[xmca] National Mathematics Advisory Panel

Can you give some ideas what you think of this report here?

Also, I believe it dovetails with issues around NCLB (pointed to recently by
Eric R.), as the criteria of research has been taken directly from that
program.

Ka:ren

P.S. I am sorry about the NO SUBJECT. I wish my email program would help
me with that!

-----Original Message-----
From: xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu] On
Behalf Of Wolff-Michael Roth
Sent: Monday, March 31, 2008 8:44 AM
To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
Cc: Brian Greer; B Sriraman
Subject: Re: [xmca] (no subject)

Hi there, I am in the process of contributing to a response by a
number of mathematics educators to be published in "The Montana
Mathematics Enthusiast" taking up, among others, those issues Karen
has been abstracting from the Panel report.
Cheers,
Michael

On 31-Mar-08, at 8:32 AM, Karen Wieckert wrote:

Hello.

I thought some of you might be interested in how the National
Mathematics
Advisory Panel final report describes research on learning based on LSV.

"The sociocultural perspective of Vygotsky has also been influential in
education. It characterizes learning as a social induction process
through
which learners become increasingly independent through the tutelage
of more
knowledgeable peers and adults. However, its utility in mathematics
classrooms and mathematics curricula remains to be scientifically
tested. "
(p. 30, General Principles of Learning)

The inclusion criteria for studies included by the panelists threw out
specific types of research...

"Systematic reviews of research on mathematics education by the task
groups
and subcommittees of the Panel yielded thousands of studies on important
topics, but only a small proportion met standards for rigor for the
causal
questions the Panel was attempting to answer. The dearth of relevant
rigorous research in the field is a concern. First, the number of
experimental studies in education that can provide answers to
questions of
cause and effect is currently small. Although the number of such
studies has
grown in recent years due to changes in policies and priorities at
federal
agencies, these studies are only beginning to yield findings that can
inform
educational policy and practice. Second, in educational research over
the
past two decades, the pendulum has swung sharply away from quantitative
analyses that permit inferences from samples to populations. Third,
there is
a need for a stronger emphasis on such aspects of scientific rigor as
operational definitions of constructs, basic research to clarify
phenomena
and constructs, and disconfirmation of hypotheses. Therefore, debates
about
issues of national importance, which mainly concern cause and effect,
have
devolved into matters of personal opinion rather than scientific
evidence."
(p. 63, Research Policies and Mechanisms)

In the Appendix, on pg. 81, the Standards of Evidence are laid out as
they
were developed by a subcommittee. Specifically,

"In general, these principles call for strongest confidence to be
placed in
studies that
. Test hypotheses
. Meet the highest methodological standards (internal validity)
. Have been replicated with diverse samples of students under
conditions that warrant generalization (external validity)"

The full report can be found here...

http://www.ed.gov/about/bdscomm/list/mathpanel/index.html

Ka:ren Wieckert

_______________________________________________
xmca mailing list
xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca

_______________________________________________
xmca mailing list
xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca

_______________________________________________
xmca mailing list
xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
Received on Mon Mar 31 09:21 PDT 2008