“Randomized trials are the gold standard for determining what works.” —Grover J. Whitehurst, Director, Institute of Education Sciences, AERA Conference, April 22, 2003.

“[AERA] expresses dismay that the DOE…is devoting singular attention to this one tool of
science [randomized trials], jeopardizing a broader range of problems best addressed through other
scientific methods.” —AERA Council Resolution, January 26, 2003.

The Bush-backed education plan, which reauthorized the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, increased pressure on schools to raise student achievement based on yearly target goals or be subject to stiff penalties. The Act also defined what constitutes rigorous scientific methods for conducting research in education, and listed “scientifically based research” as a condition for receipt of federal funds. Never before had Congress given such precise direction to researchers in any academic field on how to conduct their job.

Pushing a Particular Agenda

Concurrent with this policy shift was the appointment by the Bush administration of new key staff to the DOE and its main research arm, the Institute of Education Sciences (IES), which replaced the Office of Educational Research and Improvement (OERI).These new administrators share a skepticism regarding the quality and usefulness of most current and past educational research, because it fails to use a certain sciscientific method that is more commonly used in such fields as medicine, agriculture, and psychology.

Changes within the DOE and criticism of educational research are occurring at a time when public education issues have become highly politicized. Political leaders, talk show hosts, and others with easy access to the public—including many with no or little expertise in teaching and learning—are frequently heard weighing in on one side or the other of issues such as phonics, bilingual education, and “back-to-basics.”

At the same time,“report cards” of schools’ and districts’ student performance on standardized tests are being widely publicized, both on the Internet and frequently in oversimplified media accounts. All of this contributes to the perception that too many students are not learning, and that teachers are not doing their job. It is an easy leap to the conclusion that researchers are also failing to deliver.

PHOTO: Professor Rich Shavelson and Yue (Melody) Yin, a SUSE PhD candidate in CTE, test various objects to see whether they sink or float as part of a training session for University of Hawaii secondary school teachers who used the lesson with their science students. The presentation was part of the Romance Project, a three year National Science Foundation funded study of the type being encouraged by the U.S. Department of Education because it involves controlled experiments with pre and post measures of student learning.

  Read On...