An Elusive Science: The Troubling History of Education Research (review)

Abstract

The good news reported in the Chicago Tribune (6 Sept., p. 14) that math scores of children 9 and 13 years old have improved is somewhat tempered by the observation that at the current rate of improvement it would take 125 years to reach the scores of their counterparts in Singapore and 83 years to reach those of their peers in Japan (assuming that scores in those countries did not improve during those time periods). I am not sure that we need to worry about catching up with anyone, but the report of this as good news does suggest the paucity of truly good news on the public education front. On the reverse of that page of the newspaper we find a report (pp. 1, 15) of the latest scientific findings about cognitive development provided by a consortium of public and private agencies. There is "a growing gap between the new understanding of school readiness and federal policies intended to help children [End Page 134] overcome academic barriers." The design of Head Start (which never did reach more than half of the eligible children) was apparently based on earlier research, which was just as trumpeted as the current report. We now have learned that children need confidence, independence, curiosity, motivation, persistence, self-control, cooperation, empathy, and the ability to communicate to assure success in kindergarten--a challenging agenda for parents, and a daunting one for federal programs for preschool children. Do these and many similar reports make you wonder at all about what education research has been up to?