|
FROM THE DIRECTOR:
 Standards-based
Education in Minnesota - Volume II
Karen Seashore Louis, Director, CAREI
This volume of Research/Practice is the second of two volumes that
highlights issues related to emerging national standards in the sciences
and mathematics. Here we focus on what we are beginning to know about
the impact of standards based reform in science and mathematics
education.1 Research on the effects of standards-based reform on
teachers and students are led by faculty in the College of Education and
Human Development - in CAREI and in the Departments of Educational
Psychology and Curriculum and Instruction. The last issue of
Research/Practice (Spring, 1999) included an overview of the way in
which the National Science Foundation's Local Systemic Initiatives
Program to reform math and science education have been implemented in
Minnesota schools (Lawrenz and Post). This article highlighted the
collaboration that has developed between national curriculum groups,
local educators, and community leaders in less advantaged communities,
both rural and urban. We then moved on to a discussion about how
technology, and especially the World Wide Web, can be used to increase
the level of student inquiry in a standards-based curriculum (Dexter).
We finished with an article about how schools and science museums can
work in partnership to help each other achieve their important goals
(Ingram). Volume II of Research/Practice (Fall, 1999) begins with an
overview of the Minnesota TIMSS results and the relationship between
standards-based instruction and achievement in Minnesota science and
mathematics classes (Huffman, Lawrenz & Palmer). Two feature articles
examine changing teacher practices and the impact on student
achievement. One focuses on elementary mathematics in urban settings
(Ginsberg-Block), and reports very positive results. The other examines
the implementation of a National Science Foundation inquiry-based
curriculum, and finds that there are both plusses and minuses for
teachers and students (Huffman & Lawrenz). Also included are examples
from two teacher enhancement projects: 1) Monarch Monitoring, a K-12
science teacher program regarding research on monarch butterflies
(Freeman), and 2) CPU, a high school science teacher project developing
computer-based activities to help teachers create constructivist
learning environments in their classrooms (Heller & Goldberg). Future
issues of Research/Practice will focus on other applied research issues
in education. The College of Education and Human Development has many
faculty, graduate students and staff who are engaged in research on
literacy, social studies, and second languages and cultures education -
areas where consensus around national standards is also emerging. We
hope you enjoy this issue, and look forward to future discussions of
standards and education in Minnesota.
—Karen Seashore Louis
|
