1 / 30

Evidence-Based Approach to Policy Making: Case of Germany & United States

Evidence-Based Approach to Policy Making: Case of Germany & United States. Seoul National University Hyun-Jeong Park. Contents. Recent Worldwide Trend of Evidence -Based Approaches Case of Germany Case of United States Meanings to Us.

marshall-george
Download Presentation

Evidence-Based Approach to Policy Making: Case of Germany & United States

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Evidence-Based Approach to Policy Making: Case of Germany & United States Seoul National University Hyun-Jeong Park

  2. ICER Presentation (10/20/2005) Contents • Recent Worldwide Trend of Evidence -Based Approaches • Case of Germany • Case of United States • Meanings to Us

  3. ICER Presentation (10/20/2005) Recent Worldwide Trend of Evidence-Based Approaches (1) • TIMSS(Trends in International Mathematics & Science Study) • To conduct a country comparison to see how competent 4-th and 8-th graders are in the two domains of mathematics and science. • Project Cycles: TIMSS(1995), TIMSS-R(1999), TIMSS 2003, TIMSS 2007 • PISA(Programme for International Student Assessment) • To conduct a country comparison to see how competent 15-year-olds are in the three domains of reading, mathematical and scientific literacy • Project Cycles: PISA 2000, PISA 2003, PISA 2006

  4. ICER Presentation (10/20/2005) Recent Worldwide Trend of Evidence-Based Approaches (2) • Case of Germany & United States • Germany: Strengthen empirical researches on education only recently (due to the main-stream of educational researches following paradigms taken from the humanities). • United States: Relatively strong tradition of empirical researches on education.

  5. ICER Presentation (10/20/2005) Case of Germany PISA Shock Administrative Reactions to PISA Empirical Researches via German Extension of PISA

  6. ICER Presentation (10/20/2005) PISA Shock in Germany (1)

  7. ICER Presentation (10/20/2005) PISA Shock in Germany (2) Differences in the mean reading literacy scores of 15-year-olds from families in the top and bottom quarters of the socioeconomic index

  8. ICER Presentation (10/20/2005) Administrative Reactions to PISA (1) • Actions of German National Level: moving the different education systems from a completely input- controlled to a more output-controlled format • Improving language competencies in preschool & primary school (reading); • Promoting children at risk (low socio-economic/cultural background, migration); • Interlocking Kindergarten and primary school, earlier school enrolment; • Introducing shared educational standards for all 16 states and evaluation programs

  9. ICER Presentation (10/20/2005) Administrative Reactions to PISA (2) • Actions of German Federal State Level: Germany’s largest federal state, “North-Rhine Westphalia” • An all-day school option was implemented at the primary school level to provide cultural activities for all children, particularly for children at risk, in the afternoon (goals no. 1 & 2). • The first two primary school grade levels were changed: Children can now pass these two grade levels in one, two or three years (goal no. 3). • The curriculum of all schools and grade levels has been revised with a new output-oriented focus on student competencies. Furthermore, annual evaluation programs at the fourth and ninth grade levels were introduced (goal no. 4).

  10. ICER Presentation (10/20/2005) German Extension of PISA (1) • PISA-I • For the international study, 5,500 15-year-old students (25 students per school from 220 schools) were tested. • PISA-I PLUS • Two entire ninth grade classes were tested in the 220 schools from the international sample (resulting in approximately 9,000 students). • PISA-E • In order to facilitate a state comparison within Germany, a supplementary national sample (PISA-E) was made, in which 15-year-olds from an additional 1,500 schools, a total of 50,000 students, were tested.

  11. ICER Presentation (10/20/2005) German Extension of PISA (2)

  12. ICER Presentation (10/20/2005) German Extension of PISA (3) Percentage of students across the participating countries performing below or at Proficiency Level I on the reading literacy scale

  13. ICER Presentation (10/20/2005) Case of United States • National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) • No Child Left Behind (NCLB) Act • NAEP under ACLB Act • Other Longitudinal Studies

  14. ICER Presentation (10/20/2005) 1. National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) What is NAEP? Main NAEP State NAEP Long-Term Trend

  15. ICER Presentation (10/20/2005) What is NAEP? (1) • The National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), also known as "the Nation's Report Card," is the only nationally representative and continuing assessment of what America's students know and can do in various subject areas. • Since 1969, assessments have been conducted periodically in reading, mathematics, science, writing, U.S. history, civics, geography, and the arts.

  16. ICER Presentation (10/20/2005) What is NAEP? (2) • NAEP does not provide scores for individual students or schools; instead, it offers results regarding subject-matter achievement, instructional experiences, and school environment for populations of students (e.g., fourth-graders) and groups within those populations (e.g., female students, Hispanic students). NAEP results are based on a sample of student populations of interest.

  17. ICER Presentation (10/20/2005) National NAEP • National NAEP reports statistical information about student performance and factors related to educational performance for the nation and for specific student groups in the population (e.g. race/ethnicity, gender). It includes students drawn from both public and nonpublic (private) schools and reports results for student achievement at grades 4, 8, and 12.

  18. ICER Presentation (10/20/2005) State NAEP • Since 1990, NAEP assessments have also been conducted to give results for participating states. Those that choose to participate receive assessment results that report on the performance of students in that state. • In its content, the state assessment is identical to the assessment conducted nationally. However, because the national NAEP samples were not, and are not currently designed to support the reporting of accurate and representative state-level results, separate representative samples of students are selected for each participating jurisdiction/state .

  19. ICER Presentation (10/20/2005) Long-Term Trend NAEP • Designed to give information on the changes in academic performance of America's youth • Administered nationally every four years (but are not reported at state or district level) and report student performance at ages 9, 13, and 17 in mathematics and reading. • Measuring trends of student achievement or change over time requires the precise replication of past procedures. • Therefore, the long-term trend instrument does not evolve based on changes in curricula or in educational practices, unlike the main NAEP national and state assessments.

  20. ICER Presentation (10/20/2005) 2. No Child Left Behind Act (2001) Stronger Accountability for Results More Freedom for States & Communities Encouraging Proven Education Methods More Choices for Parents

  21. ICER Presentation (10/20/2005) Stronger Accountability for Results • States must describe how they will close the achievement gap and make sure all students, including those who are disadvantaged, achieve academic proficiency. They must produce annual state and school district report cards that inform parents and communities about state and school progress. • Schools that do not make progress must provide supplemental services, such as free tutoring or after-school assistance; take corrective actions; and, if still not making adequate yearly progress after five years, make dramatic changes to the way the school is run.

  22. ICER Presentation (10/20/2005) More Freedom for States & Communities • It is possible for most school districts to transfer up to 50 percent of the federal formula grant funds they receive to any one of these programs, or to their Title I program, without separate approval. This allows districts to use funds for any educational purpose authorized under the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, as amended by the NCLB Act in order to assist them in making adequate yearly progress and narrowing achievement gaps.

  23. ICER Presentation (10/20/2005) Encouraging Proven Education Methods • No Child Left Behind puts special emphasis on determining what educational programs and practices have been proven effective through rigorous scientific research. Federal funding is targeted to support these programs and teaching methods that work to improve student learning and achievement. • Reading programs are an example. No Child Left Behind supports scientifically based reading instruction programs in the early grades under the new Reading First program and in preschool under the new Early Reading First program.

  24. ICER Presentation (10/20/2005) More Choices for Parents • The No Child Left Behind Act allows parents to choose other public schools or take advantage of free tutoring if their child attends a school that needs improvement. Also, parents can choose another public school if the school their child attends is unsafe. The law also supports the growth of more independent charter schools, funds some services for children in private schools, and provides certain protections for homeschooling parents. • Finally, it requires that states and local school districts provide information to help parents make informed educational choices for their child.

  25. ICER Presentation (10/20/2005) 3. NAEP Under No Child Left Behind (1) • Expanding NAEP’s Mission: • In 1990, NAEP began offering states the opportunity to participate in state-level assessments in reading,mathematics, science, and writing. Generally, 40 to 45 states elected to participate in the state NAEPassessments. • Beginning in 2003, the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 required all states and school districtsreceiving federal Title I funds to participate in biennial NAEP reading and mathematics assessments at thefourth and eighth grades (Required NAEP Assessments).

  26. ICER Presentation (10/20/2005) 3. NAEP Under No Child Left Behind (2) • Required NAEP Assessments: • Additional Assessments: • NAEP will conduct a national assessment and may conduct a state assessment in reading and mathematics in grade 12 at regularly scheduled intervals. • To the extent that time and money allow, NAEP will be conducted in grades 4, 8, and 12 at regularly scheduled intervals in additional subjects including writing, science, history, geography, civics, economics, foreign language, and arts.

  27. ICER Presentation (10/20/2005) * NAEP Schedule *

  28. ICER Presentation (10/20/2005) 4. Other Longitudinal Studies

  29. ICER Presentation (10/20/2005) Meanings to Us…. • Educational Policy Issues in Korea • Equalization Policy in High Schools • Policies on College Entrance, including the policies on the autonomy of universities during the student selection process • … • Public access to the relevant data source should be guaranteed and the empirical researches based on these data should be more encouraged to produce more sound policy decisions on Education.

  30. Without Data, You Are Just Another Person With An Opinion! Thank You !

More Related