Research and Education Reform Roles for the Office of Educational Research and Improvement (1992) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:
3 THE OFFICE OF EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH AND IMPROVEMENT
3 THE OFFICE OF EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH AND IMPROVEMENT
Pages 54-106
The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.
From page 54... ...
There are other offices within the Department of Education that conduct research and development on education issues, and there are other federal agencies that also do so, but each has a much narrower mission than OERI. For instance, the National Science Foundation supports work on mathematics and science education, and the Department of Defense supports some basic research on learning and considerable work on the applications of technology to training.
|
From page 55... ...
was to: collect such statistics and facts as shall show the condition and progress of education in the several States and Territories, and of diffusing such information respecting the organization and management of schools and school systems, the methods of teaching as shall aid the people of the United States in the establishment and maintenance of efficient school systems. For its first nine decades, USOE's research activities were primarily restricted to the routine collection and dissemination of statistics, and the federal investment in education research was minimal.
|
From page 56... ...
The centers were also supposed to serve as a mechanism for ensuring that education R&D was responsive to federally identified needs (Guthrie, 1989~. As the first R&D centers were created, federal priorities for education research had not been developed.
|
From page 57... ...
. The Educational Resources Information Center (ERIC)
|
From page 58... ...
The legislation (Public Law 92-318, 1972) charged NIE with providing "leadership in the conduct and support of scientific inquiry into the education process" and with the building of "an effective educational research and development system." The preamble to the legislation declares (General Education Provisions Act, Sec.
|
From page 59... ...
OERI was originally seen as a "holding company" for NIE, the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) , Library Programs, and some other discretionary and dissemination activities.
|
From page 60... ...
Most of the work is performed by university-operated centers, free-standing nonprofit laboratories, the ERIC clearinghouses, and scholars and educators across the country in universities, professional associations, state agencies, local school districts, and nonprofit organizations. The National Advisory Council on Educational Research and Improvement OERI is advised by the National Advisory Council on Educational Research and Improvement.
|
From page 61... ...
For at least the last 3 years, the council has had few or no active education researchers or social scientists among its members. None of the 1989, 1990, or 1991 council members is listed in the directories of any of the following associations: American Educational Research Association, American Psychological Association, American Economics Association, American Political Science Association, and American Sociological Association.
|
From page 62... ...
During the 11-year life of OERI, overlapping the last 5 years of NIE's existence, there have been five assistant secretaries confirmed by the Senate; the average tenure of service by the confirmed appointees was 28 months. Altogether, only 3 of the past 11 confirmed directors and assistant secretaries have served for more than 2 years.
|
From page 63... ...
These include the Laboratory Review Panel, the Fund Board of the FIRST program, the Technical Review Board of the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) , and the Schools and Staffing Survey Technical Review Board.
|
From page 64... ...
, ERIC, some discretionary research, and various special projects, which currently include the National Board for Teacher Standards, follow-up activities to the "education summit," School Year Extension Commission, National Writing Project, and education reform evaluation. In fiscal 1991 the Office of Research had about 69 employees and administered programs with a total budget of $51.7 million, of which only $4.9 million was for discretionary research activities.
|
From page 65... ...
Most of the evaluations were performed by panels who conducted site visits, interviewed staff, reviewed pertinent agency documents, and talked to people in the education research community. These reviews affirmed the original concept of the educational R&D centers that is, institutions conducting large-scale, long-term, mission-focused programs of research but found problems in staffing, needs assessment, the nature of the work undertaken, and the im
|
From page 66... ...
In 1975 a group of ten consultants, headed by Ronald Campbell, was commissioned by NIE to conduct a 3-month review of its funding policies. By that time NIE had switched from institutional funding of the centers and laboratories to a "program purchase" arrangement: each institution had to prepare proposals for clusters of activities.
|
From page 67... ...
The panel members visited all 17 laboratories and centers, met with NIE's policy-making council and interviewed members of the educational R&D community. In its final report, the panel "endorsed the concept of R&D centers and regional educational laboratories and affirmed the importance of maintaining and improving the stability and quality of the existing institutions" (Panel for the Review of Laboratory and Center Operations, 1979:6~.
|
From page 68... ...
At these locations, notably the Wisconsin Center for Education Research and the Learning Research and Development Center, institutionalization was achieved under the earlier policies of the Office of Education and NIE and has since been maintained with diverse sources of funding. Even if either was to lose its OERI-funded centers, it could continue on as a leader in education R&D.
|
From page 69... ...
In fiscal 1991 OERI funded another 12 field-initiated studies at a total cost of $967,862. The topics for study included methods of assessing staff development projects, factors that lead to graduation or drop out among Native American students, assessment methods for accurately measuring the new mathematics education goals, and the provision of equity to minority students in small rural school districts.
|
From page 70... ...
Each clearinghouse covers a broad topic area and is responsible for identifying, indexing, and abstracting appropriate documents for input into the ERIC database. The database primarily covers reports from federally funded education research and development projects and published articles on education culled from as many as 800 journals.
|
From page 71... ...
In addition, the clearinghouse received 90,000 telephone and mailed inquiries during 1990: 17 percent were from professors and researchers, 15 percent from primary and secondary school teachers, 14 percent from school administrators and school board members, 14 percent from librarians, 8 percent from students, 8 percent from parents and the general public, and 25 percent from all others (Office of Educational Research and Improvement, 1991~. Despite the high use of ERIC, there are complaints about the system.
|
From page 72... ...
As the budget of ERIC dropped by almost 50 percent from the late 1970s to the late 1980s (in 1990 constant dollars) , fewer and fewer journals have been indexed comprehensively, and users cannot tell which are indexed comprehensively and which are indexed selectively.
|
From page 73... ...
It supervises the ten regional laboratories, the Program Effectiveness Panel and the National Diffusion Network, the Javits Gifted and Talented Program, the Leadership in Educational Administration Development program, the Mid-Career Teacher Training program, Educational Partnerships, the Star Schools Program (which uses satellite broadcasts to enrich local school instruction) , and the School Recognition Programs.
|
From page 74... ...
This has allowed them to considerably expand the activities that would have been possible with OERI funding. Over the years the laboratories' activities have gradually shifted some, from applied research and large-scale development to technical assistance work with schools and, more recently, to dissemination activities and assistance to state agencies.
|
From page 75... ...
He determined that state education agencies were open to working with the laboratories on needs assessments, product development, and dissemination, and they had the best perceptions
|
From page 76... ...
in touch with schools but able to retreat from direct service to test ideas and develop new programs still seems distinctive and sound and worthy of extensive support. The Campbell report also suggested that the program purchase approach to funding the laboratories and centers was dysfunctional and should be replaced with institutional support for those with favorable performance evaluations.
|
From page 77... ...
The investigators found that all laboratories served state education agencies, intermediate service agencies, and local education agencies, with state education agencies being the primary clients. They reported cooperative and effective relations with the laboratories, a marked improvement from Svenson's 1969 study.
|
From page 78... ...
. that has been particularly useful," more respondents cited resources from the laboratories than from any other source: 171 from the laboratories, 120 from state education entities, 106 from ERIC, and 96 from the National Diffusion Network (National Center for Education Statistics, 19904.
|
From page 79... ...
Program Effectiveness Panel and National Diffusion Network The Joint Dissemination Review Panel and the National Diffusion Network (NDN) were established in the early 1970s to judge the effectiveness of innovative programs and to help disseminate those that are found effective.
|
From page 80... ...
Second, NDN funds one or more facilitators, located in every state and certain territories, to assist local schools in defining needs, examining alternative NDN programs, and adopting programs. Some states supplement these funds so that the facilitators can conduct awareness conferences, assist local school districts with start-up costs, and provide technical assistance, monitoring, and evaluation during implementation of NDN programs.
|
From page 81... ...
Concerns were raised about insufficient guidelines for the JDRP applications, poor interface between NDN and state education agencies, inadequacies in the disseminated materials, problems in maintaining the integrity of the innovations, lack of good data on student impacts, and low adoption rates in urban schools (Emrick et al., 1977; Hall and Alford, 1978~. In the early 1980s a study was conducted of several educational dissemination strategies sponsored by the federal government.
|
From page 82... ...
studied the Title I reading projects disseminated by NDN. It found some success, but low adoption rates, which were attributed to unconvincing evidence about the effects of allegedly exemplary programs and a lack of state incentives for local schools to demonstrate improvements in educational outcomes.
|
From page 83... ...
The Schools and Teachers Program provides grants to state agencies, districts, and schools, to increase the educational opportunities and performance of elementary and secondary school students. The Family-School Partnership Program awards demonstration grants to school districts with a substantial portion of low-income students for projects that help teachers to cooperate more effectively with parents, help parents support the education of their offspring in the home setting, and evaluate family involvement programs.
|
From page 84... ...
The Eisenhower National Program for Mathematics and Science Education supports innovative projects of national significance that enhance access to, and the quality of, mathematics and science education. Priority is given to strengthening state and local programs funded under the much larger Eisenhower State formula funds.
|
From page 85... ...
These include annual collection of data on elementary and secondary schools, annual collection of data on higher education, several special studies of schools, the National Assessment of Education Progress, and a few large-scale longitudinal studies of students' progress through school and into the workplace. NCES, in conjunction with NSF, also supports most of the nation's activities in international studies of student achievement.
|
From page 86... ...
. ." This opinion is shared by many researchers and professional associations, and it has been affirmed to the committee by congressional research agency staff.
|
From page 87... ...
. Between 1986 and 1991, OERI's data indicate that the staff increased by 13 percent and the program budgets increased by 47 percent (in constant dollars)
|
From page 88... ...
The salaries and expenses budget is based primarily on the number of staff, their average grade levels, and their anticipated office expenses. Many factors affect the number of staff needed for a given program budget.
|
From page 89... ...
For instance, the Bureau of the Census does much of its work internally, with higher staff levels and lower program budgets than would be needed if it contracted out most of its work (its ratio is 15.3 staff per $1 million of program budget)
|
From page 90... ...
Individual programs are also affected by specifications in their authorizing legislation. Under OERI's current authorization, the Secretary of Education may enter into "grants, contracts, and cooperative agreements with institutions of higher education, public and private organizations, institutions, agencies, and individuals" for the purpose of "supporting scientific inquiry into the educational process" (General Education Provisions Act, Sec.
|
From page 91... ...
, which strongly favored institutional support, with periodic evaluations, for those centers and laboratories that had already demonstrated high quality and productive work. Despite the quick demise of the program purchase policy, neither NIE nor OERI really returned to long-term institutional support for the centers or laboratories.
|
From page 92... ...
Planning for the 1990 laboratory competition included a review of the laboratories' self-evaluations and peer evaluations, establishment of an external laboratory review panel to advise on the competition, several commissioned papers, meetings with representatives of the major educational associations, and open hearings in three cities. Twenty-five people reviewed the proposals.
|
From page 93... ...
And NSF's Education and Human Resources Directorate does include teachers and other practitioners in the review of proposals for mathematics and science education research and development activities. At NIH there is a two-tier review process.
|
From page 94... ...
Department of Education, 1989~. Several criteria are to be considered when deciding whether a report "is necessary," including "consistency with ED's mission and goals" and "conformity with legislation, regulations, and policy." The clearance procedure requires sign-off by the head of the originating office, by the assistant secretaries in the department with responsibilities related to the substance of the report, and by the director of the editorial policy division of the department's Office of Public Affairs.
|
From page 95... ...
Several OERI staff suggested there is merit in a nonbinding review by assistant secretaries in the department with responsibilities related to the substance of the report they had received many helpful comments. Virtually all acknowledged that there is a need for a report review process, at least for official OERI reports and presentations, but most thought it should be conducted by OERI and should focus on scientific quality and editorial style, not consistency with department policy.
|
From page 96... ...
. SOURCE: Unpublished data from the Office of Education Research and Improvement.
|
From page 97... ...
1990 constant dollars) ; by 1979 that had declined to $52 million; and in 1991 the amount was $47 million.
|
From page 98... ...
The distribution was as follows (in millions) : Research, development, and dissemination National research centers Regional laboratories ERIC Field-initiated research Education reform evaluation National Institute of Literacy Education summit follow-up National Board for Professional Teacher Standards Other NCES (statistics and NAEP)
|
From page 99... ...
recently reviewed federally funded R&D for technology applications to education. It noted the following about the Department of Education: Education's limited spending for R&D in the area of educational technology is not surprising when one looks at the overall low priority granted education research in general.
|
From page 100... ...
Occasionally, comprehensive analyses across agencies have-been undertaken to estimate federal expenditures in a given area. OMB conducted a special survey for the National Education Goals Panel in the summer of 1991 and estimated that the federal government spent $310 million on education R&D in that year (National Education Goals Panel, 1991~.
|
From page 101... ...
The low investment in education R&D also is not a function of total national expenditures for each activity. Federal education research is just 0.1 percent of total national expenditures for education.
|
From page 102... ...
Health Defense All Federal Agencies 1 0.1 _d _ I.V _ r, lo: _ V.~ __ ~ 7 _: .,, _ A., =;: n.a. 0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 12.2 10.0 10.5 11.0 11.5 12.0 12.5 Percent FIGURE 3-5 Federal support for R&D in specified areas as a percentage of total national expenditures in each area, 1990.
|
From page 103... ...
Somewhat less comprehensive analyses conducted by the Office of Management and Budget for the years 1974, 1975, and 1976 indicated federal expenditures of $1.1 billion, $1.0 billion, and $1.3 billion, respectively (in 1990 constant dollars)
|
From page 104... ...
In April 1991 President Bush announced a wide-ranging America 2000 education reform strategy. It proposed world-class standards and national achievement tests; several efforts to improve teaching and leadership in schools and recognition and rewards for excellence; the promotion of school choice; one-time $1 million grants to 535 schools that the undertake specified reforms; cooperation with the new New American Schools Development Corporation (see below)
|
From page 105... ...
The latter has not previously been a common source of funding for education research. The New American Schools Development Corporation (NASDC)
|
From page 106... ...
Although there are some indications that school districts, professional associations, business organizations and foundations have increased their support of education R&D, the spotty available evidence suggests these increases almost certainly fall short of the amount of the decline in federal support. The evidence also suggests that the expanded nonfederal support is directed towards local testing and assessment programs and some limited topics of research, rather than the broad spectrum of research and development that has traditionally been the mission of OERI and NIE.
|
Key Terms
This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
More
information on Chapter Skim is available.