local levels, but education assessment is becoming more and more valuable and an important supplement to NEI. Structural Features of Indicator Systems in China, Singapore, and the United States The statistical indicator system is one way to monitor education, but it is an imperfect vehicle for understanding the reasons for change in an educational system. This section describes indicator and assessment indicators collected in

TABLE 6.2 Different Titles of Classification in Various Countries UNESCO OECD International Other Educational Standard Common Level Classification Terms Early Childhood Education

ISCED 0

Primary Education

ISCED 1

Lower Secondary Education Upper Secondary Education

ISCED 2

ISCED 3, 4

China

Singapore

The United States

Pre-primary, Kindergarten/ Kindergarten Kindergarten/ kindergarten, Preschool Preschool nursery, preschool Elementary Primary Primary Primary school school education education/ Elementary school Junior high Junior Junior Junior/Middle school secondary secondary school school education Senior high Senior. Upper High school school, secondary secondary Lycée, school education


Tertiary Education

gymnasium sixth form/ further education ISCED 5A, 5B, Higher Higher 6 education, education college education ISCED 5A Ditto Ditto

162

Higher education

Higher education

University Ditto Ditto Level Education Source: OECD Education at a Glance (Highlights) (2000) and SNERP Country reports.

the three participating countries. We begin with a description of the levels and categories of indicators. Levels and Categories China. In China the NEI structure is worked out to match the education structure. Regular schools and adult schools are covered separately, that is, as higher education, secondary education, primary education, preschool education, and vocational education. The NEI at the national level consists of the educational statistical indicators (ESI) and the educational evaluation and monitoring indicators (EEMI). The ESI make up the annual statistical indicator system which stresses quantitative descriptions within ninety items of seven categories, most of which are basic indicators. The EEMI have seventy-seven items of four categories and focus on the evaluation and monitoring of the national education

TABLE 6.3 Comparison of Statistical and Assessment Indicators Statistical Indicators

Assessment Indicators

Emphases on educational institutions; receivers of education; rank of teachers, staff, and workers; public educational expenditure; facilities; research and developments activities in schools; work-study programs and school-run enterprises; and so on More numerical or

Emphases on teaching quality, professional ability of subjects, qualification of academic ability, academic levels, internal and external relationships, factors of intelligence and nonintelligence, management efficiency, human relations, value judgment, and so on

Both quantitative and


163

quantitative indicators qualitative indicators than qualitative indicators Whole statistics placed Indicators gauged more in annual conventional by types of investigation, procedure or put on uncertain usage of time record officially in investigation, more sampling data by single survey; gauged less by annually tracing survey (time limited) General investigation More indicators by of schools and sampling survey, without individuals ensured by any legal effect law Fixed network of full- Temporary project teams time statistical staff on specific topics Higher cost of Lower cost of manpower, manpower, financial financial resources in resources, and material data collection and resources for the data processing collection and processing Higher comparability Lower comparability of of the indicators of one the survey in the same category in different category in different years years and scopes Results of survey Results of survey published by releasing published in the forms of statistical bulletin essay, report, and others annually and publishing statistical yearbook

levels, structure, and school facilities. Most of these are secondary indicators or the indicators of structural characteristics. Singapore. The standard indicators in NEI may be classified into four broad categories, namely participation, resources, education outcomes, and contexts of education. NEI has been developed mainly for the purpose of providing information for decision making and policy formulation. The general structure of NEI is as follows: general education, vocational training and tertiary education, adult education, language, and math and science education. The United States. Each year the USDE produces well over 200 reports on NEI. They vary considerably, covering higher education, secondary education, primary education, preschool education and kindergarten, and vocational education.


164

Differences and Commonalities Education administrative departments; research institutes on education; and schools in China, the United States, and Singapore use different indicators and methods to assess educational achievements and teaching processes. Testing and Assessing Student Ability and Qualifications. Testing and assessing student ability is the main means to evaluate students and to identify weaknesses in the teaching process in order to improve the quality of teaching. Qualification examinations play an important role in the differentiation between and choices of students with respect to graduation and employment. China China has had a long history of testing students. Each school year, 17 million graduates from junior secondary schools take a common examination given by the provinces and cities. At the same time, about 4 million graduates from senior secondary schools take an examination given by the provinces and the national entrance examination to universities and colleges. In recent years, NCEDR and some departments of the MOE have conducted several projects for studying and assessing the quality of compulsory education in rural areas under the assistance of UNICEF, UNESCO, and other international organizations. The National Institute of Educational Research (NIER) and some provincial educational research institutes carried out some international assessment of learning achievements with the International Association for the Evaluation of Education Achievement (IEA). However, the MOE has also developed a series of national criteria for student assessment. Singapore Assessment of students’ achievement is a component part of NEI. For instance, Singapore measures performance in national examinations that include the Primary School Leaving Examination (PSLE) and the General Certificate of Education Normal (N), Ordinary (O), and Advanced (A) systems. It also assesses the performance of students in languages, mathematics, and science in national examinations, and it participates in international studies conducted by the IEA, and in the International Mathematics, Science, and Information Olympiads. The United States In Singapore and China, centralized NEI systems exist especially for collecting statistical data. The specific surveys are often conducted by governmental agencies at the national and local levels. Because the educational system in the United States is decentralized, however, the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) depends heavily on each state education agency’s voluntary cooperation when it undertakes statistics and independent surveys. The NCES also is responsible for the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), a survey of children’s achievement that can be regarded as a set of NEI, and it also contributes to international surveys such as the Third International Mathematics and Science Survey (TIMSS). Private sector institutes for national testing include the Educational Testing Service (ETS), which conducts many well-known, creditable, and standardized tests such as the SAT, GRE, and TOEFL. The NCES supported both the second and third International Mathematics and Science Survey of the IEA. Educational administrators at the state level put emphasis on assessment of school quality by means of various projects on learning achievement. For example, the California Assessment of Progress (CAP) is the standardized examination sponsored in total by state government.


165

Evaluating School Facilities and Basic Quality. The evaluation of school facilities and basic quality is concerned with curricular teaching, teachers’ qualifications, school management, and expenditure/financing management. Many of these evaluation indexes are included in the regular statistics system. Other methods of investigation—discussion and interview, questionnaire survey, and practical observation—have been adapted to investigate and analyze the influence of intelligent and nonintelligent factors on learning process, such as the family background, social environment, and human relationships in the management process. China In China, a sample survey in 1998 showed that the most frequent users of indicators concerned with monitoring compulsory education were administrators, school headmasters, statisticians, and researchers. They consider that the credibility and validity of the existing NEI are good, except for a few indicators concerned with expenditures. The Education, Science, Culture, and Sanitation Committees of both the National People’s Congress and the Chinese People’s Political Consultative Conference, and the Educational Superintendent Office of the MOE, monitor the supervision and inspection of compulsory education in different areas. They have developed an indicator system concerned with compulsory education based on the existing NEI. The indicators include information about students, teachers, school conditions, and expenditures. They are used to check and supervise the progress of universalization of compulsory education. A series of action procedures for assessing the quality of students in primary school has been implemented in Beijing. A systematic “management by objectives” pattern has been used to control and improve the quality of compulsory education in both Miluo City of Hunan province and Yantai City of Shandong province. The professional associations at the national level make academic assessments in universities, colleges, and specialized secondary schools. The office of the Academic Degree Committee of the State Council organizes qualification assessments on majors of doctoral students, postgraduate students, and tutors in the educational institutions all over the country. The MOE is evaluating 100 key universities as part of Project 2011. Most of the assessments basically assess the academic capacity of scientific research, conditions for scientific research, and current expenditure. More than 100 indicators for assessing the higher education have been selected to set up a new national database on regular higher educational institutions. Singapore The system for assessment of school outcomes is an essential part of the NEI system of Singapore. It includes value-added indicators of school performance using the Performance Indicators for School Management (PRISM) system. Especially important are the elementary criteria of school management such as quality and performance of students and school conditions. An individual school can use the information to improve its quality of management. No nongovernment organizations (NGOs) are involved in the NEI, although the media do, from time to time, publish reports on certain popular educational issues such as private schooling and tutoring, working students, and problem pupils. The United States Almost all of the educational departments at the state level in the United States have adopted the Basic Education Data System (BEDS) to assess school quality by means of student achievement tests. Some states, such as New York, make analyses of school facilities to guide needy schools in resource allocation and management. Comprehensive evaluation reports to schools are based on the BEDS, so


166

that each school whose score is decreased 10 percent from the prior year must submit a detailed proposal for improvement. Academic assessment in universities and colleges is the main task of professional associations or NGOs in states that have had many fruitful experiences in recent decades. These assessments are believed to have played an important role in coordination for improving the academic quality of universities and colleges. Coming Improvements. Some indicators that were important in the past have been rendered obsolete by educational reform. International organizations, such as OECD and UNESCO, provide new indicators for comparative purposes, and various nations have also adjusted their domestic education indicators more frequently. China The existing educational indicators system has been investigated and revised since the 1980s and became a new system in 1991. The amended NEI is much better suited to the needs of the reform of education systems and management of education. There have been two changes in the new NEI. One is the expansion of survey indicators. To match changes in school governance and admission, statistics about schools run by private sectors and the vocational education run by different agencies jointly have been expanded and brought into the system. New statistical measures are in accordance with the reform of higher education. The statistical indicators of physical facilities have been extended to meet the demand for a balance between the educational development and the related physical facilities. The other change in the new NEI is the EEMI that make the indicator system more complete. Singapore A constant challenge facing the NEI in Singapore is to improve the presentation of information to policy and decision makers, the media, and the general public. The information has to be timely, concise, and relevant to their needs. Ideally, the reports should contain executive summaries with easy-to-understand charts and graphs, and preferably it should be accessible online. More indicators, particularly on school and teacher effectiveness, will be introduced to meet the demand for accountability measures in the educational system. The United States In the United States, some major changes in the past two decades include: • Indicators of academic achievement appropriate at the national level and appropriate and comparable at the state level: for example, NAEP at the state level. • Indicators of academic achievement and practice that are comparable across the country: for example, the Third International Mathematics and Science Study. • Enhanced reporting through CD-ROM, the World Wide Web, and hard copy, and through “intermediary organizations” such as the Council of Chief State School Officers. • Creation of a “commissioner of education statistics” under federal law. • Development of massive databases through the Schools and Staffing Survey to assure adequate information on teacher supply and demand. • Development and implementation of household surveys to assure adequate information about preschool and kindergarten education. A major new national longitudinal study is being mounted to learn how children progress through school from kindergarten age. This work, begun in 1998, will survey more than 20,000 kindergarten-age children and will assess their progress through the fifth grade. It will include data on


167

the kindergarten programs, parent and family characteristics, community characteristics, and schools that the children attend. Non-governmental involvement. The three country reports concentrated on governmentproduced NEI, but non-government-produced NEI also exists. In the United States, many evaluations of educational outcomes are done by independent or private agencies. No nongovernment agencies are involved in NEI in Singapore and China, although the media do, from time to time, publish reports on certain popular educational issues such as private tuition and the rank of universities. In the United States, professional associations/societies often play various roles in the assessment of educational efficiency. Collection and Analysis of National Educational Indicators Data China. According to the Statistics Law, the State Statistics Bureau (SSB) should approve the national indicator system. The Ministry of Education (MOE) as a legal agency has the responsibility to design and draw up the NEI. The Department of Planning (in the MOE), as the administrative agency for educational statistics, is responsible for drawing up and assigning as well as collecting the national annual report forms and submitting the educational statistical data to the SSB. The Department of Finance (in the MOE) is responsible for designing and working out the statistical indicators regarding the educational expenditure and usage. It also transmits information to the educational departments at the levels of province, autonomous region, and municipality, and it collects the educational financial report forms for submission to the SSB. It produces the Education Statistics Yearbook of China and other publications on national educational indicators. Educational statistical data is collected through the Statistical Report Form System and also by means of other statistical survey methods: sampling, classified and specific investigation, and so on. Currently, the annual educational statistical data is collected from the beginning of the first semester of the new school year, every September. The summary of data is completed by the provincial subsystem every November. The tentative results of data processing nationwide are produced by the MOE every December or January (of the next year). The data of educational expenditure is collected by the end of the financial year (every December), so the final results are usually made available in April or May of the next year. Singapore. The Management Information Branch of the Planning Division within the MOE is the main agency responsible for the development, implementation, and reporting of the NEI. Besides providing regular reports to senior management, the branch also produces an annual publication, Education Statistics Digest, which is made available to the public. Some data are produced by tertiary institutions, while information on educational and literacy level of the population is compiled and published annually by the national Department of Statistics in The Yearbook of Statistics. Data collection for the NEI is minimal, as most of the information required can be obtained from administrative records in databases maintained by the MOE and the various educational institutions. These databases, some dating back to the early 1980s, contain detailed records of students’ schooling history and performance, teachers’ credentials and deployment, school facilities and supporting resources, and financial expenditures. All schools, junior colleges, and postsecondary and tertiary institutions are


168

linked electronically to the MOE to facilitate data updating and maintenance. The MOE also taps into databases maintained by other departments, such as the National Registration Office, to update its databases. Other sources of NEI data include surveys conducted by the MOE and the various educational institutions. The United States. The NCES has primary responsibility for producing statistical data on education at the national level. This federal agency’s mission is specified by federal law: “The purpose of the Center shall be to collect, analyze, and disseminate statistics and other data related to education in the United States and other nations” (General Education Provisions Act, Section 406 (b), U.S.C. 122 e-1). NCES is the primary national source of statistical indicators on the condition of education. In serving this function, NCES undertakes independent surveys. The NAEP has been based on a national probability sample survey of children to assure their educational achievement. The voluntary cooperation of state agencies and local schools has been essential to this periodic survey of academic achievement. NCES’s dependence on state-produced data is also exemplified by dropout data that are produced annually. Local schools provide data to the states that then supply the data to NCES. The uniformity of the data, notably the definition of a “dropout,” is prescribed under joint agreements. The Condition of Education, Digest of Statistics, and numerous NAEP publications also report annually on the NAEP results. The NCES has taken various approaches to collecting data, such as national surveys, state surveys, and surveys based on administrative records. More generally, the NCES’s Schools and Staffing Survey (SASS) relies heavily on receiving information from each educational jurisdiction, information that is based on the jurisdiction’s administrative records. Such information includes the number of teachers who are responsible for instruction in certain areas, the number of new teachers, the number of teachers who leave the teaching labor force, and so on. This SASS system has been refined continuously and continues to be refined in remarkable ways. At the local jurisdiction level, of course, a particular person is responsible for making the report in the SASS system. Developing the relationships and supplying the resources to do this well have not been easy, given the decentralized educational system of the United States. NCES also sponsors fast response surveys carried out by telephone or email. They often concern politically salient topics. The private (nongovernment) organizations that are capable of running the surveys designed by NCES include for-profit corporations and nonprofit organizations. At times, a federal agency apart from private contractors may be responsible for a survey. The U.S. Census Bureau, for instance, has been a contractor to NCES. Methodologies and Quality Control for Analysis China. The MOE has developed quality-controlled (QC) methods of educational statistics data. The objectives of these methods are to do the following: 1. Improve the quality of statistical data 2. Avoid and reduce man-made mistakes and statistical errors in the process of investigation, data collection, processing, summarization, storage, and transmission 3. Implement the standardization of data management, control statistical error, delete man-made mistakes, and increase the accuracy and reliability of statistical data


169

The NCEDR, DP, and the EMIC of the MOE, beginning in 1991, jointly carried out sample surveys of the quality of NEI in Hebei and Sichuan provinces. The surveys show that both the credibility and the effectiveness of NEI have improved smoothly at main links of the educational statistics process. Improvement is greatest in credibility. For example, in the 1998 sample survey, few persons answered affirmatively, “haven’t used the NEI much”; most thought that “the NEI can reflect the actual level of educational development.” The respondents considered that credibility and validity are good, but it should be noted that these judgments were made without external standards of comparison. Singapore. Analysis of NEI data requires conditions such as clear design, objectives, and target population; experienced staff; effective computing facilities; funds; and management support. Management and policymakers have to see the importance and usefulness of NEI and must be willing to provide the necessary funding for hardware and software, particularly if databases are to be used. Workshops are organized regularly to train new data providers in schools and the MOE with the aim of improving the reliability of their data. Before data are loaded into the databases, they are again checked for accuracy and consistency with existing information in the databases. These precautionary measures ensure that the administrative databases, which are updated at least once a year, produce credible indicators. In the case of survey data, several methods have been used to assess and improve the quality of the data and indicators. The United States. Under the U.S. Constitution, the primary responsibility for education lies with each of the fifty states. That is, each state has its own department of education. Each department and state generates most of the financial resources necessary for the education of students in the primary and secondary schools. Each has developed its own information system. Cooperation is obviously necessary in designing national surveys and in producing national reports. For example, participation in NAEP requires the agreement of each state department of education. Most states have done so, but some have withdrawn cooperation. NCES staff and executives spend considerable time fostering federal-state relationships. This is in the interest of assuring the cooperation necessary to generate national educational indicators. Applications of National Educational Indicators Used in Policy Making China. Reliable evidence about educational systems is essential for educational policy making and development. China is a developing country with the largest population in the world. The MOE and educational bureaus or commissions of local governments in various provinces, autonomous regions, and municipalities contribute to macroeducational policies at the national and local levels. Since the 1980s, education in China has experienced steady, continuous development, and also great achievements. The major achievement in NEI has been to standardize and publicize statistical data. This has provided basic materials for educational policy making by the educational administrative departments at various levels. For example, China is a large country with a vast area and uneven economic development. In making a macrodevelopment plan of education for the year 2000 and the year 2010, NEI data show the imbalances in educational development between the coast areas and the middle and western areas of China. In terms of enrollment rates, basic school conditions, educational expenditures,


170

and teacher qualifications, there is a significant “gradient” situation from coast (higher development) to western (lower development) areas. The national government has decided that the universalization of compulsory education should be based on the principles of planning by regions and offering instruction by types; these principles should then be implemented by steps. The objective is to permit choices among development targets and rates in different areas of the country. NEI data reflect not only the development level in the education of the country as a whole, but also the status and disparity of various types of education in urban and rural areas of different regions. It provides a basic reference for planning or policy making by regions and types at various levels of administrative departments of education. Singapore. Singapore is a newly industrialized country with a small population. The MOE manages the whole educational system; for example, the NEI issued by the MOE include pass rates in the core subjects—such as languages, math, and science—and the number of subjects passed or aggregate score obtained. The pass rates are expressed both as a percentage of those who take the examination and as a proportion of all children in that age group. Annual system outcomes are reflected in the number of school leavers and graduates. These figures are expressed in terms of both year cohorts as well as age cohorts. The NEI also contain some information on students’ personal and home backgrounds besides schooling and performance data. This is possible given the size of the system and development over time of appropriate technologies for capturing and analyzing data. This capacity allows the NEI to reflect disparities in participation and performance by gender, ethnicity, and home background. Regular feedback about student performance permits the education minister and senior policymakers to monitor the condition of the education system and to introduce new policies or fine-tune existing ones to enhance the efficiency and effectiveness of the system. The United States. The United States is a developed country with a large population. The federal government is not responsible for managing education directly; the state governments have such responsibility. The federal government has no formal unified system for identifying actual or potential NEI users. More often, federal agencies that are responsible for developing educational indicators offer general categories of uses and users. A 1995 report said that the typical customers for performance data in the United States includes parents and the general public, education administrators, and senior executives in government. Because the important tasks of the U.S. Department of Education are to collect, analyze, and disseminate educational information, and to conduct special projects that provide financial assistance to the states, most decisions made by the USDE involve individual projects. Policy analysts and researchers produce a list of priorities for each project according to content importance and quality of data; they then submit it to the secretary general of the USDE for decision and coordination. NCES often sponsors special studies on the use of certain statistical reports, and it provides the technical service for use of data. As pointed out in the NCES booklet Learning about Education through Statistics, local governments request data concerning school demographic characteristics, pupil/teacher ratios, and dropout rates. Compared with federal agencies, state governments use educational indicators and data more frequently and popularly for education policy making and actual administration at the local level.


171

Use of National Educational Indicators in Educational Planning Statistics are important for summarizing the expenditures, implementation, and achievements of the prior year’s action plan, and for planning educational development and expenditures for following years. China. In China, the Educational Statistics Yearbook of China and other reports on educational expenditure for the past year are published each summer. Generally speaking, the time lag in producing annual educational statistics data in China has been declining and now approaches the average level of industrialized countries, faster than the average level of most developing countries with a large population. National educational indicators data provide the information basis in time for making the annual education plan at national level and local levels. Enrollment rates, dropout rates, population coverage rates, qualification rates of full-time teachers, school building information, and annual expenditures in compulsory education are the important indicators for making the annual plan for universalization of compulsory education. A sample survey in 1998 showed seven kinds of indicators: inputs, capital construction, expenditures, staff, teachers, school-age population, and average level of attainment. Most frequent use is made of indicators on inputs and expenditures. The expenditure indicators are often a priority in making the annual plan and mid- or long-term projects. Singapore. Educational administrative agencies in Singapore are the groups that most use NEI when making plans. Educational administrators and school management personnel use NEI for their operations, primarily for planning purposes. Indicators on participation rates and enrollments are used by administrators for planning resource requirements such as those for schools, teachers, textbooks, and test materials. Trends in teacher profiles are used for staff recruitment, development, and deployment. The United States. The USDE puts its emphasis on administration with “data criteria” special projects. The annual plan submitted to the secretary general by the Department of Planning must have a detailed note including supporting evidence from NEI, such as what data are lacking, how further data can be obtained, and what data would be potentially useful. Monitoring Education The main function of NEI is to send out timely warning messages when deviations are found, in order to set in motion corrective development of education. China. In China, governments at various levels have responsibility for education. For example, since the mid-1990s several sample surveys of population by SSB have indicated that the lower-secondary school-aged population (12–14 years old) in 2000 will increase by 10 percent more than the projections from the 1990 census. This poses a serious challenge for reaching the goal of universalization of nine-year compulsory education. The MOE suggested that local governments react to this trend by increasing teachers and school facilities in the coming years. Another example: by examining the statistics, a provincial educational commission discovered that the qualification rate of teachers in secondary and primary schools is lower compared with last year, due to the insufficiency of teacher training in the province. This in turn has influenced the rate at which improvements in quality are being realized. The educational commission proposed


172

that provincial governments urgently improve the quality of teachers. The measure was adopted quickly by the provincial governments. Singapore. The Singapore government also is taking advantage of NEI for early warnings about problems. High dropout rates in the 1970s led the MOE, in 1980, to introduce streaming at the primary and secondary levels to enable pupils to progress at their own pace and to reduce wastage. A decline in enrollment in Chinese schools in the late 1970s prompted the MOE to implement a scheme to preserve the better traditional Chinese schools by providing additional funding and encouraging good students to attend them. The United States. In recent years, municipal, state, and national governments have focused on educational quality. Relatively low rankings compared to other countries in math and science achievement have influenced public debate about education. This debate appears to have informed government decisions to focus American educational goals on science and mathematics education. The decisions were followed by the appropriation of government funds for education. Routine Educational Management and Research China. Since the 1990s, each of the provincial educational departments in China has published a local statistical yearbook with educational data. The local indicators match the NEI data of the Educational Statistics Yearbook of China but are more detailed. These statistical indicators not only play an active role in educational reform and development and in strengthening the scientific management in education for educational administrative departments, but they also provide basic analytical data for local institutes of educational research. The data further processed by the research institutes provide a better reference for educational policy making. According to a sample survey carried out in 1991, in most regions the education departments ask local governments at the same levels for support and help concerning planning, finance, and personnel to the educational operation. In 1995, NCEDR edited the first version of the Educational Atlas of China with assistance from the Department of Finance of MOE. This atlas has become the essential reference for educational administrators and educational researchers. Singapore. In the 1970s, data for the NEI in Singapore were collected by sample surveys and annual statistical returns from schools. Now these methods of data collection have been replaced by inputs from administrative databases, which not only improve the accuracy and timeliness of data and indicators but also allow longitudinal studies to be conducted with ease. The United States. The National Center for Education Statistics is the authorized agency for producing statistical data on education at the national level. Its purpose is to conduct basic statistics and various special studies. NCES also provides technical assistance to define what is meant by the “use” of information, to distinguish among types of use, and to define the initial conditions and context of use for administrators and researchers. It edits many kinds of publications on educational statistics every year. The U.S. country report said that the most successful report on NEI in the past decade might be the Condition of Education (nces.ed.gov/programs/coe). This recent remarkable achievement in reporting has been enhanced by the production of hard copy and CD-ROM versions to increase public understanding of and support for education.


173

The publication of educational indicators and statistics data plays an importantly helping hand and leading role in improving understanding of and support for education in all circles of society. China. At the present time, the MOE uses all kinds of methods to provide an educational information service for all circles of society. This includes publishing a statistical yearbook of education and setting up a materials exchange through EMIC to provide advisory services on any special topic. The MOE at this time is engaged in the construction of a computer network service. The CD-ROM version of Higher Education in China was edited in 1997, and the updated NEI data (last year) has been published on the MOE’s homepage since 1998. The MOE and the provincial educational departments issue annual statistical bulletins of education as well as news releases, minutes from meetings, and other forms of dissemination. Singapore. The MOE of Singapore disseminates official information on racial differences in educational attainments and performances each year. Information on job opportunities and starting salaries of fresh graduates are provided for students and their parents to select the type of courses to take at the vocational and tertiary institutions. The United States. The U.S. country report shows that the national-level data produced by the NCES have an indirect bearing on educational administration and management. The NCES collects, analyzes, and disseminates the basic educational statistics periodically, and it sends the findings to governments and the public, focusing attention on education problems. In January 1997, the NCES carried out a consumer survey in order to improve the quality of service and to raise the level of understanding of education by the community. The survey sought to identify types of groups using data, how frequently customers used NCES products or services in the past twelve months, for what purpose did they use NCES data, and the levels for which they sought data. Quality Improvement in Schools China. The educational indicators used in school management in China are most closely related to routine management of schools and the measures of improvement. The principals and teachers in secondary and primary schools pay close attention to schoollevel indicators. These include enrollment rates; retention rates; dropout rates; repetition rates; qualified examination rates; promotion rates of students; qualification rates of teachers; and proportion that meet criteria for books and reading materials, lab experiment equipment, physical facilities, and school buildings. Generally speaking, the headmasters and teachers pay much more attention to comparisons within local areas and less attention to statistical information about education at the national level. A 1998 sample survey showed that headmasters of primary and secondary schools use NEI data less frequently than do officials and researchers. Singapore. The education management information system is now well established. Due to the small scale of the educational system, many data can reflect the operational status of a single school. It is now possible to monitor the progress and performance of each and every pupil in a cohort from primary school to university. The United States. The National Center for Education Statistics points out that educational associations use enrollment information to examine racialethnic trends and finance data to check the economic health of institutions. Colleges use institution-level


174

data on enrollment, financial ratios, and graduation ratios to make comparisons with other institutions. Aspects to Be Improved and Enhanced Enhancement of the NEI System in China In the process of implementing the new NEI that are improving the indicator system, China lags behind in terms of human resources, technologies, and equipment. The management standard and quality of administrative personnel requires improvement. Some local governments and departments of educational administration pay too little attention to the construction of information systems for the management of education. Financial support for the system is inadequate. Some obvious problems have been revealed in the operation of NEI: • Data on effectiveness and educational quality are weak compared to those on expansion of enrollments. • Data on adult education are weak compared to those for standard general education for children. • Data on non-degree programs are weak compared to those for regular academic programs. • Less information is known about the process of schooling as compared to inputs. • Less information is known about school management as compared to physical facilities. • Less information is known about effects of investments as compared to budgets. • Data on evaluation and monitoring are weak compared to academic research. Results from the 1998 sample survey carried out by the China team during the Six Nation Project were analyzed to generate the following suggestions: • Indicators of school structure and operation, especially for schools run by local people, help governments with different types of school operation. • Indicators about financial investment in education by governments at various levels differentiate the shares of educational expenditure by different financial administrations. • The indicator system of “school fee criteria” at various types and levels of schools is helpful for local policy making as well as for providing a basis for explaining the policy to the public. • Indicators of pupils’ rates of entrance and exit can be used to adjust the wave of schoolage population, to change educational programs, to reduce overcrowding, to improve school facilities, and to reduce teaching loads. • Research indicators about where students go after graduation should be collected and used to classify graduates in terms of continuing education or employment. • Indicators should be developed to describe levels of equipment in physical education and art. • Indicators should be developed with respect to programs in health and psychology.


175

• Indicators are required to describe pay and working conditions of teachers. These should include teacher salaries compared to those of workers in main industries, teachers’ housing square footage compared to that of other citizens, teacher salaries as a proportion of school expenditures, and changes in that proportion. China began work on planning the improvement of its educational indicator system in 1996. Principles to improve educational indicators and renew plans were proposed. These recommendations could help the NEI to meet the needs of the future educational development and administration. They should correspond to educational changes required by the transition from a planned economy to a socialist market economy. For example, it is more important now for both students and schools to know and understand the employment situation of graduates. The Action Plan for Vitalizing Education in the 21st Century, drawn up by the MOE and approved by the State Council in January 1999, requires that China set up an information network for recruiting students, and a registration management and employment information service in universities and colleges. In order to improve the use of limited educational resources, more use should be made of indicators showing and measuring the efficiency of investment in education. While validity of indicators reflecting educational development is sufficiently high, some errors occur in design, and not all of these can be eliminated. Over time, low credibility of data leads to low validity. The MOE is studying ways to improve the NEIS by referring to UNESCO’s International Society for Educational Information (ISEI) and OECD’s Education Indicators System. The MOE recently set up the China Education and Research Net (CERNET), which links more than 500 universities and colleges through the Internet. An internal EMIS network within the educational departments is being established. Small internal networks have been developed in local agencies. The MOE is establishing an internal EMIS network within the educational departments and agencies. Because the number of Internet users is rapidly increasing (users reached more than 20 million by the end of 2000), the NEI data must be disseminated in multiple channels in the coming years. The current homepages in English for searching the NEI and data about China are www.moe.edu.cn; www.edu.cn and www.stats.gov.cn. Improvements to NEI Systems in Singapore An important area for improvement is data integration, which will not only strengthen the structure of the NEI but also provide a fuller picture on the status of the educational system. If the various data sources in the NEI can be linked electronically, then related indicators such as pupil performance and teacher qualifications, for instance, may be monitored simultaneously instead of individually. Such an idea is still being explored by the MOE. The Internet has in recent years become an invaluable vehicle for collecting and disseminating information. Besides providing access to valuable information on indicators of other educational systems, it can serve as a convenient channel for collecting and distributing national indicator data. It can also be used to track advances in statistical techniques and information technology relevant to the NEI. Given this, NEI should have their own Web site. The new quality assurance approach to school appraisal in the school excellence framework balances focus on results and processes in education.


176

The aim is not merely achieving good results but sustaining those good results. Sound processes are what will assure sustained results. Schools will assess themselves in terms of approach (how outcomes are to be achieved), deployment (extent to which approach is applied), and results (degree of achievement of outcomes from applying the approach). Two computerized systems, a school appraisal system and a school profile system, will allow schools to appraise themselves based on a set of criteria developed by MOE, and they will then know how they stand relative to other schools with similar student profiles and governance structures. Innovations in NEI Systems in the United States During its first decade, some states did not cooperate with NCES’s effort to develop reliable state-level data using the NAEP. Federal government efforts to involve all states have increased levels of cooperation. Nevertheless, given decentralization of governance of education, the United States still lacks a unified or standardized system of educational indicators and statistics. To remedy this situation, the USDE through NCES has taken on the mission of improved standardization of statistics in educational administration. Any organization such as NCES that tries out new ideas must experience some failure at the micro-level. NCES is now distributing data to scholars, researchers, and others using CDROMs. The CD-ROMs supplied in 1992 were a failure in that even sophisticated students could not analyze the data provided. NCES staff accepted comments from students and improved the CD-ROMs. Plans for other national educational indicators, including the NAEP and international assessments and surveys, are given in the NCES volume Programs and Plans of the National Center for Education Statistics. The annual report is available on the World Wide Web (www.ed.gov/NCES/). Plans for particular surveys are also often made available on the Web. See, for example, the Web site for the National Assessment of Educational Progress, www.ed.gov/NCES/naep. Conclusion In the twenty-first century, information technology is widely used in education. This will in time contribute to important innovations in educational thinking and methodology. Methods of analysis and dissemination based on computer systems and networks have provided unprecedented support in the construction of EMIS, and they have opened the door to applying NEI data more quickly and conveniently in educational policy making. Countries at various levels of socioeconomic and educational development enter the twenty-first century with different priorities for the improvement of the relations between NEI and educational policy making. On the one hand, the developed countries are pursuing strategies to maintain their current advantage in future global competition. The developing countries, on the other hand, want to leap forward in order to bridge the gap, or at least avoid a further widening of the gap. Both sets of countries, due to the proliferation of information technology, face a possible danger of future information overload with NEI. This issue merits further observation.


177

For China, the role of government in educational development and its administration has been reconfirmed, taking into account challenges from the economic system transition and changing channels and patterns of information. The United States and Singapore have strong economies and good basic systems of EMIS. Most likely, these systems will tend to make information processing faster and efficient and will increase the effectiveness of NEI data to meet the diversified needs of policy making and public understanding. Developing countries such as China must not only increase the effectiveness of existing resources by improving the quality of management and personnel; they must also find a suitable strategy for renewing technical conditions and hardware equipment with limited financial support. They must, therefore, study useful experiences from developed countries and raise funds and obtain technical assistance in various channels. References Boruch, R., G.Terhanian, and E.Boe. 1997. National education indicators (NEI) in six nations: The case of the United States. Philadelphia: Graduate School of Education, University of Pennsylvania. Meng, L.K. 1997. National education indicator systems: Singapore. Singapore: Ministry of Education, Management Information Branch. OECD (Organization for European Co-operation and Development). (2000). Education at a Glance Highlights. Paris: Organization for European Co-operation and Development.

Chapter 7 The Six Nation Project as an Experience in Collaborative Research NOEL F.MCGINN Does it make sense to compare culturally unique education systems? Under what circumstances can policymakers and researchers from more than one country collaborate in this endeavor? Can the benefits to international collaboration include not only highquality research but also improvement of international relationships? Given the advantages claimed for collaborative research, why is there not more of it? Finally, must the ambitions of countries to preserve their unique education systems succumb to pressures for uniformity inherent in economic globalization? This chapter reviews the experience of the Six Nation Education Research Project (SNERP) to assess obstacles to and benefits from international collaborative research in education. The first section offers a simple framework for understanding the process and requirements of successful collaboration. The framework can be taken as a series of hypotheses based partly on other studies of collaboration in education (Gaillard 1994; Jameson 1994; Johnston 1997; Maina Ahlberg, Nordberg, and Tomson 1997; Shive, Gopinathan, and Cummings 1988). The next section recounts the processes of collaboration pursued in the Six Nation Project and then interprets these in the language of the conceptual framework. The chapter concludes with an overall assessment of the project as a collaborative venture and offers suggestions for future projects. Requirements for and Obstacles to Collaborative Research in Education Collaboration works when participants understand each other’s objectives and the actions necessary to achieve those objectives. Even when both parties are committed to working together, however, it is difficult to arrive at a common understanding of what each party hopes to achieve and the means to do so. To complicate the issue even more, the greatest potential returns to collaboration occur when each participant brings a unique set of knowledge and skills, that is, when differences between the participants are large. These differences, however, make it even more difficult to arrive at a common perspective. Differences in explanations may result from differences in information, or from differences in the language available to explain the information obtained. In the old adage of the blind men and the elephant, for example, the synthesis of the information gained through their touching of different parts of the animal yielded a better understanding of the animal. If all had touched only the leg, their different explanations (e.g., a tree, a rolled-up carpet, and the leg of a hairy giant), even if combined into a single explanation,

The six nation project as an experience

179

would not have generated a comprehensive understanding of the elephant. They had a better chance of describing the elephant because each had different information (leg, trunk, tail, body). Language includes two kinds of terms. The first, “denotative” terms, refer to what can be directly experienced (e.g., what the blind men felt with their hands). “Connotative” terms refer to what can be implied or understood beyond the literal, explicit sense of the words used (e.g., likening the leg to a tree trunk, the tail to a hose, etc.)—Using language that does not distinguish between the facts of experience and the thoughts or images those facts generate is a common source of confusion. Insistence on objectivity in scientific research is an attempt to avoid this confusion. The researcher hopes that definition of phenomena in terms of the methods used to observe them will preclude misunderstanding. The “facts” are what any person will experience if he or she carries out the same method of observation as the researcher. Understanding or meaning is limited to the facts themselves—what you see is all there is. The “objective” method has proved to be exceedingly powerful in generating useful and reliable information and research. Its application to education began in the midnineteenth century, at the same time as the emergence of industrial capitalism. Its power lies in its ability to compare distinct phenomena or, in our case, education systems, on a common set of denotative dimensions. The enthusiasm for national educational indicator systems described in Chapter 6, and for international tests of mathematics and science knowledge as reported in Chapter 2, is testimony to the utility of objectivity. As noted earlier, however, this approach to the reduction of confusion in communication comes at a cost. Sole reliance on “objective data” can limit understanding of phenomena. To communicate, each party must “know,” in the sense of being familiar with, the phenomena that are described. Familiarity is ensured by reducing the phenomena to their constituent elements and by limiting conversations to others within our culture or discipline. “Atomization” of knowledge makes it more likely that the description of phenomena will be intelligible by other persons. Reliable communication is possible only when both parties have had the same experiences or when they use the same “language” for describing reality. New experiences are described in terms derived from earlier experiences, which may limit awareness of the “newness” of what is being seen. Some phenomena, for example the subjective states of individuals, or events that occur only once, are not easily described by objective methods of observation. The Importance of Metaphors Because the method of analysis fragments “facts” (Masemann 1990), taken by themselves facts convey limited meaning and understanding of reality. Human beings seek to expand understanding by connecting facts using nonobservable descriptions of reality. These constructions help us to understand and to talk about complex and temporal phenomena that are not immediately observable or that cannot be observed in their entirety. Nonobservable descriptions take the form of analogies, metaphors, and metanarratives (Hayhoe 2000) and describe what cannot be seen in ways that others can understand. They are less precise than facts or empirical definitions, but their imprecision can accommodate a broader range of understanding than can more explicit and factdelimited definitions. The elephant’s leg as tree trunk is an example.


180

Comparing facts with expectations based on prior understanding (for example, on hypotheses derived from a theory or projections from a model) is a critical tool for identifying the limitations of existing explanations. Knowledge (as understanding) advances slowly by piling up facts, but it jumps ahead when contradictions of facts with theory force us to rethink our explanations (Kuhn 1970; Root-Bernstein 1989). Metaphors are an essential tool for understanding and communication in comparative research, and they have been very important in international research on education. Eckstein (1983) points out that many of the “great leaps” in science have occurred with the use of figurative expressions that drew together information or “facts” that were previously considered unrelated. For example, Harvey’s seventeenth-century likening of the heart to a pump that circulates blood was a major advance over the then-dominant understanding of the human body. Today we liken the working of our brains or minds to a computer and as a consequence understand much more about human behavior. Not all metaphors are equally effective, of course, in providing an accurate understanding of the external reality. In the case of Harvey’s contribution, for example, the metaphor of the water pump replaced the metaphor of the ebb and flow of the ocean’s tide promoted by Galen in the second century, because it accounted for more of what could actually be observed. Harvey may not have had much more data than Galen about the heart and the flow of blood, but what he did have was knowledge about the pumps used to push water out of British coal mines (Miller 1978). Comparative research relies heavily on use of metaphors as they help in linking the known with the unknown. Metaphors can, however, be misleading. First, because they develop in a specific linguistic and cultural context, they may convey a different meaning than that held by the communicator. Figurative expressions in Spanish that are “innocent” in Mexico, for example, may be considered offensive in another Spanish-speaking country. A conversation recorded in London takes on a different meaning in New York. In addition, common speech is full of expressions that were originally used figuratively but have now lost their original meaning and are used literally: the leg of a table, for example, or the head of a hammer (Eckstein 1983, p. 319). Second, like models, metaphors are not the reality they describe and they cannot be tested in the way we test hypotheses and theories. They may generate a sense of understanding that is not warranted. Eckstein notes that metaphors can lead researchers up blind alleys, delaying advance in correct knowledge. Structural Obstacles to Sharing Understanding The obstacles posed by language can be overcome, but only by attending to a second set of constraints or difficulties. When people act together (and talk about their actions), they share experiences that can lead to new metaphors and new definitions that enhance the sharing of meaning. Standing in the way, however, to a fruitful collaboration are contextual characteristics or structures that, if not addressed, constrain sharing understanding. These structural features affect the kind and depth of relationship that develops between the participants. For our purpose here, we refer to these features as “extrinsic” or “intrinsic.” The former is easier to identify although not always easier to


181

overcome. Both kinds of difficulties were experienced in the Six Nation Education Research Project; both kinds affected the project’s outcomes. Extrinsic Features The organization, design, and execution of collaborative research are constrained by resources, incentives, and time. These kinds of difficulties are more severe when research is comparative and international. Resource Constraints. The parochial appeal of education limits willingness to collaborate in research with other countries. The most vocal stakeholders in education are concerned primarily about how it relates to their immediate context. Parents seek for their children an education judged relevant according to family, community, and workplace experiences. What happens in other countries has much less importance than what happens in other schools in their own country. Most employment is directly related to local markets; ties to the world market are difficult to detect. Most employers draw comparisons among schools in their own country rather than with those in other countries. Epstein (1991) describes how American support for comparative international research on education prospered “when Americans felt threatened by the Soviet Union’s technological achievement” (p. 607) of launching Sputnik, only to decline as the United States built its own rockets. Interest in knowing about others’ schools surged again in the 1990s after publication of comparative data that showed American students lagged behind those of Canada, Ireland, Korea, Spain, and the United Kingdom in mathematics and science knowledge. Comparative research has made American policymakers abruptly aware that their nation’s economic competitiveness and political leadership are jeopardized by the diminished ability of American schools to educate citizens effectively. (Epstein 1991, p. 606) Public support of collaborative international research on education should increase, therefore, as culture and society are impacted by economic globalization, increased flows of tourists and immigrants, and greater exposure to news and entertainment from abroad. The Six Nation Project is a reflection of growing interest in knowing about other education systems. Interest in international comparative research may also vary as a function of the degree of homogeneity among schools in a particular country, and as a function of the immersion of the country in the world economy. Concern for what happens in others’ education systems should therefore be higher in countries with centralized educational governance and whose economies depend heavily on foreign trade. Concern for and interest in others’ education systems translates into funding for international comparative research. In some cases, research is funded to assist a country in its competition with others, with the hope that it will provide information about relative success on common dimensions. This is exemplified in the IEA studies on achievement in mathematics and science. Sometimes research serves as a source of information and ideas for improvement of our schools relative to theirs, as per King (1979). Research motivated primarily by


182

competition, however, is not likely to be collaborative, and it is unlikely to focus on unique aspects of national educational systems. Incentives to Collaborate. Some academic communities apply negative incentives to collaboration with others in research projects. This is done because publications are used as the primary evidence of scholarship essential for promotions; joint authorship makes it difficult for a faculty-review committee to assess a colleague’s competence and ideas. Junior researchers may be especially wary of becoming involved in a project where their own contributions cannot easily be identified. The most common form of cooperation among researchers in education is exchange of data and ideas rather than joint production of knowledge. In some countries, academics may be discouraged from engaging in research outside national boundaries. In universities with a strong emphasis on research production and promotion linked to publication in leading journals, scholars may decide it is in their best interest to work on high-profile domestic topics. Academic journals are linked to disciplines; research topics are chosen on the basis of disciplinary issues rather than policy concerns or international comparison. Discouragement of international research is most acute in education, generally considered to be linked closely to national culture and idiosyncrasies. Time. Research takes time, research in two or more countries takes more time, and collaborative research is especially time consuming. Policymakers generally seek information for immediate or mid-term concerns and therefore are less likely to be interested in long-term research projects. Universities and other research centers may find it difficult to release their members from current duties, especially for projects that take several or more years to complete. International and collaborative projects take more time than others, and international collaborative projects can drag on for years before there is any tangible product. Table 7.1 suggests five approaches to carrying out research. Intrinsic Features Three major intrinsic features can limit the fruitfulness of collaborative projects. First, some projects combine groups that are so much alike that they have little to offer each other. Second, when important differences do exist, they often are denied or not recognized. Most groups find it difficult to talk openly about important differences among their members. Finally, in research, as in other human endeavors, groups require but often do not have strong leadership to help them overcome other constraints to success. Existence of Differences. The major obstacle to success in collaboration is also why it has such potential. Breakthroughs in understanding are more likely when collaborators begin with clear differences of information about and explanations for the phenomenon being studied. These differences set up the condition in which each participant’s point of view can be challenged by reference to the information and point of view of other participants. The resolution of this tension can constitute an explanation and understanding that makes sense of the several points of view and is consistent with a broader range of information. Collaborative projects within a given nation are, therefore,


183

less likely to generate new ideas than collaboration with a culture different than one’s own, but this collaboration will also be more difficult to sustain.

TABLE 7.1 Five Strategies for Conducting Educational Research Strategies

Critical Features Logic Useful and Outcomes Structure

Risks and Stresses

Research Solve local Overgeneralization at home problems and only, develop DOMESTIC assuming universal universal theory problems Research Assessment of Denies validity of designed generalizability contrary facts and in one of findings and ideas of INTERNATIONAL country theory. What collaborators carried out to do if not in others replicated? Each Basis for future Limits interaction, country collaboration. mutual learning does own Makes for local interesting MULTINATIONAL research report on common topic Countries Develop global Sounds easy but collaborate theory. Learn hard to manage. to produce from Can fall back into GLOBAL common colleagues’ international research experiences strategy if unequal design time and resources Multiple, Stimulates Hard to manage linked recognition of multiple roles of TRANSNATIONAL designs new participants possibilities Source: Taken from Peterson (2001).

Failure to Acknowledge Differences. Cultures strive for internal harmony by socializing their members to avoid public comment on differences in how people look, in their behavior, or in their ideas. At the same time, most languages rely primarily on dichotomous terms to describe physical experiences and emotions (good, bad; hot, cold; strong, weak). Talking about differences in dichotomous, either-or terms increases the likelihood of conflict. It is especially important to avoid conflict with another when that person has authority over us or is sought or valued as a friend. In a society that


184

encourages tolerance, we are encouraged to keep quiet about the differences we see, and we hide or paper over differences using high-level abstractions with little meaning (Johnston 1997). This limits learning, however, as the people who have most new ideas and information to share with us are those most different from us. There are two broad approaches to the effective handling of differences. The first is to adopt a democratic decision process in which all parties can state their positions, but group decisions are decided by majority vote. A second approach, more difficult but fruitful, calls for a process of “embracing contraries” (Elbow 1986). Here the objective is to generate a new set of underlying assumptions, a metalanguage or metanarrative that resolves the differences. These processes require extensive communication among members of the collaborative project. The communication has to be structured to focus on critical elements of the project about which participants are most likely to hold different positions. The objective is to use differences as tools to identify areas of understanding to be explored and mapped. The Importance of Sponsorship and Leadership. Collaborative projects flounder when they lack an enthusiastic sponsor and one or more strong leaders. Sponsors provide general legitimacy, can generate resources and political clearances, and provide some measure of stability. Sponsors can facilitate connecting policymakers with project processes and products. Collaborative projects must have sponsors in each of the participating countries to ensure that the project is not seen as “imposed” by an external actor. Leadership may be individual or collective; unless the research team identifies a person or persons to whom it will look for direction, however, it will not prosper. Most groups designate a single formal leader because multiple leaders increase problems of communication within the team. These problems are more likely when team members come from different countries or when the team includes policymakers as well as researchers. Leadership, on the other hand, is often exercised by more than one person. One kind of leadership is concerned with completion of tasks. The knowledge and skills required for tasks vary according to the cycle of the research process. For example, one person may carry out design of the research, another can be responsible for identification and mobilization of funding, another handles direction of data gathering and analysis, and yet another may take on the responsibility of producing a report. Another kind of leadership is concerned with resolution of the conflicts inherent in collaborative relationships. Persons other than successful task leaders generally exercise this kind of leadership. The Six Nation Education Research Project contained elements of a collaborativeproduct project. Leadership was provided by a steering committee composed of representatives of each of the six participating countries. Active participation of all countries was increased by asking each to meet its own costs of research and by holding project meetings in its countries. Policymakers met often with researchers. Country research teams met and analyzed each others’ findings. Importance of Dialogue Leadership is most effective when dialogue generates among participants a shared understanding of objectives and actions. Effective leaders help their members to weave “webs of meaning” that make sense out of the learning that is occurring. This sense making links new knowledge with structures and operations


185

consistent with the team’s identity or mission, itself subject to changes through learning. The effect is to enable individual members to act in a way that supports team objectives without explicit direction. A team’s web of meaning can be understood as a shared theory of itself as an organization operating in time and space, governing the knowledge that is made sense of, and the sense the team itself makes (Dougherty et al. 2000). Success in the construction of webs of meaning results in a new organizational form sometimes called a “community of practice” (Burroughs, Schwartz, and Hendricks-Lee 2000). Loose command structures and flat hierarchies characterize business firms that build communities of practice. Case studies of these firms demonstrate greater use of strategy, new product lines, wider spread of competency levels across employees, and lower turnover. This occurs in both public and private corporations. “Dialogue” is much more than mere “discussion.” The term discussion is used broadly to refer to any conversation in which participants express their views about common or shared knowledge. The defining characteristic of a dialogue is that participants put forth views that differ from those of other participants. Discussion permits the transfer of “explicit” or conscious knowledge, helpful for getting things done. This exchange takes place within the boundaries of shared understanding. The facts of science can be exchanged. Dialogue, on the other hand, facilitates the transfer of “tacit” knowledge, those understandings one has but cannot easily articulate to others. Extensive conversation, using a variety of metaphors and other forms of figurative speech, is necessary for the collaborative group to be able to construct some “web of meaning” that makes sense out of the differences in question. Critical in the process of exchange of distinct values, beliefs, and objectives is listening to the “voices” of the Others in the group (Masemann 1990; Rust 1991). Listening, as distinct from hearing, involves responding to the Others using their metaphors (Forester 1988, esp. pp. 109–33). In a collaborative research team, sharing this understanding or new knowledge allows the whole team to learn. Innovative research teams—that is, those that produce knowledge—see themselves as creating value and seek to bring tacit and explicit knowledge together despite the tensions that it involves (Dougherty et al. 2000). The process of dialogue is not linear and problem solving but rather often results in problem posing. This feature can be damaging to a collaborative project, but without it the project is unlikely to achieve the special benefits to be achieved from collaboration (as compared to exchange). Extensive research on collaboration in task problem-solving teams in business is summarized as: Contrary to popular myth, great teams are not characterized by an absence of conflict. On the contrary…one of the most reliable indicators of a team that is continually learning is the visible conflict of ideas. In great teams, conflict becomes productive…. On the other hand, in mediocre teams, one of two conditions usually surround conflict. Either there is an appearance of no conflict on the surface, or there is rigid polarization. (Senge 1990, p. 249) Dialogue that works through differences is especially difficult in international collaborative research. Most obvious are problems caused by language. Participants have


186

different mother tongues and therefore unequal technical fluency and comprehension in whatever common language is used. More serious are deep differences in meaning derived from experience and training in unique cultures and mediated through language. Often these differences are discovered only through painful and embarrassing processes of misunderstanding. All the obstacles described above were encountered in the Six Nation Project. The next section describes the consequences of efforts to overcome them. Carrying Out the Six Nation Project Although the Six Nation Project was started with great enthusiasm, it soon stumbled. Cooperation and especially collaboration turned out to be more difficult than expected. Eventually, only five rather than six studies were carried out. These varied widely in the extent to which they were collaborative. This section provides a process history of the project and its various research studies. Initiation The project grew out of approaches by the director of International Education at the University of Pennsylvania, Cheng Y.Davis, to government representatives of China, Germany, Japan, Singapore, and Switzerland. Initial contacts were made through cultural attaches at embassies in Washington, D.C.These contacts were followed up by visits in the summer of 1993 by a team from the the University of Pennsylvania Graduate School of Education to the countries, to ministries of education and labor, to employers, and to universities. The team inquired about the interest of the governments to participate in a collaborative research in education. All governments expressed interest. In the United States, sponsorship was offered by the Graduate School of Education of the University of Pennsylvania and by the U.S. Department of Education. A planning meeting was held in December 1993 at the University of Pennsylvania (Graduate School of Education 1993). Those attending the meeting included education officials from Singapore, Switzerland, and the United States; diplomatic representatives from China and Japan; and senior university professors from Germany, Singapore, Switzerland, and the United States. The conference was billed as a “first step toward developing and implementing a truly global perspective and internationalizing educational research and practices.” The outcome was a commitment to collaborate in research on six major topics: • Mathematics and science education • Language education and literacy • Vocational education • Higher education • Educational evidence for policies, programs, and projects • Education and economic growth Each country would assume leadership for research on a specific topic, and some countries expressed interest in a particular topic, but the meeting closed with no specific


187

agreement on assignment of topics. Countries agreed to collect information pertinent to the various topics and to prepare ideas for research. The participants agreed that collective oversight was required, and a steering committee was appointed to supervise future developments. A second meeting was held at the end of May 1995 and attracted thirty-three participants (Office of International Programs Graduate School of Education 1995). The U.S. delegation presented the outline of a proposal to study the effects of national policies on achievement of students. Singapore presented a proposal centering on processes of language acquisition in different settings. The Swiss team’s proposal covered various issues and settings in vocational training. The delegation from Japan delivered an outline for a proposal to study how higher education institutions respond to social and economic change. China led a discussion on how to use indicators to understand the outcomes of educational policy decisions. Finally, delegates from Germany proposed to examine the ways in which economic growth might be enhanced by more effective training of employees. Many of those attending the 1995 conference were senior government officials rather than academic researchers. About half the people attending had not been present at the planning meeting in 1993. This greater diversity of participants made it difficult to arrive at consensual decisions about how to proceed. As a result, leaders of the national delegations met apart to discuss the importance of formal leadership for SNERP. One proposal was the designation of an overall academic director who would integrate the various efforts. A candidate from the United States was not accepted, and the proposal was shelved. Instead, a decision was made to establish a steering committee with representation from each country. The meeting ended with agreement to a formal set of by-laws. These included the following: 1. Each country would appoint a director responsible for overall coordination of research on the topic assigned to that country. This person would attend steering committee meetings. 2. At the same time, each country participating in a topic would develop its own methodologies for data collection and for analyses. 3. Each country would seek funding for the research activities carried out within its boundaries. 4. Research on the first five topics would seek to show how education contributes to national economic development. Each study, including the sixth, would be designed to have some impact on education policy in the country in which it was carried out. Reliance on “committee leadership” was necessary to keep the infant project from splintering apart. On the other hand, having to review all decisions with committee members engaged full-time in other activities slowed the rate of progress of SNERP. Meetings were few and far apart. The first (face-to-face) meeting of the Steering Committee took place in February 1996 (in Singapore). A second meeting was held in Switzerland in September 1997; a third in China in June 1999. The lack of an academic director for the project limited the extent to which the various studies communicated with each other, both within and across countries. Although each of the first five studies reflected on how their topic was related to economic development, there was no


188

collaboration in studying the relationship between education and economic development. When the German team abandoned its proposal to study education and economic growth, SNERP lost its common theme. It was assumed that each country would, in addition to directing research on one topic, participate in at least some of the other five studies. Table 7.2 indicates the eventual participation by countries in the various studies. The next section describes the factors that conditioned these outcomes. Progress on Development of Each Study Steering Committee members returned to their countries as coordinators with three responsibilities. First, they had to recruit a person to lead the research for which their country had assumed responsibility. In most cases, this person had attended the Steering Committee meeting. Second, the coordinators had to recruit the researchers who would work on the other studies in which the country was interested. In most cases, the study directors from other countries

TABLE 7.2 Countries Participating in Each Research Topic Other Country Date Participating Topic Responsible Begun Countries Math and United States 1997 Science Education Language Singapore 1999

Vocational Switzerland Training and Education (VTE) Higher Japan Education

1996

Indicators China

1996

Education Germany and Economic Growth

Not started

1997

China, Germany, Singapore, Switzerland China, Japan, Switzerland, United States Japan, Singapore, United States

China, Germany, Switzerland, United States Singapore, United States

worked with the national coordinator in the recruitment of researchers. Third, the coordinator had to mobilize funding for the various research activities in which their


189

country would be involved. Because each of the coordinators were senior officials or researchers with heavy workloads, the time available to pursue these additional responsibilities was minimal, and progress was slow. Math and Science. The University of Pennsylvania (representing the United States) felt that, as host of the original meeting, it should be last in specifying its preference for a topic: by default, it took on responsibility for math and science education although none of its academic participants worked in this area. At the 1995 second conference meeting, a professor from the Catholic University of America (invited by the University of Pennsylvania) presented a proposal to examine the way in which national policies exert and influence the achievement of students in math and science. He met with little support, and the U.S. team was asked to produce a more limited proposal that would be of more common interest to the participating nations. The U.S. team suggested that such a proposal could be tied into the Third International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS). At the first face-to-face Steering Committee meeting in February 1996, a professor from Penn introduced the outline of a new study on math and science education, but delegations from the other countries were not enthusiastic. A detailed proposal was discussed at the second Steering Committee meeting in Shanghai but was not well received. Meanwhile, in 1996, a third professor from the University of Pennsylvania was in Singapore as a visiting professor. He discussed with his colleagues the feasibility of sharing national TIMSS data to do cross-national comparisons. Using the TIMSS data would not permit the full measure of collaboration possible in studies designed from scratch, but it could provide opportunities for collaboration in analysis. The unique feature of the study would be comparison and explanation of national-level differences in achievement scores from forty-one countries. Prior TIMSS analysis had focused on accounting for differences within countries. Researchers from five of the six countries (Japan excepted) met in Philadelphia before the 1997 Steering Committee meeting to discuss how they would work together. The focus of the analysis was shifted from math and science instruction to the impact of national policies on achievement. As the TIMSS data were not yet available at that time, however, no progress could be made. In 1998 TIMSS data for all countries became available. At that time, four of the SNERP countries (China had not participated in TIMSS) agreed to carry out separate, that is, nonintegrated, analyses; their relationship was defined as a “confederation” to distinguish it from the collaborative studies being done for the other topics. A report of the analysis for the United States was presented in a meeting in October 2000. Pedagogical Practices in English Language Education. Singapore came to the 1995 meeting with a strong interest in bilingual education policy but little research-based knowledge about effective classroom practices. A proposal offered by a professor from the University of Pennsylvania was rejected, as it did not focus attention on language instruction in schools. By July 1995, Singapore had prepared its proposal. In February 1996 representatives from Germany and Switzerland met in Singapore to discuss the study; their product was a research plan and time frame. The United States joined the study in 1997; China and Japan in 1999. Each country began work on a detailed description of their own


190

instruction practices in language, and the sociocultural and sociopolitical backgrounds of language policies. These reports were completed for five countries by August 2001. Country reports were prepared for China, Japan, Singapore, Switzerland, and the United States. The first three were published in book form: see Hu (2002a), Iino (2002), and Silver (2002). Grin’s (1997b) report reflects the Swiss study; and the working paper by Hornberger, Harsch, and Evans (1999) is the American study. In addition, presentations based on the study have been given at eight professional conferences. One article has been published (Hu 2002b). In the interval, however, the academic director of the language study resigned. Singapore had difficulty in finding a replacement. By 1999 it had become clear that countries had different interests in the study topic: Germany and Switzerland wanted to focus on language in the workplace; Singapore was concerned with pedagogical practices in the teaching of English; and the United States chose to focus on how learners identify opportunities for language learning. The Singaporean team endeavored to produce a single research instrument that would satisfy the interests of all participants. Vocational and Technical Education. Switzerland eagerly sought this topic, and Japan, Singapore, and the United States also expressed enthusiasm in the topic from the beginning. Efforts to develop a common understanding of the research focus included meetings in Singapore (February 1996) and Japan (February 1997) and frequent correspondence. Teams composed of members from each of the countries visited research sites (schools and work sites) in each country, carrying out individual and group interviews. The representatives from each team interpreted the findings they had generated; by 2000 the study had produced a report integrating these perspectives. Higher Education. The Ministry of Education of Japan had expressed interest in this topic in a meeting prior to the project start in December 1993, and a government representative participated in that meeting. The academic director of the study, a university professor, was identified later and attended the second conference in 1995. The director had been studying, with other Japanese academics, the impact of rapid expansion of university enrollments on the administrative organization of Japanese universities. This research, begun with a conceptual model developed by an American sociologist, posits three stages of development for higher education institutions: elite, mass, and universal. The director of the SNERP study expanded this model to fit the Japanese reality and introduced concepts of “massification” and “post-massification.” An extensive conceptual paper was prepared and distributed to the other participants (Arimoto 1997c). An international seminar held in Hiroshima in February 1997 marked the formal start of the study; representatives of all six countries agreed to participate. Participants presented reports on higher education in their countries (Research Institute for Higher Education 1997). The Japanese team carried out a national survey of university reforms and proposed that the other countries do a similar survey using a uniform questionnaire. The Japanese team then sent researchers to the other five countries to gather information. By the time of the 1999 Steering Committee meeting, no other surveys had been completed and it appeared that Singapore and China would drop out. In September 1999 Japan hosted a “Six Nation University Presidents’ Summit” attended by twenty-two members of SNERP and 160 Japanese university professors and officials. The results of this meeting also have been published (Research Institute for Higher Education 2000). A third international seminar was held in February 2000


191

(Arimoto 2001). Switzerland and the United States carried out surveys using a modified version of the original questionnaire. National Educational Indicators. The Chinese representative who selected this topic argued that provision of information about system performance was essential for his country’s transition from a planned to a market economy. Singapore and the United States expressed interest, and an academic researcher from the United States traveled to China to work together with the director, an official in the Ministry of Education, on development of a proposal. This was presented in the 1995 conference. In the first working meeting in 1996, researchers from the three countries, faced with limited funding, agreed to rely on document searches for data gathering. China later carried out a questionnaire survey on statistical practices in the various provinces. By March 1997, each country had completed a report on the current status of educational indicators in their country (Boruch, Terhanian, and Boe 1997; Li and Lin 1997; Meng 1997). A report issued in 1998 compared the three systems from the perspective of China (Li et al. 1998). A seminar on Educational Indicators and Policy Making was held in China in 1999 in conjunction with the Steering Committee meeting. Education and Economic Growth. The representative from Germany chose this topic at the initial organizational meeting in 1993 and again at the second conference in 1995. This person was highly committed to the objectives of SNERP, visited several participating countries for meetings on other topics, and presented a paper on higher education at the 1997 meeting in Japan. At the 1995 conference Germany proposed a study on Generic Skills for Economic Growth and sought by mail to enlist support from other countries. At the 1997 Steering Committee meeting, the German team reported development of a framework for classification of skills required for work, but noted that there had been no response from other countries for assistance in identification of relevant databases. At the 1999 Steering Committee meeting, the German representative requested discontinuation of the study as no other countries were participating. The request was accepted and a proposal made that the issue of economic growth be addressed in the other five studies. German participation in the project was eventually limited to two of the studies. Summary. The VTE and Language studies carried out six of the seven activities associated with collaborative or exchange research relationships. The other studies had fewer collaborative activities. The Indicators study involved collaboration in the design process, but data collection was done separately by each country and researchers spent little time in discussing each other’s findings. Other participants made only minimal contributions to the design for the Higher Education study, and discussion of results was limited to a public conference. The Math and Science group used data generated in a collaborative effort of the IEA members. Use of these data precluded collaboration in design. Although there was a discussion about strategies for analysis, each country’s analysis was carried out without participation by other countries. The Education and Economy study was designed by one country and never implemented. Table 7.3 summarizes the various activities carried out by the six studies. Factors Limiting Collaboration in the Six Nation Project


192

The SNERP study was highly collaborative as a project even though not all individual studies were collaborative. The project and its various activities were designed collaboratively. Frequent meetings were held to discuss the progress and significance of each of the studies and, to some degree, cultural differences in approaches to research. In some countries, regular meetings took place between the teams working on the various studies. Countries shared physical resources (money, personnel, and facilities for meetings and conferences). In some instances, countries helped others cover some costs (e.g., travel abroad). None of the individual studies reached this same level of collaboration, however. This section discusses some of the reasons for and consequences of gaps in collaboration. Most of the difficulties encountered in the SNERP study are attributable to its design rather than to qualities of its participants. For example, because the project included government officials who were less stable in their positions than university-based researchers, membership on the Steering Committee

TABLE 7.3 Activities Carried Out in Each Study Activities Math and Language Vocational Higher Indicators Education Science Training Education and Education and Economy Education Participatory None design

Participatory None data collection

Participatory None analysis Meetings to One share ideas, meeting data about study

Joint preparation of research plan; feedback on instruments Joint collection by Singapore team and country facilitators None Several meetings; many email exchanges

Joint preparation of research plan

Initial Joint China None proposal by and United Japan States amended after consultation Mixedteams None China team None in each visits each country country

Yes

Some

None

None

Several Several One None meetings; meetings; meeting; visits to three major major each conferences conference country Sharing Joint efforts Short-term Short-term None None None resources to obtain stays in each stays in each TIMSS data country; country research assistants Database None Country Country Country Country None development reports on reports on reports on reports on language VTE university national


Resource transfers

practices; practices Web site in development Researchers None Visiting professor in from China, Singapore Japan, and United States to Singapore

193

reforms

educational indicators

None

None

None

and the national teams changed over time. New persons brought new ideas and interpretations of what had been developed earlier. This slowed down the research process but broadened the scope of the studies. In each stage, differences in levels of competence and point of view and cultural understandings within and across national teams generated a dialectic that sometimes yielded new understandings. Research of any kind is meant to be a learning experience—that is, a source of change in knowledge and behaviors—and participants in SNERP learned from both successes and failures. The following commentary focuses on the major obstacles experienced in the evolution of the project. Resources Although public officials in each country had expressed interest in the concept of the project before the organizational meeting, it proved difficult to mobilize funds for the various studies proposed. The initial proposal for the Math and Science Education study may have sounded too academic to policymakers. The study design did not convey clearly how the study would address issues of education quality at the national level. Funding eventually was obtained by defining the study as an extension of a larger effort in which countries had already made an investment, the IEA Third International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS). This outcome had the effect of diminishing the extent of collaboration among SNERP members. Government officials in Germany had a strong interest in the Six Nation Project but were never able to obtain funds for the study they proposed, and resource constraints limited their participation in other studies. On the other hand, ample funding for the Vocational Training and Education study made it possible for researchers to travel in teams to observe each others’ schools and factories. The initial design of the Indicators study was especially costly, which limited data collection in the United States and Singapore. In China, on the other hand, a strong central government was able to obtain cooperation from regional government officials. Singapore found it difficult to free up time for skilled researchers to work on the Language and Education study. This was in part a structural problem: highly skilled people in Singapore routinely have several responsibilities, such as teaching and administrative duties in addition to research. It was also partly a temporal problem: the Six Nation Project came along at a time when researchers were already engaged in other studies. These constraints led to scaling back the initial objectives for the Language study. Constraints of human resources also reduced the scope of and participation of various countries in the Indicators study.


194

Finally, inability by the German team to secure funding for the project in general, and for their proposed study on skills for employment, contributed to the eventual abandonment of the topic and their limited participation in other studies. Incentives The project lacked the usual incentives associated with research projects. Academic researchers had few reasons to expect that participation in SNERP would enhance their careers or allow them to make significant advances in their discipline. The segmentation of the project into six topics with country directors for each study meant no individual researcher would command large amounts of funds. In effect, the collaborative definition of the project reduced opportunities for personal distinction. Perhaps the only incentive for a researcher not already engaged in international research was a paid opportunity to visit five interesting countries. As a result, SNERP had difficulty in enlisting academics experienced in comparative international research. The high status of those who did participate was based on extensive national or domestic research and publication. Time Research of any kind takes time, comparative research takes more time, and collaborative research done well is a heroic effort. Several features of the design of SNERP restricted the time available for research activities. First, the project sought to impact education policy by affecting decisions of policymakers. The strategy to do this called for involvement of policymakers in all phases of the project and the individual studies. Policymakers would participate, it was believed, only if researchers had a distinguished academic record. Only senior researchers were recruited to meet with policymakers and to design the various studies. This decision had at least two debilitating consequences. Although senior researchers may enjoy equal status with policymakers, they may have no more skills in dialogue with persons from different intellectual disciplines or cultures than do less-experienced persons. Fortunately for SNERP, both researchers and policymakers were highly motivated to make the project succeed, and they worked hard to understand each other’s perspectives. In addition, senior staff in any organization are those who carry most responsibilities. This is especially true in societies characterized by hierarchical authority structures. Most of the senior persons engaged in SNERP took on these additional tasks without release from their many other assignments. The project was sometimes seen as a secondary activity to be postponed in order to handle primary responsibilities. The second feature of SNERP that restricted time is the fact that comparative research has to resolve the contradiction between having to assume a single perspective in order to compare, and the importance of identifying unique features of the items being compared. Each of the topics contained a large number of researchable questions. Project participants recognized this from the beginning. They were concerned about how to be sufficiently encompassing so as to capture the important, unique features of each education system while also identifying transferable solutions to problems. At the same time, the participants had to pick research questions that could be answered within the time frame of the project. In the case of the Education and Economy topic, for example,


195

the proposal was feasible given the experience and research capability of the German team, but it did not match the policy concerns of the other countries. Efforts were made to find a topic of mutual interest, but eventually time ran out and the study was abandoned. The resolution of the comparative contradiction requires developing concepts (metalanguage) that subsume differences at one level of understanding into higher-level expressions. In some cases the development of metanarratives makes it possible to combine methodological (e.g., modernist and postmodernist) perspectives in meaningful ways (Hayhoe 2000). These metanarratives can act as a “‘crust of convention’ that we all carry and tend to universalize. This crust must be broken to open the world to the mind and soul” (Rust 1991, p. 616). A new understanding was eventually constructed in the Higher Education study, but the task required long and extensive discussions in order to produce a definition of the central concepts that made sense to all participants. Collaborative international research takes longer not just because of the daunting difficulty of language but also because it involves more people located at great distance. The Six Nation Project sought to reduce the impact of this difficulty by holding annual meetings (Steering Committee meetings and international conferences), but each of these meetings involved different, if overlapping, sets of people, increasing the number of communications necessary for everyone in the web to be connected. The problem is not insuperable, but it requires time, which extends the length of the research process. Sharpness of Differences The potential benefits of collaboration are greatest when participants differ significantly in their information and conceptual understandings. The demands of time, however, push research designers to isolate “neat” problems about which there are few differences of opinion. The project sought to promote resolution (rather than elimination) of differences. An attempt was made to involve policymakers in all phases of the research process. This worked for those studies in which policymakers and academic researchers were matched in competence and authority, such as the Vocational Training and Education study. The critical elements were the definition of a problem of immediate concern to policymakers; a data-collection process that engaged vocational training and education professionals, administrators, and students; and an analysis process in which policymakers and researchers from all participating countries interpreted the findings. Vocational education and training in Switzerland and Germany has a social and economic meaning very different from that in the United States and Japan. The design of the study illuminated those differences. The Indicators study was successful in developing good parallel descriptions of the use of statistical information about education in each of the participating countries. The study’s report pays attention to differences in the governance of education across the three countries, as the explanation for differences in information, but the analysis is limited. This limitation is explained by the fact that it was carried out by only one of the three participants; this country necessarily could not embody the cultural factors that shaped information practices in the other two countries. Least successful in this respect was the study based on an analysis of the TIMSS data. Forced by constraints of time to choose an existing data set, the researchers then opted to work in parallel rather than together. Each analysis is technically excellent and yields


196

important insights, and the report makes an important contribution to the use of multilevel analysis. The high level of competence of this analysis is lacking only the enrichment that would have been provided by alternative perspectives and interpretations offered by persons from a different conceptual and cultural background. Importance of Dialogue The various studies varied widely in the extent of communication among participants, whether policymakers or researchers, and whether in the same study, in another study in the same country, or in a different country. Communication was both written (mostly email between countries) and face to face. The Language study exemplifies the various levels of communication taking place. The Singapore representative to the Steering Committee went to those meetings and to SNERP conferences and represented the project and the Language study to the Ministry of Education. On the other hand, he had no direct involvement in the study design, data collection, or analysis. The study was designed and data collected by the two directors from Singapore and “facilitators” in the other countries. Facilitators played a critical role in putting external researchers together with teachers and policymakers, and in explaining what was observed in classrooms. The research teams also talked at length with classroom teachers in the various countries. Some of the participating teachers remained in communication with the Singapore researchers after completing the data collection. The research assistants from Japan (Waseda University) and the United States (University of Pennsylvania) dialogued with researchers. Differences must exist, and they must be accepted as legitimate, but this can threaten relationships within the collaborative group. Such tensions did appear in the course of the project, threatening several of the studies. In private conversations, participants complained that this or that colleague made no sense at all, used vague and confusing language, didn’t understand methodology, and so on. These tensions were resolved only through repeated contacts and discussion, critical comments, and redrafting of documents. The process followed during the project is described in this quotation from a participant: Although we all came from diverse work and cultural backgrounds and experiences, we were able to share our views and aspirations on the project frankly. This helped a great deal in forging camaraderie, which was critical in a project of this nature. Despite some vague notions and misgivings of the project’s outcomes, even after discussing the various issues for two or more years to try to seek common grounds, we agreed to “bite the bullet” and to proceed. It was slow moving initially as we sought to clarify the objectives and research methodologies of the studies, and establish more definitive ideas each time we met or corresponded. In the process, we had to modify or change the “shape” or research topic for some of the studies. (John Yip, personal correspondence)


197

The effectiveness of dialogue in generating shared understandings greater than the sum of individual understandings is seen most clearly in the case of the Higher Education study. Strong differences exist between the cultural meaning of higher education in Japan and in other countries. In addition, the teams of researchers participating in this study came from sharply different intellectual and epistemological traditions. The director of the study had been studying governance reforms in Japanese universities for several years, and on his own had worked out a complex conceptual explanation of how universities are affected by changes in enrollment. The translation of the study director’s theoretical document into English used terminology that was not highly familiar to researchers in the United States or other English-speaking countries. The response to his document was hesitant but polite. The other researchers, with their own conceptual frameworks, criticized the statement and argued for alternative views. Over time, successive versions of the research design were produced, each stimulating more frank and detailed discussion of the underlying issues of how universities are changing in response to the forces impacting them. One outcome of this dialogue was recognition that the institution of higher education takes different forms as a result of national context. For example, many differences exist between those countries with a governmentoriented higher education policy and those with a market-oriented higher education policy. In this respect, it has become clear that differences of relationships among government, university, and market have close relationships with the policy and practice of higher education reforms (Arimoto 2001). Arimoto also notes that, by confronting these differences, it becomes possible for the researchers to develop a common framework with which to describe unique systems from differing cultures. Leadership and Sponsorship The Six Nation Project enjoyed strong institutional sponsorship from an early stage. This did not always translate into lavish budgets and high numbers of staff but instead was essential for carrying the studies through the difficult initial period of building trust across cultures and language. Strains of communication across wide differences in discipline, experience, culture, and language more than once threatened the individual studies (and may have contributed to the loss of the study on Education and Economy). Those studies that had strong leadership did best; those studies in which no clear structure of leadership emerged suffered. The strong sponsorship of the project by the University of Pennsylvania in the person of Dean Susan Fuhrman played a critical role at several points. Task leadership was not a critical issue for the individual studies in the project. The choice of senior researchers ensured a high level of technical competence in each research. The collaborative process compensated for their relative lack of experience in comparative international research. Frequent meetings and correspondence produced an abundance of comparative material to be analyzed. The strain of collaboration, on the other hand, required careful attention to issues threatening group cohesion. Under pressure to produce (first proposals, then data, then final reports), groups are tempted to overlook the importance of affirming each member of the group, through listening, using each other’s ideas, and seeking consensus for all


198

decisions. These strains had most impact in the early stages of the project, when groups had not yet established the minimal bonds of friendship and respect required for group work. As noted in Table 7.3, not all countries participated in all six studies. Country representatives explained this as a problem of funding, a lack of human resources and time, or a topic that is irrelevant for their country. Privately they acknowledged that in some cases it was difficult to establish a working relationship characterized by mutual respect. Given constraints of time and resources, they opted for those studies in which teams were more cohesive. Study directors were expected to exercise task leadership, and they did. In the Six Nation Project, however, leadership to maintain project and group cohesion came primarily from outside the individual groups. Annual meetings (the Steering Committee and conferences) were organized by Cheng Davis to encourage social relationships outside the study setting. She also arranged a number of informal dinners and meetings that fostered closer personal relationships. The various Steering Committee presidents ensured that meetings respected the work of all participants and avoided public confrontations. Criticism of each other’s work was filtered through the committee president and Cheng Davis as project organizer. That we are now able to see some useful results emerging is due, in no small part, to the group’s single-minded resolve and dedication, as well as Cheng’s prodding, to see the project through to its successful conclusion. (Yip, personal correspondence) In the short run, attention to group cohesion in complex organizations that are culturally diverse reduces opportunities to benefit from dialectical confrontation of ideas. In the long run, however, attending to cohesion makes it possible to engage in deeper and deeper confrontations. In that respect, it is possible that the Six Nation Project is just now beginning to generate the conditions for significant breakthroughs in comparative research in education. Summary: Variants of Collaboration The factors just described explain the different degrees of collaboration experienced in the five studies. None of the studies fall into the “domestic” or “international” categories described in Table 7.1. In each case, the research designs finally used reflected influences and interests of more than one country. Cross-fertilization was least visible in the Indicators and Math and Science studies but the reports included comparative information as well as conclusions pertinent to each country’s situation. The most appropriate label for the other three studies is the “global” category. Each study used a shared design for data collection; results were discussed and interpreted collectively. Each attempted to draw out implications that could be applied to many countries, that is, a global theory. None of the studies achieved the “transnational” stage, which requires considerable front-end work on developing independent but interlocking designs. In other words, all variables used in each study were measured in all the participating countries—an implicit assumption that their realities can be described with a single global theory.


199

Outcomes of the Six Nation Project The outcomes of the Six Nation Project can be assessed in three different ways: production and dissemination of research knowledge, impact on education policy, and development of international relationships. An assessment should attempt to identify those achievements of the project that can be attributed to its collaborative design. These outcomes in turn can be assessed in terms of their cost. Impact of the Project on Production of Research Knowledge All studies except that of Mathematics and Science, which used data from TIMSS, prepared reports describing the country-level data they had collected. The data are in the form of narrative descriptions, interview and observation protocols, questionnaire responses, and statistical tabulations. At least thirty-four documents have been produced (Arimoto 1997a, 1997b, 1997c, 1999, 2001, 2002; Arimoto and Morgan 2000; Boe et al. 1999; Boe, Barkanic, Leow, et al. 2001; Boe, May, Barkanic, and Boruch 2001; Gopinathan 2002; Gopinathan and Morriss 1997; Grin 1997a, 1997b; Grin, Harayama, and Weber 2000, 2002; Grin, Metzger, and Gruner 1997; Grin and Strobel 2000; Gumport et al. 1997; Hartmann 1997; Hornberger, Harsch, and Evans 1999; Hu, 2002; Iino 2002; May, Boe, and Boruch 2003; Metzger et al. 2001; Morgan 1997; Research Institute for Higher Education 1997, 2000; Silver 2002; Teichler 1996, 1997; Xin 1997). Several of these documents have been published and are available from the respective research centers. The Vocational Education study team is preparing a book, and one or more journal articles will be generated from the Mathematics and Science study. A book treatment of the country studies from the Language and Education Project is due out in 2002. The total published production will probably exceed five books and half a dozen articles. Given the relatively low level of human resources dedicated to each of the studies, this volume of publication exceeds that of most conventional research projects. This level of academic productivity is especially high when one takes into account that the SNERP studies were designed to inform national governments and policymakers rather than an academic community. The project sought to involve policymakers in the research process in order to increase their use of the research findings. This involvement contributed to reducing time spent on producing academic reports. The ratio of policymakers to researchers was greatest in the Indicators study, carried out within a Ministry of Education office; this study has the lowest academic productivity. A second factor limiting the production of academic reports is that some of the studies were begun only recently. The Language study, for example, was begun in early 1999. It is too early to expect academic publications (which may require 1.5 to 2 years in a journal with rigorous standards). Those studies with the longest time in operation, Vocational Education and Higher Education, are those most advanced in publishing. Quality of Research Knowledge. A more difficult judgment is whether SNERP generated knowledge of equal or higher quality than that which might be expected from a more conventional research approach. This question can be approached in two ways. First, it is reasonable to assess the quality of the research in comparison with conventional research projects. From an academic perspective, the acid test is publication of articles based on the research in refereed journals. None of the studies in the project is yet at this stage. A


200

secondary test would be review of the various study reports by a panel of experts in the various fields. This was not contemplated in the project design. Short versions of the various studies did meet with positive reactions at a meeting of the Comparative and International Education Society in 2000. The studies have contributed to our fund of comparative knowledge about national education systems. The topics have been studied before— comparative research has been published on higher education reforms, on practices in English language instruction, on vocational education and the school-to-work transition, on educational indicators, and on factors that explain national differences in levels of student achievement. The unique contribution of these studies, it can be argued, is a more detailed explanation of the processes involved, with reference to idiosyncratic national characteristics. This is most true in those studies that used observational and qualitative methods, principally the Vocational Education and the Language studies. The use of qualitative data in which data categories are unique across countries generated insights that do not emerge from quantitative comparisons using uniform variables. This is most evident in the Language and the Higher Education studies. The Language study observed teachers in classrooms in each country. The observation of sequences of instructional practices allowed the researchers to posit various styles of teaching. Some of these characterized all teachers in the national sample; others were unique to individuals. “National” styles were distinct from each other, reflecting national policies in some countries or a national “teaching culture” in the United States. In the Higher Education study, qualitative data from each country contradicted the expectations generated by quantitative data. The general model for the study predicted that universities would pass through certain stages as a function of quantitative expansion. In fact, as was observed using interviews and questionnaire data, Chinese universities are facing the same conflicts being experienced in the United States and Japan, even though enrollment rates are much lower. Closer examination of the qualitative data suggested other factors that contribute to forces on universities to change structure and governance. Learning by Participants. From a constructivist perspective, written documents represent explicit knowledge and do not reveal the tacit knowledge that may have been acquired during the project. We have no direct way at this point to measure the extent to which participants increased their personal knowledge. A reasonable test would be to ask their national colleagues if they have noted any changes in the project participants. The participants themselves feel that they have learned from the project. One participant commented: I saw different patterns of policy making that improved my own ability. I saw different emphases, different dimensions. Because I attended several meetings I could easily get into conversations about other countries and I learned about their trends. (Zhang Li, personal correspondence) At the same time, Li did not feel that he had learned much about how to do comparative research. Several of the teachers in the Language study corresponded with the visitors from abroad to report that the research had made them think about their teaching in a new way. They were, they claimed, now more aware of their own approach and practices.


201

Impact of the Project on Education Policy The assessment of the impact of research on education policy (and practice) is difficult for at least two reasons: 1. Policy makers often are not able to articulate the sources of information used in decision making because policy making is a process and not an event. What emerges as policy is the result of a number of small decisions. The process is described as one of “knowledge accretion and decision creep” (Weiss 1980). It is difficult, therefore, to identify the impacts of specific research studies on policy. 2. Even in centralized education systems, policy implementation is a stochastic procedure, generally fanning out from capital cities to rural areas over several or more years. The full impact of new policies is visible only after an effort such as the Six Nation Project has ended. Some of the effects of the project on policy are, however, already discernible in those studies characterized by high levels of collaboration between researchers and policymakers. In Switzerland, for example, involvement of government and university officials in the Vocational Training and Education study resulted in immediate discussions about policy implications in government-planning offices. Policymakers dominated the Indicators study team in China; they have already moved to make changes in the national education information system. The studies with lower levels of policymaker involvement—Pedagogical Practices in English Language Education, Higher Education Reforms, and Predictors of Differences in Mathematics and Science Achievement—have had no discernible impact on policy to date. Impact of the Project on International Relationships There is no doubt that the Six Nation Project has contributed to improvement of relationships among the individuals, institutions, and countries involved. The evidence for this is increased communication between and among participants independent of project activities, formal agreement to engage in other activities, and planning for a second collaborative project studying education. Each of the interviewed participants reported that they now had more frequent contact (generally by email) with persons they had met during the project. The project contributed to development of friendships across national boundaries, and it helped researchers and policymakers identify sources of information and advice previously inaccessible to them. Several of the institutions have sought further collaboration through joint projects on different aspects of education and training. These agreements face the usual problems of time and resource constraints but are now easier to develop as a result of the project’s “ice breaking.” The Graduate School of Education of the University of Pennsylvania has entered into various student and professor exchange agreements. There have been effects as well. Countries who had not participated in the project have now asked Penn to set up training programs and to provide assistance in research design. The participants in the project, joined by representatives from other countries, met in June 2002 to plan another collaborative project, the Eight Nation Education Research Project. Launched in 2003, the project strives for greater levels of collaboration and will once again try to relate education to economic development.


202

The Cost of the Six Nation Project The research findings and policy impacts of the Six Nation Project studies should also be assessed in terms of their costs. The projec’s accomplishments would be less impressive had this been a highly expensive operation. In fact, the direct costs of the Six Nation Project were less than other comparative education research projects that are similar in number of participating countries and volume of research findings. Direct costs were low because the design of the project emphasized collaboration and policy impact. Almost all of the work done was carried out by staff already working in their respective institutions. That is, few additional staff was hired. Host countries covered all the costs of the numerous conferences and seminars out of their regular budgets. Research designs traded high-level precision for identification of problems and variables of direct interest to policymakers participating in the design process. We asked the study directors to sum up the additional costs incurred in carrying out their research. The totals for the five countries are presented in Table 7.4. These costs undoubtedly underestimate the true costs (in time of staff allocated to the project, in use of facilities and materials, etc.) of the studies and the project as a whole. The low figure (compared to usual costs of education research in the United States) indicates, however, the synergy generated by a collaborative project such as this. Countries were willing, and able, to allocate staff and facilities because of the perceived benefit of collaboration across nations.

TABLE 7.4 Estimated Direct Costs of Research in Each Country, in U.S. Dollars Country China Japan Singapore Switzerland United States Total

Costs $18,145 $239,333 $51,605 $420,000 $375,000 $1,104,083


203

Conclusion Collaborative projects, like good dialogues, are not totally predicable. True, each party enters the conversation with a set of interests, but, as the other participants respond in unexpected ways, the conversation takes a new, perhaps more interesting and helpful direction. It is that capacity for others to surprise us that makes collaboration both exciting and sometimes frustrating. Surprise is another name for being wrong in our expectation of what the future will bring. George Soros (1998, drawing from Karl Popper), in order to explain why the positivist models of economists so often fail to predict the outcomes of policy decisions, suggests that humans are inherently fallible; that is, we cannot avoid being wrong in predictions about the future. He distinguishes between two versions of fallibility. The official version is that we lack information and consequently our models are not correct. Once we collect enough information, we will predict the future with certainty. Soros proposes an alternative version, “radical fallibility,” we are inherently likely to be wrong. We make mistakes not because we are not intelligent or lack information. Our individual knowledge is most of the time insufficient because reality is produced by thinking human beings who are “reflexive,” that is, they decide what to do on the basis of their information about reality and their objectives. In any given situation, unless we know the subjective states of the other actors, we cannot predict how they will act. In order to know what information they have and what objectives they hold, we have to dialogue with them. In so doing, however, we alter both our own information (and perhaps objectives) as well as their information (and perhaps objectives). Although we can learn a great deal about the Other (especially with respect to a given situation) neither the Other nor we stand still. We can never have absolute certainty, although we can narrow down the range of uncertainty for a given situation. If we accept the notions of reflexivity and inherent fallibility, what can be done to improve the world in which we live? A primary requisite, Soros insists, is to accept that we will make mistakes, and often. If we accept that limitation, we will pay much more attention, as we go along, to the consequences of our actions. Continuous assessment makes it more likely that errors will be detected early, reducing the cost of making mistakes. If we accept fallibility as inherent, then we can also see mistakes not as fatal but as sources of information that permit us to do better in reaching our objectives. Collaboration across distinct cultures and disciplines provides the conditions for making a lot of mistakes and learning a great deal. What is learned is more likely to expand the dimensions of our knowledge and can take us in new and more promising directions. It can expand the understanding of each participant without making each one a clone of the other. The Six Nation Project illustrates that it is possible to use the comparative method in education without making invidious comparisons. If leaders pay attention not just to the technical task of the research project but also to relationships among participants, it is possible to foster and strengthen mutual appreciation. Although the research that results may not conform to conventional expectations of “rigor” in, for example, definitions of concepts, collaboration can produce valuable insights at reasonable cost. This requires


204

not just front-end commitment to collaboration, but also careful guidance and a willingness to delay research activities while seeking greater mutual understanding. The project failed to make a significant advance in our understandings of the link between education and economic growth. In hindsight, this was an unreasonable objective. Both terms are high-level abstractions, and theory is woefully underdeveloped. In economic theory “education” is treated as a commodity of uniform size and value that can be traded in the market. Only recently have economists begun to try to study the kinds of variables—such as curriculum and pedagogy—considered important by educators. Most educators, on the other hand, completely ignore what happens to students after they leave school. Hardly any research has been done by educators on how changes in education affect economies. More common is attention to how economic variables, such as those summed up in “globalization,” affect education (see, for example, Carnoy and Rhoten [2002] or Mok [2000]). Given the advantages claimed for collaborative comparative research, why is more of it not done? A simple explanation might be that in fact there is relatively little comparative research in education. A recent review of three leading journals in the field of comparative education found that less than one-third of more than 800 published studies looked at more than one country (Rust et al. 1999). The obstacles and difficulties reviewed in this chapter discourage all but the most innovative and energetic from taking on the task of collaborative comparative research. The rewards make it worthwhile. The Six Nation Project demonstrates that through collaboration it is possible to carry out high quality research of interest to policymakers. Participants from different cultures can learn from each other, preserving unique features while improving their capacity to meet the demands and challenges of globalization. References Arimoto, A., ed. 1997a. Cross-national study on academic organizational reforms in postmassification stage. In Academic reforms in the world, edited by Research Institute for Higher Education. Hiroshima: Hiroshima University, RIHE. Arimoto, A. 1997b. Cross-national study on post-massification academic organizational development (in Japanese). Review in Higher Education 46. Arimoto, A. 1997c. Massification of higher education and academic reforms in Japan. In Academic reforms in the world, edited by Research Institute for Higher Education. Hiroshima: Hiroshima University, RIHE. Arimoto, A. 1999. International comparative study on academic reforms in the post-massification stage of higher education. Review in Higher Education 54:122. Arimoto, A., ed. 2001. University reforms and academic governance: Reports of the 2000 threenation workshop on academic governance. Vol. 7, RIHE International Publication Series. Hiroshima: Hiroshima University, Research Institute for Higher Education. Arimoto, A., ed. 2002. University reforms and academic governance reconsidered: Report of the six-nation higher education research project. Vol. 8, RIHE International Publication Series. Hiroshima: Hiroshima University, Research Institute for Higher Education. Arimoto, A., and K.Morgan, eds. 2000. Higher education reform for quality higher education management in the 21st century: Economic, technological, social, and political forces affecting higher education. Vol. 11, RIHE International Seminar Reports. Hiroshima: Research Institute for Higher Education, Hiroshima University.


205

Boe, E.E., G.Barkanic, C.S.Leow, H.May, S.Shin, J.C.Singleton, G.Zeng, and R.F.Boruch. 2001. Correlates of national differences in mathematics and science achievement: Evidence from TIMSS (Data Analysis Report No. 2001-DAR1). Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania, Graduate School of Education, Center for Research and Evaluation in Social Policy. Boe, E.E., H.May, G.Barkanic, and R.F.Boruch. 2001. Predictors of national differences in mathematics and science achievement: Data from TIMSS for eighth grade students. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania, Graduate School of Education, Center for Research and Evaluation in Social Policy. Boe, E.E., H.M.Turner, H.May, C.S.Leow, and G.Barkanic. 1999. The role of student attitudes and beliefs about mathematics and science learning in academic achievement: Evidence from TIMSS for six nations. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania, Center for Research and Evaluation in Social Policy. Boruch, R., G.Terhanian, and E.Boe. 1997. National education indicators (NEI) in six nations: The case of the United States. Philadelphia: Graduate School of Education, University of Pennsylvania. Burroughs, R., T.A.Schwartz, and M.Hendricks-Lee. 2000. Communities of practice and discourse communities: Negotiating boundaries in NBPTS certification. Teachers College Record 102(2):344. Carnoy, M., and D.Rhoten. 2002. What does globalization mean for educational change? A comparative approach. Comparative Education Review 46(1):1–9. Dougherty, D., L.Borrelli, K.O.Munir, and A.Sullivan. 2000. Systems of organizational sensemaking for sustained product innovation. Journal of Engineering and Technology Management 17(3–4):321–55. Eckstein, M.A. 1983. The comparative mind. Comparative Education Review 27(3):11–22. Elbow, P. 1986. Embracing contraries: Explorations in learning and teaching. New York: Oxford University Press. Epstein, E. 1991. Editorial. Comparative Education Research 35(4):605–609. Forester, J. 1988. Planning in the face of power. Berkeley: University of California Press. Gaillard, J.F. 1994. North-south research partnership: Is collaboration possible between unequal partners? Knowledge and Policy 7(2):31–63. Gopinathan, S. 2002. University reforms and academic governance in Singapore. In University reforms and academic governance reconsidered, Vol. 8, RIHE International Publication Series, edited by A. Arimoto. Hiroshima: Hiroshima University, Research Institute for Higher Education. Gopinathan, S., and S.B.Morriss. 1997. Trends in university reform in the context of massification. In Academic Reforms in the World, edited by Research Institute for Higher Education. Hiroshima: Hiroshima University, RIHE. Graduate School of Education. 1993. Global education for the 21st century: A six-country education conference. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania. Grin, F. 1997a. The LIVE Project and its partners: Structuring collaboration between Germany, Singapore and Switzerland. Report prepared for the Language and Literacy project as part of the Six Nation Education Research Project. Geneva: University of Geneva. Grin, F. 1997b. Swiss multilingualism: Key figures and issues in language teaching policy. Country report prepared for Language Education and Literacy project of SNERP. Geneva: University of Geneva. Grin, F., Y.Harayama, and L.Weber. 2000. Responsiveness, responsibility and accountability: An evaluation of university governance in Switzerland. Berne: Office Federal de l’Education et la Science (OFES). Grin, F., Y.Harayama, and L.Weber. 2002. University reforms and academic governance in Switzerland. In University reforms and academic governance reconsidered. Vol. 8, RIHE International Publication Series, edited by A.Arimoto. Hiroshima: Hiroshima University, RIHE.


206

Grin, F., C.Metzger, and A.Gruner. 1997. Current issues in higher education. In Academic reforms in the world, edited by Research Institute for Higher Education. Hiroshima: Hiroshima University, RIHE. Grin, F., and O.Strobel. 2000. Language instruction in vocational education: Switzerland and Singapore compared. Geneva: University of Geneva. Gumport, P., M.Iannozzi, S.Shama, and R.Zemsky. 1997. Trends in higher education from massification to post-massification. In Academic reforms in the world, edited by Research Institute for Higher Education. Hiroshima: Hiroshima University, RIHE. Hartmann, W. 1997. Higher education in a federal system. In Academic reforms in the world, edited by Research Institute for Higher Education. Hiroshima: Hiroshima Univeristy, RIHE. Hayhoe, R. 2000. Redeeming modernity. Comparative Education Review 44(4):423–39. Hornberger, N.H., L.Harsch, and B.Evans. 1999. Language education of language minority students in the United States. Working Papers in Educational Linguistics 15(1):—. Hu, G. 2002a. English language teaching in the People’s Republic of China. In English language education in China, Japan, and Singapore, edited by R.E.Silver and G.Hu. Singapore: National Institute of Education. Hu, G. 2002b. Recent developments in secondary English language teaching in the People’s Republic of China. Language, Culture and Curriculum 15(1). Iino, M. 2002. Language and literacy education in Japan. In English language education in China, Japan, and Singapore, edited by R.E.Silver and G.Hu. Singapore: National Institute of Education. Jameson, D.A. 1994. Strategies for overcoming barriers inherent in cross-cultural research (doing research). Bulletin of the Association for Business Communication 57(3):39–40. Johnston, M. 1997. Contradictions in collaboration: New thinking on school/university partnerships. New York: Teachers College, Columbia University. King, E.J. 1979. Other schools and ours. 5th ed. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston. Kuhn, T.S. 1970. The structure of scientific revolutions. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Li, Z., R.Boruch, L.K.Meng, and H.W.Meng. 1998. The comparisons of national educational indicators and data used for educational administration in policy-making. Beijing: National Center for Educational Research and Development. Li, Z., and Z.H.Lin. 1997. Educational evidence and indicator systems: The case of the P.R.China. Beijing: National Center for Educational Research and Development. Maina Ahlberg, B., E.Nordberg, and G.Tomson. 1997. North-south health research collaboration: Challenges in institutional interaction. Social Science & Medicine 44(8):10. Masemann, V. 1990. Ways of knowing: Implications for comparative education. Comparative Education Review 34(4):465–73. May, H., E.E.Boe, and R.F.Boruch. 2003. The ecological fallacy in comparative and international education research: Discovering more from TIMSS through multilevel modeling. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania, Graduate School of Education, Center for Research and Evaluation in Social Policy. Meng, L.K. 1997. National education indicator systems: Singapore. Singapore: Ministry of Education, Management Information Branch. Metzger, C., H.Fujita, S.S.Law, R.Zemsky, J.E.Berset, and M.Iannozzi. 2001. Different paths, similar Pursuits: The economic and personal potential of vocational training and education in an international context, Vol. 12, Studies and Reports, edited by D.Euler and C.Metzger. St. Gallen, Switzerland: Universitat St. Gallen. Miller, J. 1978. The body in question. New York: Random House. Mok, K.H. 2000. Impact of globalization: A study of quality assurance systems of higher education in Hong Kong and Singapore. Comparative Education Review 44(2):148–74. Morgan, K.J. 1997. Approaches to mass higher education: A comparison of change in Britain and Australia. In Academic reforms in the world, edited by Research Institute for Higher Education. Hiroshima: Hiroshima University, RIHE.


207

Office of International Programs Graduate School of Education. 1995. Global education for the 21st century: The second six-country education conference. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania. Peterson, M.F. 2001. International collaboration in organizational behavior research. Journal of Organizational Behavior 22:59–81. Research Institute for Higher Education (RIHE), ed. 1997. Academic reforms in the world: Situation and perspective in the massification stage of higher education. Vol. 10, RIHE International Seminar Reports. Hiroshima: Hiroshima University, RIHE. Research Institute for Higher Education (RIHE), ed. 2000. Higher education reform for quality higher education management in the 21st century: Economic, technological, social and political forces affecting higher education. Vol. 11, RIHE International Seminar Reports. Hiroshima: Hiroshima University, RIHE. Root-Bernstein, R.S. 1989. Discovering. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. Rust, V.D. 1991. Postmodernism and its comparative education implications. Comparative Education Review 35(4):610–26. Rust, V.D., A.Soumare, O.Pescador, and M.Shibuya. 1999. Research strategies in comparative education. Comparative Education Review 43(1):86–109. Senge, P.M. 1990. The fifth discipline: The art and practice of the learning organization. New York: Doubleday. Shive, G.L., S.Gopinathan, and W.K.Cummings. 1988. North-south scholarly exchange: access, equity, and collaboration. London: Mansell. Silver, R.E. 2002. Education and economic policy as language policy (Singapore). In English language education in China, Japan, and Singapore, edited by R.E.Silver and G.Hu. Singapore: National Institute of Education. Soros, G. 1998. The crisis of global capitalism. New York: Public Affairs. Teichler, U. 1996. Comparative higher education: Potentials and limits. Higher Education 32(4): 35. Teichler, U. 1997. Reforms as a response to massification of higher education: A comparative view. In Academic Reforms in the world, edited by Research Institute for Higher Education. Hiroshima: Hiroshima University, RIHE. Weiss, C.H. 1980. Knowledge creep and decision accretion. Knowledge: Creation, Diffusion and Utilization 1(3):381–404. Xin, W. 1997. Reform and development of China’s higher education system in the past decade. In Academic reforms in the world, edited by Research Institute for Higher Education. Hiroshima: Hiroshima University, RIHE.

Contributors Akira Arimoto has a Ph.D. from Hiroshima University, Japan. He is currently the Director of Research Institute for Higher Education at Hiroshima; previously he was Professor of Education at Osaka University. In addition, he is the National Government University Inspector for Ministry of Education. He is a visiting professor at Yale University (in the United States), the Max Planck Institute of Education (in Germany), and Lancaster University (in Great Britain). He has contributed chapters to The Handbook of World Education (1991), Higher Education Research at the Turn of the New Century (1997), and Research on Higher Education: Its Relationship to Policy (2000), and he has written articles published in the journal Higher Education Policy. He also has written, edited, and contributed to books published in Japanese. Gema Barkanic is an advanced doctoral student at the University of Pennsylvania. Jean-Etienne Berset has a Ph.D. in Economics from the University of Fribourg, Switzerland. He is currently Director General of the University of Applied Sciences of Fribourg. He was formerly Head of International Affairs, and then of Strategic Controlling, Federal Office for Professional Education and Technology, Switzerland. His publications include Educational Controlling and numerous articles on specialized educational topics. Erling E.Boe received his Ph.D. from Washington State University and is currently Professor of Education at the University of Pennsylvania. He is a cofounder of the Center for Research and Evaluation in Social Policy, University of Pennsylvania. He has been a Visiting Scholar at the National Center for Education Statistics, U.S. Department of Education; and a Visiting Professor at the National Institute for Education, Singapore. He coedited Teacher Supply, Demand and Quality: Policy Issues, Models and Data Bases. Robert F.Boruch received his Ph.D. from Iowa State University and has been a University Trustee, Professor of Education, and Professor of Statistics at the University of Pennsylvania. He is currently the Principal Investigator for the U.S. Department of Education’s Institutue of Education Sciences’ What Works Clearinghouse (http://w-w-c.org/) and a cochair of the Steering Group of the International Campbell Collaboration (http://www.campbellcollaboration.org/). He is a Fellow of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences and the Academy of Experimental Criminology, and he has been a Visiting Fellow at the Max Planck Institute and at the Center for Advanced Studies in the Behavioral Sciences. His publications include Evaluating AIDS Prevention Programs: Expanded Edition; Controlled Experiments for Planning and Evaluation: A Practical Guide; and Cross Design Synthesis: Advances in Educational Productivity. Hidenori Fujita received his Ph.D. from Stanford University and is currently a Professor of Education and Sociology at International Christian University, Tokyo, Japan.

Contributors

210

He is the author of Educational Reform and Child, School and Society. He is the coeditor of Culture and Society: Distinction, Structuration and Reproduction and the sixvolume Series on Learning and Culture. Marcus Iannozzi is President of Iannozzi Communications, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. Song-Seng Law received his Ph.D. from the University of Wisconsin. He is currently the Director, Technical Personnel Training Center, S.M.Wu Manufacturing, in Singapore. Zhang Li has a B.Sc. in Nuclear Physics from Peking University, China. He has been Director-General and a Professor of National Center for Education Development Research (NCEDR) of MOE (China) since 1999. He was the Deputy Director, the Assistant Director, and the Division Chief of NCEDR from 1989 to 1999; the Deputy Division Chief of the Department on Policy Analysis of State Education Commission (SEDC) from 1985 to 1989; and a visiting scholar at the International Bureau of Education (UNESCO, Geneva) in 1987. Prior to that, he was a teacher at the Institute of Higher Education of Peking University (1983–1985). His research and writings (about sixty papers and ten monographs) have dealt mostly with the study of macropolicy/strategy on educational development. Henry May earned his Ph.D. in Policy Research, Evaluation, and Measurement from the Graduate School of Education at the University of Pennsylvania. He is now a research specialist at the Consortium for Policy Research in Education (CPRE) and a lecturer at the Graduate School of Education at the University of Pennsylvania. Noel F.McGinn has a Ph.D. in Social Psychology from the University of Michigan and is Professor Emeritus at the Graduate School of Education, Harvard University. He has written numerous articles and book chapters on school effectiveness, educational planning, decentralization, and the impacts of globalization on education; he was the coauthor of Framing Questions, Constructing Answers: Linking Research with Education Policy for Developing Countries and Informed Dialogue: Using Research to Shape Education Policy Around the World. He is the coeditor of the Handbook of Modern Education and Its Alternatives and editor of Crossing Lines: Research and Policy Networks for Developing Country Education. Christoph Metzger received his Ph.D. in Economics from the University of St. Gallen, Switzerland. He is a Full Professor of Economic Education and Business Administration, St. Gallen, and a Visiting Scholar at the University of Texas, Austin. His main research, development, and consulting interests are in the fields of curriculum, educational evaluation and performance assessment, learning strategies, vocational training and education, and teacher training. His publications include WLI-Schule: Wie lerne ich? Handbuch für Lehrkräfte; WLI School: How do I learn? Handbook for Instructors; Lernund Arbeitsstrategien. Ein Fachbuch für Studierende an Universitäten und Fachhochschulen; Learn-and-work Strategies: A Manual for studying in Universities and professional schools; and WEG— Wissen, Erwartungen und Gefühle zum Studium; (KUF: Knowing, Understanding and Feeling through Study). Rita Silver received her Ph.D. in Educational Linguistics from the Graduate School of Education at the University of Pennsylvania. Her areas of specialization are secondlanguage acquisition and classroom pedagogy. She has presented at numerous national

Contributors

211

and international conferences. Currently, she is an Assistant Professor at the National Institute of Education, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore. Rita Skuja-Steele received her Ph.D. from the University of Pennsylvania and is currently a Professor at the National Institute of Education, Singapore. Robert Zemsky received his Ph.D. from Yale University. He is a Professor of Education at the University of Pennsylvania and the Director of the Institute for Research on Higher Education.

Topics Index Collaboration and confederation, 55 and dialogue, 204–206, 216–218 and Differences in SNERP, 216–217 and role of language, 198, 207 as horizontal cooperation, 3 Costs of objectivity, 198 Difficulties in Higher Education study, 170 Extent in SNERP studies, 213 Extrinsic constraints, 200 Forms and benefits in research, 7–9, 203 Impact of globalization on, 201 Impact of resource constraints in SNERP, 214 Importance of differences between partners, 203 Importance of leadership, 204 Importance of metaphors, 199 in IEA studies, 9 in Higher Education study, 155 in VTE study, 93, 104 Incentives for and against, 201–202 Intrinsic constraints, 202 Sponsorship and leadership, 207, 219 Lack of incentives for in SNERP, 215 Objectives in research, 6 Obstacles to in SNERP, 212–220 Obstacles to shared understanding, 199 of policy makers, 169 Requirements for, 197, 207 Research about in education, health and social sciences, 7 Role of time in SNERP, 215 College mania Definition, 101 Japan, 113 Singapore, 124 Switzerland, 127 United States, 138 Comparative Academic Profession study, 147 Comparative education, modernization theory and nationalism, 5 Ecological fallacy, 31, 41 Education and Economic Growth Cross-national differences in role of language, 79

Topics index

213

Economic slowdown and VTE, 15 Limitations of indicators, 17 SNERP failure to study, 207, 212, 214 Role of language education, 55 Role of mathematics achievement, 48 English as a Foreign Language, 55, 80–82, 85 English as a Second Language, 54, 57, 63, 66, 76, 80–82, 84, 85 English Language Training, 54 Gross Domestic Product and achievement, 13, 27, 35, 49 Gross National Product, 174 Hamamatsu, 92, 107–109, 112, 113 Hierarchical Linear Modeling, 28, 29, 37, 40 Higher Education and globalization, 169 Collaboration in study, 210 Contact with policy makers in Japan, 157 Governance structures in 3 countries, 163 Implementation of study, 210 Policy implications of study, 166 Research hypothesis, 152 Seminar results, 159 Summary of findings, 16 Survey of universities, 155 Survey results, 158 International Association for the Evaluation of Educational Achievement, See IEA Japan, Meiji restoration, 4, 158 Mathematics and Science Achievement Benefits of cross-national analyses, 34 Collaboration in study, 209–210 Comparison of Math and Science predictors, 46 Involvement of policy makers, 22 Limitations of study, 59 Multivariate model for Math, 29 Prediction model for Math, 37, 46 Prediction model for Science, 37, 45, 46 Predictor variables, 27 Summary of findings, 11 Why East does better than West in Math, 37, 46 Meister system of education and training, 111, 130, 132, 133 Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology, Japan, 147, 148, 155, 167 Multinational Confederation for Research with TIMSS, 21, 22 National Assessment of Educational Progress, United States, 182–187 National Education Indicators Collaboration in study, 211

Topics index

214

Collection in China, 185 Collection in Singapore, 185 Objectives of study, 175 Statistical systems across countries, 188 Summary of study findings, 17 Use in monitoring, 190 Use in planning, 189 Use in policy-making, 188 Use in research, 190 Ordinary Least Squares, 28, 29, 37 Pedagogical Practices in English Language Education Assessment, 75 Classroom activities, 67 Collaboration in study, 210 Focus of programs, 64 Focus on English learning activities, 56 Implementation of study, 209 Instruments, 56 Involvement of policy makers, 53 Policy implications of findings, 85 Research questions, 55 Summary of study findings, 13 Support structures, 72 Teacher training, 74 Time allocation, 78 Use of textbooks, 71 Variations in teaching approach, 83 Policy makers and Pedagogical Practices in English Language Education Study, 13 in Mathematics and Science Achievement study, 22 in Pedagogical Practices in English Language study, 13 involvement in studies, 17, 157 Resources, in collaboration, 214 Schools and Staffing Survey, United States, 176, 185 School-to-work, 98, 114, 123, 125, 144 Six Nation Education Research Project, See SNERP Six Nation University President’s Summit, 161, 211 SNERP Assessment of outcomes, 220 Cost-effectiveness, 224 Distinct features of reports, 10 Impact on policy, 223 Initiation, 206–207 Learning through collaboration, 222 Limits on collaboration, 212 Participation of countries in studies, 208

Topics index Quality of research., 220–221 Six Nation University Presidents’ Summit, 211 Summary of five studies, 10 Textbooks, 71, 73 TIMSS, 12, 21–24, 26, 27, 182, 214, 216, 218 Trow Model of university development, 144–150, 157 Limitations of, 166 Universities and economic growth, 167 and globalization, 167 Academic reforms, 158–161 Governance reforms, 163–166 Stages of development, 17, 149, 154, 221 Vocational and Technical Education Approach of study, 91 Collaborative methodology, 93, 104, 210 Definition, 98 Dual apprenticeship system, 120 Impact of college mania, 101 Implementation of Study, 209 Japan, 105–106 Purpose in Japan, 110 Role of industry in Japan, 112 Role of industry in Singapore, 118 Singapore, 116–125 Stakeholders, 103 Stigma, 99 in Japan, 111 in Singapore, 118 in Switzerland, 127 Summary of findings, 15 Trends, 99 United States, 128

215

Persons, Places, Institutions Achola, P.P.W., 10, 20 Altbach, P., 147, 166, 171 Amano, I., 150 Arafeh, S., 52 Argentina, 4 Arimoto, A., x, 147, 150, 152–155, 157, 168, 171, 211, 218, 220–221, 226–227 Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC), 175 Australia, 154 Bailey, T., 137, 145 Balan, J., 4, 19 Baldauf, R.B., 55, 89 Barkanic, G., 21, 26, 27, 52, 221, 227 Basic Education Datya System, United States, 182 Beaton, M.E., 23, 26–28, 39, 52 Beijing, 175, 181 Bello, A., 4 Benavot, A., 2, 19 Ben-David, J., 168, 171 Berlin, Germany, 177 Berset, J.E., 53, 91, 145, 228 Beuchat, V., 93 Biklen, S., 93, 144 Black, C.E., 6, 19 Boakari, F.M., 10, 19 Boe, E.E., 21, 26, 27, 31, 54, 176, 211, 221, 225, 226, 228 Bogdan, R.C., 93, 144 Boli, J., 2, 19 Borrelli, L., 205, 227 Boruch, R.F., 21, 26, 31, 42, 174, 176, 211, 221, 227, 228 Bruthiaux, P., 55, 82, 89 Bryk, A.S., 28, 52 Burroughs, R., 205, 227 Burstein, L., 10, 20 Cahnmann, M., 82 California Assessment of Progress, 181 Calsyn, C., 22, 52 Canada, 201 Capelli, P., 137, 145 Carnegie Foundation, 147 Carnoy, M., 5, 19, 226, 227 Carpenter, M.D., 6, 19

Persons, places, institutions

218

Catholic University of America, 208 Center for Policy Research in Education, University of Pennsylvania, 53 Chiang, M., 117, 144 China, vii, 2, 12, 15–17, 21, 26, 53–58, 63–67, 70, 72–74, 77–79, 82, 83, 85, 152, 157–158, 161, 167, 170, 173–176, 180–184, 186–191, 206–211, 222, 224 Clark, B.R., 168, 171 Clay, M., 78, 89 Cochran-Smith, M., 58, 89 Coleman, J.S., 5, 19 Colwell, R.R., 22 Cooper, R.L., 80, 89 Council of Chief State School Officers, United States, 183 Cousin, V., 4 Cummings, W.K. 2, 5, 19, 197, 229 Curtis, C.C., 23, 52 Davis, C.Y., x, 206, 219 Dishner, E.K., 78, 89 Dore, J., 6, 19 Dougherty, D.L., 205, 227 Dubrow, G., 155, 156, 160, 172 Dubs, R., 128, 144, 227 Easterby-Smith, M., 9, 19 Eckstein, M.A., 199, 200, 227 Educational Testing Service, United States, 180 Elbaz, F., 70, 87, 89 Elbow, P., 203, 227 Epstein, E., 201, 227 Erney, P., 93 Evans, B., 82, 88, 210, 221, 227 Farrell, J.P., 4, 19 Farrell, T.S.C., 86, 87 Federal Office for Professional Education and Technology, Switzerland, 53 Federal Statistical Office, Switzerland, 144 Feinman-Nemser, S., 87, 89 Floden, R., 87, 89 Forester, J., 205, 227 Frame, J.D., 6, 19 France, 4–5, 154 Fraser, S., 4, 19 Frigoletto, L., 6, 19 Frommberger, D., 94, 144 Fuhrman, S., vii, x, 53, 219 Fujita, H., 91, 94, 109, 144, 145, 221, 228 Gaillard, J.F., 197, 227 Galen, 199 Geneva, 54


219

Germany, 2, 12–16, 21, 22, 28, 29, 32, 33, 36–39, 41–47, 53, 54, 58, 126, 130, 152, 154, 158, 161, 164, 167, 174, 176, 206–212, 214, 216 Gogan, L.S., 52 Gonzales, P., 22, 52 Gonzalez, E.J., 23, 27, 28, 39, 52 Goodebegure, L.F., 147, 171 Gopinathan, S., x, 117, 145, 165, 197, 221, 227, 229 Great Britain, 5, 154, 201 Gregory, K.D., 23, 52 Grin, F., 54, 55, 76, 81, 82, 88, 156, 160, 163–165, 171, 172, 210, 221, 227, 228 Gruner, A., 221, 227 Gumport, P., 221, 228 Hafernik, J.J., 7, 19 Hamamatsu, 92, 93, 107–113 Harayama, Y., 156, 160, 163–165, 171, 172, 221, 227 Harbison, F., 5, 19 Harsch, L., 82, 89, 210, 221, 228 Hartmann, W., 221, 228 Harvey, 199 Hayhoe, R., 199, 216, 228 Hendrick, J., 93, 136, 145, 227 Hendricks-Lee, M., 205, 227 Herbart, J.F., 4 Ho, W.K., 117, 145 Holbrook, J.A.D., 4, 19 Hong Kong, 12–14, 26, 28, 29, 32, 33, 36–39, 41–47 Hornberger, N., 54, 82, 89, 210, 221, 228 Houang, R.T., 52 Hoyle, C., 23, 52 Hu, G., 66, 80, 210, 221, 228 Iannozzi, M., 91, 137, 145, 228 Iino, M., 66, 76, 81, 89, 210, 221, 228 Institute of Technical Education, Singapore, 118, 122, 124, 145, International Comparative Study on Higher Education Policy, 224 Ireland, 201 Jacobs, G.M., 86, 87, 89 Jakwerth, P.M., 52 Jameson, D.A., 197, 228 Japan, 2, 5, 6, 12–17, 28, 29, 32, 33, 36–39, 41–47, 54, 56–58, 61–67, 70–79, 82–84, 92, 96, 100, 104–116, 150–168, , 174, 176, 206–210, 216, 218, 222, 224 Jocelyn, L., 22, 52 Johns Hopkins University, United States, 168 Johnston, M., 197, 203, 228 Jullien, M-A., 4 Kaiser, P., 147 Kam, H.W., 175


220

Kamens, D.H., 2, 19 Kandel, I.L., 5, 19 Kaplan, R.B., 55, 89 Kastberg, D., 22, 52 Kelly, D.L., 23, 27, 28, 39, 52 Kerr, C., 149, 171 King, E.J., 201, 228 King, K., 2 Kitamura, K., 150 Korea, 201 Kuhn, T.S., 199, 228 Kun, C.J., 54 Kutner, M.H., 28, 52 Kwan-Terry, A., 83, 89 Law, S.-S., 91, 118, 120, 145, 221, 228 Lee, K.M., 176 Lehigh Valley, 92, 1233, 136–140 Leow, C.S., 26, 27, 221, 227 LeTendre, G.K., 10, 19 Li, Z., x, 53, 173, 211, 222, 228 Lin, Z.-h., 211, 228 Lipsett, M.S., 4, 229 Lipsey, R.G., 4, 19 Low, S.H., 14, 118, 120, 145, 162 Luukonen, T., 6, 19 Lytle, S., 58, 89 Maasen, L., 147, 171 Maina Ahlberg, B., 197, 228 Mak, K., 228 Malina, D., 7, 19 Mann, H., 4 March, J., 1, 19, 210, 228 Martin, A.O., 23, 27, 28, 39, 52 Masemann, V., 199, 205, 228 May, H., 21, 26, 27, 31, 42, 147, 221, 227, 228 McGinn, N., 6, 19, 197, 228 McNeely, C.L., 6, 19 Meek, F.v.V., 147 Meng, H.-W., 176, 211, 228 Meng, L.K., 176, 196, 211, 228 Messerschmitt, D.S., 7, 19 Metzger, C., 54, 96, 96–98, 145, 221, 227, 228 Meyer, J.W., 2, 19 Miller, J., 200, 228 Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology, Japan, 66, 147, 148, 155, 168, 169, 171, 228 Miquel, J., 6, 19 Mok, K.H., 226, 228 Morgan, K.J., 154, 171, 221, 227, 228


221

Morine-Dershimer, G., 87, 89 Morriss, S.B., 221, 227 Mortimer, K.P., 162 Muller, W., 101, 145 Mullis, I.V.S., 23, 27, 28, 39, 52 Munir, K.O., 205, 227 Murni, D., 55, 59 Myers, C., 5, 19 Nachtschiem, C.J., 28, 52 National Assessment of Educational Progress, United States, 180–186 National Center for Education Statistics, 50, 51, 135, 145, 184 National Centre for Education Development Research, China, 53, 176, 180, 185, 189 National Educational Goals Panel, United States, 22 National Institute for Educational Research, China, 176, 180 National Institute of Education, Singapore, 53, 54, 176, 180, 228 National Science Foundation, United States, 21, 22, 227 Nayar, P.B., 83, 89 Neal, J.E., 7, 19 Nedwek, B.P., 7, 19 Neter, J., 28, 52 Ng, A.S., 93 Ng, K-K., 93 Nichols, J.D., 7, 19 Nordberg, E., 197, 228 Office of International Programs, Graduate School of Education, University of Pennsylvania, 207, 228 Okubo, Y., 6, 19 Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), 147, 175, 177, 178, 182, 191, 196 Osaka, 54 Paige, R., viii Peak, L., 22, 52 Penn, See University of Pennsylvania Pennycook, A., 55, 89 Persson, O., 6, 19 Pescador, O., 226, 229 Pestalozzi, J.H., 4 Peterson, M.F., 203, 229 Philadelphia, United States, 15, 21, 54, 63–80, 83, 209 Popper, K., 225 Prabhu, N.S., 82, 89 Prussia, 4, 5 Purves, A., 10, 19 Ramirez, F.O., 2, 19 Raudenbush, S.W., 28, 52 Readence, J.E., 78, 90


222

Reinisch, H., 94, 144 Research Institute for Higher Education (RIHE), Japan, 147, 148, 211, 221, 228 Rhoten, D., 226, 229 Riddell, R., 4, 19 Riley, R., viii, 54 Root-Bernstein, R.S., 199, 229 Russia, 5 Rust, V.D., 205, 216, 226, 229 Sadler, P., 4, 19 Sarmiento, D., 4 Schmidt, W.H., 26, 50, 52 School District of Philadelphia, 74, 89 Schwartz, T.A., 205, 227 Schwille, J., 10, 19 Senge, P.M., 205, 229 Shama, S., 221, 228 Shanghai, 15, 54, 61–67, 71–78, 82, 83, 157, 176, 208 Shapiro, R., 137, 145 Shavit, Y., 101, 229 Shibuya, M., 226, 229 Shin, S., 21, 27, 52, 227 Shive, G.L., 165, 171, 197, 227, 229 Silver, R.E., 53, 81, 90, 210, 221, 229 Sim, C-K., 93 Singapore, 2, 12–15, 17, 21, 22, 28, 29, 32, 33, 37–47, 49, 53, 54, 57, 58, 59, 61–79, 82–87, 92–96, 100, 104, 116–125, 139, 160, 165, 167, 173–176, 178–183, 186–190, 206–211, 217, 224 Singleton, J.C., 21, 27, 52, 227 Sivertson, G., 6, 19 Skuja-Steele, R. 53, 54 Smith, B.H., 4 Smith, H., 55, 90 Smith, T.A., 23, 27, 28, 39, 52 Soros, G., 225, 229 Soumare, A., 226, 229 Soysal, Y.N., 2, 19 Spain, 24, 25, 201 Spencer, S., 55, 89 St. Gallen, 92, 129 State Statistics Bureau, China, 176, 183, 188 Strobel, O., 221, 228 Sullivan, A., 205, 227 Switzerland, 2, 12–17, 21, 22, 28, 32, 33, 36–39, 41–47, 53, 54, 57, 58, 61–85, 92–97, 100, 104, 125–134, 139, 151, 154, 157, 160, 165, 167, 174, 177, 206, 211, 216, 223, 224 Tan, J., 117, 145, 221, 229 Teichler, U., 11, 161, 166, 171, 221, 229 Terhanian, G., 176, 211, 227 Thailand, 154 Theisen, G.L., 10, 20 Tierney, R.J., 78, 90


223

Tin, W.H., 54, 176 Tokyo, 54, 92, 154 Tollefson, J.W., 55, 90 Tomson, G., 197, 228 Trow, M., 148–152, 157, 165, 166, 171–172 Tsen,W., 221, 229 Turner, H., 227 Twente University, Netherlands, 147 United Nations Development Programme (UNDP), 177 United Nations Education, Science and Cultural Organization, 6, 174, 177, 178, 180, 182, 191 United States, 2–4, 12–17, 21, 28, 29, 32, 33, 36–39, 41–47, 56–58, 63–85, 92, 93, 96–98, 100, 104, 115, 116, 124, 125, 134–144, 154, 158, 160, 173–190, 201, 206–211, 216, 218, 222, 224 U.S. Department of Education, 21, 22, 23, 54, 98, 176, 180, 187, 188, 194 University Council, Japan, 148 University of Applied Sciences, Switzerland, 113, 127, 133 University of Hawaii, 162 University of Pennsylvania, United States, 21, 53, 92, 175, 177, 206, 208, 209, 219, 224 University of Tsukuba, Japan, 154 Vandrick, S., 7, 19 Venezuela, 4 von Vught, F., 171 Wagner, C.S., 6, 9, 20 Waseda University, Japan, 216 Wasserman, W., 28, 52 Weber, L., 156, 160, 163–165, 1′72, 221, 227 Wee, H.T., 176 de Weert, E., 147 Weiss, C.H., 223, 229 Williams, T., 22, 52 Woessmann, L., 26, 52 Wong, S.Y., 94, 109, 145 World Bank, 6, 177, 178 Xin, W., 221, 229 Yamamoto, S., 167, 168, 172, 221, 229 Yamanoi, A., 153, 158, 172, 221, 229 Yates, B.A., 5, 20 Yip, J., x, 53, 218, 220 Yoder, P.S., 7, 20 Zemsky, R., 91, 136, 145, 155, 156, 159, 160, 162, 172, 221, 228, 229 Zeng, G., 21, 27, 52, 227

Learning through Collaborative Research: The Six Nation Education Research Project

Your Education Research Project Handbook

Improving Research through User Engagement (Improving Learning)

Collaborative Research in Multilingual Classrooms

Collaborative Agents - Research and Development

Tom Purdom-Research Project

Improving the Context for Inclusion: Personalising Teacher Development through Collaborative Action Research (Improving Learning)

Latino Education: An Agenda For Community Action Research (National Latino a Education Research and Policy Project)

Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning in Higher Education

Research in education

Strategic Education Research Partnership

Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning in Higher Education

Research Methods in Education

Learning Disabilities: New Research

Learning from Teacher Research

Project Scheduling: A Research Handbook

How to Conduct Collaborative Action Research

How to Conduct Collaborative Action Research

Success With Your Research Project (Study Skills in Education)

Improving Health through Nursing Research

Transforming Combustion Research through Cyberinfrastructure

Collaborative Computational Technologies for Biomedical Research

Participatory Learning in the Early Years: Research and Pedagogy (Routledge Research in Education)

The Frontiers of Project Management Research

Argumentation in Higher Education: Improving Practice Through Theory and Research

The Management of a Student Research Project

Advancing Scientific Research in Education

Advancing Scientific Research In Education

Contributions from Science Education Research

Introduction to research in education

Research Methods in Education - 6e

Learning through Collaborative Research: The Six Nation Education Research Project

Your Education Research Project Handbook

Improving Research through User Engagement (Improving Learning)

Collaborative Research in Multilingual Classrooms

Collaborative Agents - Research and Development

Tom Purdom-Research Project

Improving the Context for Inclusion: Personalising Teacher Development through Collaborative Action Research (Improving Learning)

Latino Education: An Agenda For Community Action Research (National Latino a Education Research and Policy Project)

Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning in Higher Education

Research in education

Strategic Education Research Partnership

Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning in Higher Education

Research Methods in Education

Learning Disabilities: New Research

Learning from Teacher Research

Project Scheduling: A Research Handbook

How to Conduct Collaborative Action Research

How to Conduct Collaborative Action Research

Success With Your Research Project (Study Skills in Education)

Improving Health through Nursing Research

Transforming Combustion Research through Cyberinfrastructure

Collaborative Computational Technologies for Biomedical Research

Participatory Learning in the Early Years: Research and Pedagogy (Routledge Research in Education)

The Frontiers of Project Management Research

Argumentation in Higher Education: Improving Practice Through Theory and Research

The Management of a Student Research Project

Advancing Scientific Research in Education

Advancing Scientific Research In Education

Contributions from Science Education Research

Introduction to research in education

Research Methods in Education - 6e

Recommend Documents