The Importance of International Benchmarking for U.S. Educational Leaders

Abstract

INTERNATIONAL comparisons of education policy and practice were, until recently, the domain of just a small group of researchers. But with the rapid changes being brought about by globalization, they are fast becoming a significant new tool in the development of educational leaders. Clearly, one of the most pressing challenges facing the U.S. education system today is to maintain the American ideal of local control while producing a national work force that is prepared for global competition. This challenge is a source of ongoing conflict and mixed messages and is likely to be increasingly important in the future. A second major challenge is how to turn around low-performing schools and those with large achievement gaps between subgroups of students. Short-term improvement is often the result of individual leadership and other local variables, but the challenge is to change the system to sustain long-term improvement on a broad scale. While all nations view education as an investment in the future, most nations other than the U.S. treat the challenges of academic performance and of globalization as national priorities. Government officials, educators, and business leaders work closely together to create a coherent national improvement strategy. For example, the minister of education in Singapore, a nation already at the top of international measures of student performance, is advocating reform of that nation's education system to meet the demands of globalization. Singapore's system improvements emphasize the need to develop students' problem-solving skills earlier in their schooling in order to create a more broad-based academic experience and better prepare young people for life beyond school. The United States can learn a lot from the way other nations respond to new challenges. Too often America falls back on the political blame game, caring more about pointing fingers than identifying serious strategies for improving the education system. We don't work as a team--all too often it is government, both state and federal, versus local educators. We need to realize before it is too late that such an approach is a prescription for long-term national disaster. Being exposed to more cohesive systems of education is just one of many ways that educators in the United States can benefit from contact with their peers around the world. Another benefit is that of knowing how we as a nation are performing in our delivery of education to children relative to the performance of other countries. Tools such as the Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS) and the Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) remind us that we still have significant progress to make when it comes to educating our secondary students. As a recent report from the National Assessment of Educational Progress highlights, TIMSS and PISA also give us an opportunity to compare countries' relative performance over time. (1) This study provides some insight as to not only which countries outperform the U.S. but also which ones are making significant gains. In addition, TIMSS and PISA contribute to a common language of education indicators and larger conversations about what elements of an education contribute to long-term success and productivity in higher education and the work force. Finally, competition can be a powerful motivator, and results such as these can be great professional development tools as well. A third benefit of international comparisons is that they offer a fresh perspective. While the circumstances and geography are different, most of the issues educators face are common--poverty, language and cultural differences within a school, level of government control--and looking at how other countries deal with these same issues allows for creative approaches to problem solving. …