Educational Policies Commission Research Articles

What’s in a name: Education and the Disadvantaged American (1962)

Education and the Disadvantaged American represented an attempt by the leaders of the American elementary and secondary education enterprise to come to terms with the failure to learn of a significant portion of the school population. The dimension of race surrounded the discussion leading to publication, but it was never addressed straightforwardly. Rather, the EPC chose to bypass race in favor of various notions of cultural disadvantage or other forms of a cultural deficit model. This choice led not to an effective document, but to a publication that skirted the major issue involved in the situation, race, while being just as negative in its discussion of cultural difference as any racist might be in considering minority races. Sources for this paper include the verbatim records of the deliberations of the Educational Policies Commission, over a two year period as it considered the problem of what to do about non‐learners in schools. The eventual document produced and named in the title of this article is another source. The major secondary source for the article is Barry Franklin’s From Backwardness to At Risk, the most scholarly sound history of special education in the USA. Franklin’s acceptance of the possible positive result in using the term “at risk” in framing policies for non‐learners is called into question, however. He sees at risk as a cultural term but this is precisely how the Educational Policies Commission viewed the term disadvantage. Thus the article concludes that the term “at risk,” as used by Franklin and the organizers of ISCHE 29, has the same problematic aspects that severely weakened the EPC publication.

Why Study the Educational Policies Commission?

It is an honor to be asked to give this address at GERA. To acknowledge that honor briefly, and with my tongue in my cheek a bit, let me start with a brief account of my own contact with GERA, and its parent organization, AERA. This account is offered to indicate how one like me who does historical research in education has interacted with the movers and shakers in our professional educational research organizations, who largely do not do such research, over the past three decades.

Equity and Excellence: Providing Access to Gifted Education for Culturally Diverse Students

Lacking both Incentive and opportunity, the probabilities are very great that, however superior one's gifts may be, he will rarely live a life of high achievement. Follow-up studies of highly gifted young Negroes...reveal a shocking waste of talent--a waste that adds an incalculable amount to the price of prejudice in this country. (Educational Policies Commission, 1950, p. 33) As the aforementioned quote suggests, a mind is not only a terrible thing to waste, a mind [1] is a terrible thing to erase. That is to say, we are wasting and erasing gifts and talents when we do not recognize the strengths of students. primary premise of this article is that the under-representation of diverse students in gifted education centers on the debate between excellence and equity, which is grounded in a perspective about culturally diverse populations. This thinking effectively hinders educators from recognizing the gifts and talents of students who are different from the dominant culture. Hindrances to Progress Recognizing the loss of talent among diverse students who are not being identified as gifted, Congress (1988) passed legislation (i.e., Javits Act) to promote the interests of gifted students; its major goal is to support efforts to identify and serve minority [2] and low SES students. This legislation requires that about half of the funded projects serve low socioeconomic status (SES) students. Moreover, the National Association for Gifted Children (1997) published a position statement urging educators to use more than one test to make educational and placement decisions about gifted students and to seek equity in their identification and assessment instruments, policies, and procedures. Despite these initiatives, little has changed in the demographics of gifted education (or the practices and instruments used to identify gifted students). In a 1996 article, Ford examined reports that focused on the demographics of gifted education nationally. trends revealed that Black, Hispanic, and Native American st udents have always been under-represented in gifted education and, in some years, their under-representation increased rather than decreased. Why do culturally diverse students persist in being underrepresented in gifted education? While a majority of publications point to testing and assessment issues, experiences suggest that the primary barrier is the pervasive deficit orientation that prevails in society and schools. After examining this orientation, we discuss symptoms of this orientation, such as the low referral rates of diverse students for gifted education services and the heavy reliance (sometimes exclusive reliance) on tests that inadequately capture the strengths and cultural orientations of diverse students. Deficit Ideologies: Limiting Access and Opportunity Perceptions about differences among students manifest themselves in various ways, and they exert a powerful influence in educational settings. A common saying among African Americans is The less we know about each other, the more we make up. For instance, if a teacher does not understand how some cultural groups value cooperation or communalism over competition, that teacher may perceive the diverse child as being too social. Communalism is a commitment to social relationships and social learning (e.g., working in groups, helping others). It is a we, us, our philosophical orientation (see Boykin, 1994; Shade, Oberg, & Kelly, 1997). Likewise, if teachers do not understand that some cultures come from an oral tradition, they may neither recognize nor appreciate the strengths of students who prefer speaking more than writing and reading. They may not recognize that students who speak nonstandard English can still have strong verbal skills. Thus, teachers may not refer culturally and linguistically diverse students for gifted education services if they equate giftedness with verbal, reading, and/or writing proficiency. …

Measuring thinking with standardized science tests

AbstractAccording to the Educational Policies Commission, the central purpose of education in this country is to lead students to develop the ability to think. No standard way exists to measure whether or not the schools are achieving that purpose. The EPC identified 10 rational powers as constituting the essence of the ability to think. The research reported here was done to ascertain which rational powers are measured by commercially‐available, standardized tests in science. A universe of standardized tests was defined and 12 specific tests were randomly selected for analysis. All instruments were validated by a panel of experts, as was a training program for the four teacher‐evaluators who applied previously‐evaluated criteria to each test item to determine which rational powers had to be used in responding to the item. Seven of the 12 standardized tests analyzed in the research required that students use only the rational power of recall in responding. In fact, approximately 90% of the items analyzed from all tests required only recall. Students were required to use other rational powers only rarely when responding to a test item and the use of the rational powers of comparing, imagining, and analyzing was not necessary on any of the test items examined. The conclusion was drawn that the producers of standardized tests are not concerned with measuring student achievement of the rational powers.The purpose which runs throught and strengthens all other educational purposes—; the common thread of education—; is the development of the ability to think.

The nature of advanced reasoning and science instruction

AbstractAlthough the development of reasoning is recognized as an important goal of science instruction, its nature remains somewhat of a mystery. This article discusses two key questions: Does formal thought constitute a structured whole? And what role does propositional logic play in advanced reasoning? Aspects of a model of advanced reasoning are presented in which hypothesis generation and testing are viewed as central processes in intellectual development. It is argued that a number of important advanced reasoning schemata are linked by these processes and should be made a part of science instruction designed to improve students' reasoning abilities.Concerning students' development and use of formal reasoning, Linn (1982) calls for research into practical issues such as the roles of task‐specific knowledge and individual differences in performance, roles not emphasized by Piaget in his theory and research. From a science teacher's point of view, this is good advice. Accordingly, this article will expand upon some of the issues raised by Linn in a discussion of the nature of advanced reasoning which attempts to reconcile the apparent contradiction between students' differential use of advanced reasoning schemata in varying contexts with the notion of a general stage of formal thought. Two key questions will be discussed: Does formal thought constitute a structured whole? And what role does propositional logic play in advanced reasoning? The underlying assumption of the present discussion is that, among other things, science instruction should concern itself with the improvement of students' reasoning abilities (cf. Arons, 1976; Arons & Karplus, 1976; Bady, 1979; Bauman, 1976; Educational Policies Commission, 1966; Herron, 1978; Karplus, 1979; Kohlberg & Mayer, 1972; Moshman & Thompson, 1981; Lawson, 1979; Levine & linn, 1977; Pallrand, 1977; Renner & Lawson, 1973; Sayre & Ball, 1975; Schneider & Renner, 1980; Wollman, 1978). The questions are of interest because to date they lack clear answers, yet clear answers are necessary if we hope to design effective instruction in reasoning.

Conceptions of Science and Learning Science

of Science has adopted a Statement of Purposes and Objectives that claims Education in science, like education in letters and arts, will enlarge the child's appreciation of his world; it will also lead him to a better understanding of the range and limits of man's control over nature.' These ends are ensured because procedures of scientific enquiry, learned not as a canon of rules but as ways of finding answers, can be applied without limit. The well-taught child will approach human behavior and social structure and the claims of authority with the same spirit of alert skepticism that he adopts toward scientific theories.2 The Educational Policies Commission has

An analysis of the effects of arithmetic homework upon the arithmetic achievement of third-grade pupils

A substantial part of the elementary student's day is commonly devoted to the preparation of home-study assignments. A National Education Association Teacher Opinion Poll [7]* revealed that 83.5 percent of all elementary teachers surveyed favored the use of homework in the teaching of elementary school students. G. W. Bond [1] surveyed 77 school districts in the state of New York to determine their homework practices. He found that 90 percent of those schools surveyed had formal homework beginning by the fourth grade or earlier. Students in Grade six were expected to complete an average of 50 minutes of homework daily, while those in the lower grades had proportionally less homework assigned. When one considers that the elementary school day is usually less than six hours, the addition of up to one hour's work at home represents a significant part of the total educational effort. The importance of homework was stressed by the Educational Policies Commission of the National Education Association [4], which listed homework as one of ten contemporary issues in elementary education.

School-Related Attitudes in Middle-School Age Students

Much has been written on American education and various proposals for administrative and curricular changes have been offered to cure its alleged shortcomings (e.g., Committee for Economic Development, 1968; Conant, 1959; Educational Policies Commission, 1961). Interestingly, however, children themselves have been rather consistently left out of the recommendationmaking process. Thus, we find little, if any, information on how pupils themselves perceive the school curriculum and personnel. In the same vein, not much is known of the possible variations in these perceptions as a function of pupil sex, grade, or subgroups (private vs. public schools, normal vs. disturbed children, Orientals vs. Indians, etc.). Coleman (1961) and Tannenbaum (1962), among others, gave some evidence that academic concern does not occupy a central place in the mind of a typical high school student. Even so, it is an interesting question to ask whether he reacts uniformly to every academic subject. Yamamoto and Wiersma (1968) showed with 120 college students in education that there are indeed

The Role of the Fine Arts in Education

The recommendations in the following article are those of the Educational Policies Commission of the American Association of School Administrators and the National Education Association of the United States. While publication of this policy state- ment does not constitute formal approval by the sponsoring associations, it is being circulated widely among school administrators. Music educators who may wish to amplify, correct, or debate the views presented are invited to do so in letters, or articles. The statement is reprinted with permission.—Ed.

An Interview Test of Critical Thinking

THE ABILITY to think critically is generally I considered to be one of the skills teachers should attempt to develop in their students. The desira bility of this skill is reflected in recommenda tions of such authoritative bodies as the Educa tional Policies Commission, the Harvard Fac ulty, and the American Council on Education (1). There have been many attempts to measure the ability to think critically. One of the first major attempts resulted in the construction of the Watson-Glazer Test of Critical Thinking, which at the present time appears to be the major meas urement approach utilized in studies of critical thinking. A more recent test developed by Ennis (2) is intended to obviate some of the limitations inherent in the Watson-Glazer. A problem of interest both to educators and psychologists is the extent to which critical thinking skills manifest themselves beyond the paper and pencil test-taking situation. To study this question, Reilly (4) developed a test designed to measure a student's ability to apply knowledge in circumstances not directly learned in the class room situation. A science scrapbook was prepared containing 40 newspaper clippings matched in content or idea to 40 items on a previously given physics test. The students were asked to agree or disagree with the accuracy of the newspaper clippings. There have been other devices of a test nature somewhat similar to this (3, 1). It will be noted, however, that these attempts, while less obviously purporting to measure criitical think ing, still are limited by the paper and pencil for mat, a limitation which would appear to be rather important. This paper reports an attempt to evaluate criti cal thinking through a structured interview with the student. This approach appears to have the following merits: First, it is not identified as a test and in particular is not identified as directly related to critical thinking or reasoning but merely seeks to examine the student's opinions and the reasons for the opinions which he holds on a particular topic. Second, the topic about which opinions are sought is one which is believed to be of some interest and importance generally and particularly to high school students so that | one might have some confidence in generalizing to other aspects of their every-day life. The interview consists of 12 items pertaining to the topic of sleep learning of which ten are scored. The 12 items along with samples of the scoring guides for each are presented at the end of this article. The interview was administered to 59 high-school juniors and recorded on tape. Each interview took approximately five minutes. The scoring procedure was developed by hav ing three individuals, all with background in logic or critical thinking, independently score a sample of 70 responses. Using a six point scale the raters agreed within a three point range on all responses except four. On these four items two of the judges discussed the items and arrived at the final assignment. The remaining item scores were determined by averaging the judg ments of the three raters. Following this the pro tocols of each of the subjects were scored using the examples so derived. The score for each indi vidual was a summation of his scores on the 12 items. The objectivity of the scoring system was evaluated by having two independent scorers score 47 interviews. A correlation of .85 was at tained between the two sets of scores. The split-half reliability adjusted by the Spearman-Brown formula was found to be .64. In addition to the logical validity implicit in the development of the scoring system, the following validity data were obtained. In each case the standard error of r is .16 or smaller. The correla tion with the Watson-Glazer Test of Critical Thinking was .58. The correlation with the I.D.S. Test of Critical Thinking was .54. The correla tion with teachers' ratings of critical thinking based on one year's experience with the same stu dents during which a concerted attempt to teach critical thinking was integrated into the Ameri can history course resulted in a correlation of .60. An additional attempt at validation consisted of comparing the C.I. scores of one group of students prior to an instructional period in criti cal thinking with the scores of a second group of students who had completed the course work in critical thinking, the expectation being that the scores of the students having completed the

The Gifted Student Program of the BSCS

Of the multitude and diversity of natural resources of our country, the human resource, constituting the youth of high intellectual abilities and special talents, will probably exert the greatest influence in guiding the destiny of our democratic society and the molding of our American culture. We, as educators, are concerned not so much with the hoarding of this most valuable resource as with the wisest use of it. We aim to guide our able youth so that they may make the most effective and productive use of their abilities to help realize their personal aspirations and, concomitantly, promote the w-elfare of their country. The Gifted Student Committee of the BSCS was organized in 1960 and was charged with the responsibility for developing materials especially designed for coping with the needs of gifted high school biology students who could conceivably become research biologists if they were properly incubated and subsequently nurtured. The art of investigation was to be emphasized. Before I tell about the publications that have been produced by the Gifted Study Committee, I should like to give a brief characterization of a gifted student. The Educational Policies Commission has suggested that students who are highly gifted have I.Q.'s of 137 or more, and that those with I.Q.'s between 120 and 136 are moderately gifted. Furthermore, the gifted usually express themselves clearly and accurately. They read one or two years ahead of their class and are one to two years ahead of their class in mathematics. They grasp abstract concepts better than the average. They want to know the reasons for things instead of just accepting them. There are more characteristics but these are basic. Characterizing the gifted student in biology is not quite so definitive. In addition to the attributes of the generally gifted that have just been mentioned he mayevidence the following: He participates in biology club activities; uses his leisure time for biology hobbies; reads scientific literature, particularly in biology, beyond the demands of school assignments; participates in science fairs and other contests; volunteers to undertake special science reports or projects in connection w7ith class work; attends meetings of junior and adult science societies in the community; visits scientific institutions such as museums, botanical and zoological gardens, industrial plants and research laboratories; uses his parents' allowance and gift money for the purchase of scientific materials and books; collects and explores for objects of biological or ecological interest; applies for membership in summer institutes, honors courses, and other special provisions for gifted biology students; and indicates aspirations and sets goals toward a career in science. Briefly, the gifted or able biology student may be recognized as one who shows a deep involvement in some area, some problem in the biological sciences. He works well, and he works hard and long at it. Here are one or two examples that may elucidate the characterization: After reading about conjugation in Paramecium and in Spirogyra a student ponders on a problem such as: How is it possible for two Spirogyra cells to have their contents enclosed within the walls of one cell after conjugation? He reads Smith's book, Fresh Water Algae of the United States and learns about the development of small contractile vacuoles in the protoplasts of conjugating Spirogyra cells. He is intrigued by the fact that although conjugating cells of Paramecium and Spirogyra look alike, they have different physiological qualities. His persistence in finding out more about sexuality leads him to the studies by Tracy Sonneborn on mating types of Paramecizum.

Purpose Into Practice

Click to increase image sizeClick to decrease image size NotesWarren G. Bennis, “Revisionist Theory of Leadership,” Harvard Business Review, Vol. 39, No. 1 (Jan.-Feb., 1961), p. 26.Andrew W. Halpin, “Jargon … Sacred and Profane,” Phi Delta Kappan, Vol. 43, No. 6 (Mar., 1962), p. 237.Elizabeth M. Drews, Guidance for the Academically Talented Student (Report of a conference sponsored by the American Personnel and Guidance Association and the National Education Association), Washington, D.C.: N.E.A., 1961.“The Central Purpose of American Education,” NEA Journal, Sept., 1961, p. 14, reprinted from Part I of The Central Purpose of Education (Educational Policies Commission of NEA & CASSA).The National Council of Teachers of English, The National Interest and the Teaching of English, Champaign, Illinois: N.C.T.E., 1961, p. 15.

The Effectiveness of Short-term Group Counseling Upon the Academic Achievement of Potentially Superior but Underachieving College Freshmen

(1961). The Effectiveness of Short-term Group Counseling Upon the Academic Achievement of Potentially Superior but Underachieving College Freshmen. The Journal of Educational Research: Vol. 55, No. 4, pp. 169-173.

Spotlight on NEA: The Educational Policies Commission

Spotlight on NEA: The Educational Policies Commission

Government, Administration, Co-Ordination, and Financing of Higher Education

of the pertinent books appearing during the last six years: those by Carmichael (11), Clark (15), Donovan (23), Glenny (30), Henderson (35), Henninger (38), Keezer (44), Medsker (49), Moos and Rourke (52), Perkins (59), Stoke (68), Woodburne (73), and Wriston (74); also the reports of the President's Committee on Education Beyond the High School (60), the Educational Policies Commission of the National Education Association (53), and the Committee on Government and Higher Education (18). The period immediately preceding 1954 was treated by Henderson and Jorgensen (36) in an earlier number of the REVIEW.

The American High School Today . A first report to interested citizens. James B. Conant. McGraw-Hill, New York, 1959. xiii + 140 pp. Cloth, $2.95; paper, $1.; An Essay on Quality in Public Education . Educational Policies Commission. National Education Association of the United States, Washington, D.C., 1959. 31 pp. $0.35.

<i>The American High School Today</i> . A first report to interested citizens. James B. Conant. McGraw-Hill, New York, 1959. xiii + 140 pp. Cloth, $2.95; paper, $1.; <i>An Essay on Quality in Public Education</i> . Educational Policies Commission. National Education Association of the United States, Washington, D.C., 1959. 31 pp. $0.35.

The American High School Today . A first report to interested citizens. James B. Conant. McGraw-Hill, New York, 1959. xiii + 140 pp. Cloth, $2.95; paper, $1.; An Essay on Quality in Public Education . Educational Policies Commission. National Education Association of the United States, Washington, D.C., 1959. 31 pp. $0.35.

<i>The American High School Today</i> . A first report to interested citizens. James B. Conant. McGraw-Hill, New York, 1959. xiii + 140 pp. Cloth, $2.95; paper, $1.; <i>An Essay on Quality in Public Education</i> . Educational Policies Commission. National Education Association of the United States, Washington, D.C., 1959. 31 pp. $0.35.

Evaluation of their High School Curriculum by Prospective Teachers

IN ALL PROBABILITY the most widely accepted statement of the goals of secondary education in the United States is the one which appeared in Educa tion for All American Youth, prepared by the Educational Policies Commission and published in 1938. This statement of goals was presented in terms of ten imperative needs of secondary school students. How effectively the schools are coping with these needs has been the subject of many studies reported in numerous articles and books. Altogether too infrequently, however, have there been inquiries directed to high school graduates themselves to discover their judgments concerning the adequacy of the curriculum they have experienced. It would seem, therefore, that the evaluations of the consumers of the secondary school program have been neglected and that greater attention should be given to their appraisals . Extent to which needs were met in high school?In this article there are re ported the responses made by three hundred prospective teachers enrolled at the University of California, Los Angeles, in evaluation of the curriculum in the high school which they had attended. The UCLA students were enrolled in an introductory education course and were, in the main, graduates from high schools located in Southern California. Since they had expressed the intention to become teachers, it was assumed that their opinions concerning the high school curriculum would be discriminating and possibly more favorable than opinions from other groups of high school graduates. First of all the UCLA students were asked to read carefully the list of im perative needs as stated by the Educational Policies Commission and then to indicate to what extent they believed their own high school curriculum had been useful in helping them meet each of the needs. They were asked to us e num bers from 0 through 10, the number 0 to be used if it was believed that no help whatsoever was given them in meeting the stated need and the num ber 10 if great help was believed to have been given. Table I shows the mean average rating given by the 300 students with regard to each of the ten needs. As shown in Table I, the prospective teachers considered their high school curriculum to be most effective in meeting their needs for (1) citizenship ed ucation, (2) health education, and (3) aesthetic appreciation. Other needs be lieved by these students to be rather well met in the high school were (4) ethi cal and human-relations education, (5) science education, and (6) 3 R edu cation. A mediocre rating was given the high school's contribution to meeting

Sane and Moderate: Manpower and Education, a report by the Educational Policies Commission of the National Education Association of the United States and the American Association of School Administrators

"Sane and Moderate: Manpower and Education, a report by the Educational Policies Commission of the National Education Association of the United States and the American Association of School Administrators." The Journal of Higher Education, 29(3), p. 174

Symposium. Manpower and Education. Washington, D. C. (1201 Sixteenth Street, N.W.): Educational Policies Commission, 1956. 127 P. $1.25

Science EducationVolume 41, Issue 3 p. 241-242 Book Review Symposium. Manpower and Education. Washington, D. C. (1201 Sixteenth Street, N.W.): Educational Policies Commission, 1956. 127 P. $1.25 First published: April 1957 https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.3730410343AboutPDF ToolsRequest permissionExport citationAdd to favoritesTrack citation ShareShare Give accessShare full text accessShare full-text accessPlease review our Terms and Conditions of Use and check box below to share full-text version of article.I have read and accept the Wiley Online Library Terms and Conditions of UseShareable LinkUse the link below to share a full-text version of this article with your friends and colleagues. Learn more.Copy URL Share a linkShare onFacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditWechat No abstract is available for this article. Volume41, Issue3April 1957Pages 241-242 RelatedInformation