Minnesota State TIMSS Press Statement by William H. Schmidt 11:00 AM CST, St. Paul, MN

U.S. National Research Center Statement By Professor William H. Schmidt National Research Coordinator For U.S. TIMSS Michigan State University, College Of Education

Contact Information: Karen Twigg, MSU Media Relations 517-355-2281 Jacqueline Babcock, College of Education, MSU, 517-353-7755 Four months ago the U.S. National Research Center for the Third International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS) released its eighth grade report to the nation. The achievement results comparing U.S. performance to that of other nations were disappointing, especially in mathematics. Today, Minnesota released its TIMSS achievement results and they are both encouraging and disappointing. In science Minnesota students were significantly outperformed only by Singapore and in fact, together with Singapore achieved the highest score in earth science. In mathematics their performance placed them in the middle, much like the U.S. as a whole and significantly better than only 12 other countries, none of which are major U.S. trading partners. This is in contrast to the fact that Minnesota students rank at the very top in a comparison of states on the National Assessment.

More importantly, the Minnesota results show that children in the United States can do well when their curriculum is focused and coherent and is based on a common set of standards for all children.

In Minnesota, at eighth grade there is a statewide consensus followed by virtually all districts that science instruction should focus on earth science. That same consensus focuses instruction at seventh and ninth grades on life and physical science, respectively. This consensus operates like voluntary state standards, defining what all students should learn at each grade level.

Eighth grade science teachers in Minnesota respond by teaching four main earth science topics providing a major amount of instructional time on each one. In addition, the teachers who teach eighth grade science have specialized training in earth science.
The results are astonishing. Using TIMSS for comparison, Minnesota essentially ranks number one in the world in earth science along with Singapore. This would seem to imply that U.S. students can compete when presented with a focused coherent curriculum based on grade specific standards applicable to all students. These results are consistent with the conclusions of U.S. reports released earlier explaining why we as a nation did not do as well as we had hoped. It is also encouraging, suggesting that if one of our state educational systems with a clear vision of goals in science education can achieve as well as the better national educational systems, our entire nation could do as well. Nothing appears to stand in our way except our splintered vision of what to do in mathematics and science education.
The discouraging side of the story, once again, involves mathematics. Just a few weeks ago the U.S. Department of Education released the National Assessment (NAEP) results and reported that mathematics performance for the nation was improving. The state NAEP comparisons placed Minnesota as the top performing state in the nation in mathematics tied with three other states. Yet internationally, Minnesota was found in the middle, ranking twentieth with achievement levels not significantly different from the U.S. as a whole and outperforming only 12 other countries. Being number one in the U.S. does not result in achievement significantly better than the U.S. as a whole on the TIMSS test.
Why would these same children that performed so well in science and especially in earth science do so much more poorly in mathematics? Not surprisingly, the answer seems to be that there is no corresponding statewide consensus that drives mathematics instruction. The same unfocused, fragmented vision that guides U.S. instruction operates in Minnesota. The tracking that dominates U.S. classrooms is also present in Minnesota reserving algebra for only the chosen few. In short, the mile wide inch deep characterization of the U.S. curriculum also affects Minnesota in mathematics.
The curriculum seems to be the difference. The same splintered vision that dominates U.S. practice in mathematics dominates Minnesota practice. In science, the Minnesota vision is focused and coherent, not splintered.

The implications for the nation as a whole are profound.

U.S. students can be the best in the world when we give them a curriculum that is focused and coherent and that is delivered by teachers well trained in the content being offered at that level.
Even the same students who performed as the world's best in earth science do not do well in mathematics when they are given a mathematics curriculum that is a "mile wide and an inch deep".
Standards defined for all children even when based on a consensus model across local districts can have a powerful impact on achievement.
Teachers well prepared in their subject matter are important in delivering a focused standards based curriculum.
Minnesota shows the nation a way to achieve what we want for all of our children and it shows us that we can achieve our goals if only we have the will.
It points us toward a focused, coherent and well articulated set of national standards of what we as a nation want all of our students to learn in mathematics and science.