http://www.nytimes.com/2005/11/21/opinion/21mon4.html?th&emc=th
Editorial Observer
By BRENT STAPLES
Published:
NYT - November 21, 2005
Ref : "The
Teaching Gap," by James Stigler and James Hiebert
The United States will become a second-rate economic
power unless it can match the educational performance of its rivals abroad
and get more of its
students to achieve at the highest levels in math, science and literacy.
Virtually every politician, business leader and educator understands this, yet
the country has no national plan for reaching the goal. To make matters worse, Americans have remained openly
hostile to the idea of importing strategies from the countries that are beating
the pants off us in the educational arena.
The No Child Left Behind
Act, passed four years ago, was supposed to put this problem on the national
agenda. Instead, the country has gotten bogged down in a squabble about a part
of the law that requires annual testing in the early grades to ensure that the
states are closing the achievement gap. The testing debate heated up last month
when national math and reading scores showed dismal performance across the
board.
Lurking behind these test
scores, however, are two profoundly important and closely intertwined topics
that the United States has yet to even approach: how teachers are trained and how they teach what they teach.
These issues get a great deal of attention in high-performing systems abroad -
especially in Japan, which stands light years ahead of us in international
comparisons.
Americans tend to roll
their eyes when researchers raise the Japanese comparison. The most common
response is that Japanese culture is "nothing like ours."
Nevertheless, the Japanese system has features that could be fruitfully
imitated here, as the education reformers James Stigler and James Hiebert
pointed out in their book "The Teaching Gap," published in 1999.
The book has spawned
growing interest in the Japanese teacher-development strategy in which teachers
work cooperatively and intensively to improve their methods. This process,
known as "lesson study," allows teachers to revise and refine lessons
that are then shared with others, sometimes through video and sometimes at
conventions. In addition to helping novices, this system builds a publicly
accessible body of knowledge about what works in the classroom.
The lesson-study groups
focus on refining methods that improve student understanding. In doing so, the
groups go step by step, laying out successful strategies for teaching specific
lessons. This reflects the Japanese view that successful teaching is the
product of intensive teacher development and self-scrutiny. In America, by
contrast, novice teachers are often presumed competent on Day One. They have
few opportunities in their careers to watch successful colleagues in action. We
also tend to believe that educational change would happen overnight - if only
we could find the right formula. This often leaves us prey to fads that put
schools on the wrong track.
There are two other things
that set this country apart from its high-performing peers abroad. One is the
American sense that teaching is a skill that people come by naturally. We also
have a curriculum that varies widely by region. The countries that are leaving us behind in math and
science decide at the national level what students should learn and when. The
schools are typically overseen by ministries of education that spend a great
deal of time on what might be called educational quality control.
The United States, by
contrast, has 50 different sets of standards for 50 different states - and
within states, the quality of education depends largely on the neighborhood
where the student lives. No Child Left Behind was meant to cure this problem by
penalizing states that failed to improve student performance, as measured by
annual tests.
The states have gotten around the new law by setting state
standards as low as possible and making state tests easy. This strategy was
exposed as fraudulent just last month, when states that had performed so well
on their own exams performed dismally on the alternative and more rigorous test
known as the National Assessment of Educational Progress.
No Child Left Behind was
based on the premise that embarrassing test scores and government sanctions
would simply force schools to improve educational outcomes for all students.
What has become clear, however, is that school systems and colleges of
education have no idea how to generate changes in teaching that would allow
students to learn more effectively. Indeed, state systems that have typically filled teaching
positions by grabbing any warm body they could find are only just
beginning to think about the issue at all.
Faced with lagging test scores and pressure from the federal government,
some school officials have embraced the dangerous but all-too-common view that
millions of children are incapable of high-level learning. This would be seen
as heresy in Japan. But it is fundamental to the American system,
which was designed in the
19th century to provide rigorous education for only about a fifth of the
students, while channeling the rest into farm and factory jobs that no longer
exist.
The United States will need
a radically different mind set to catch up with high-performing competitors.
For starters we will need to focus
as never before on the
process through which teachers are taught to teach. We will also need to
drop the arrogance and xenophobia that have blinded us to successful models
developed abroad.