 |
|||||||||||||||||||
|
Michael Feuer, a leading education research and policy analyst, is presenting the 2004-2005 Burton and Inglis Lecture Series, entitled “The Science of Rationality and the Rationality of Science: Thoughts on the Future of Education Research and Policy.” The focus of this lecture series is to help advance the discourse on scientific approaches to education research.
Feuer is executive director of the Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education at the National Research Council of the National Academies in Washington, D.C. He has promoted the intersection of education research and policy throughout his career, addressing issues ranging from educational technology, testing, and performance standards to institutional economics. The first of these lectures took place on Thursday, November 18 (visit http://forum.wgbh.org/wgbh/forum.php?lecture_id=1730 to view the first lecture), with additional forums planned for Thursday, February 24 and Thursday, April 21. Q: Can you tell us a bit more about what you do with the National Research Council of the National Academies? A: The National Research Council (NRC) is the operating arm of the National Academies, which is the umbrella organization for the National Academy of Sciences (NAS), National Academy of Engineering, and Institute of Medicine. The principal role of the NRC, a private nonprofit organization, is to provide independent and objective advice to the federal government. We do this by convening interdisciplinary committees of volunteer experts who are appointed by the president of the NAS. At present there are roughly 500 committees, involving some 7,000–10,000 volunteers, working on studies covering the full range of scientific, technical, and health issues. Nearly every agency of the federal government has been or is currently a sponsor of this work; foundations and other private sponsors support about one-fifth of the total NRC portfolio.
I direct the Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education (DBASSE), one of the six major units within the NRC. We conduct studies and other activities covering a broad range of issues in human development, criminal justice, demography, decision making, statistics, governance, economic welfare, and education. DBASSE has a staff of just under 100, many of whom hold advanced degrees; an annual budget of roughly $20 million; and an advisory board of distinguished scholars who help us identify research and researchers relevant to our current and prospective portfolio, participate in review of studies, and provide overall intellectual and procedural guidance. Currently the chair of DBASSE is Richard C. Atkinson, president emeritus of the University of California. Q: What do you mean by the [title of the lecture series], “The Science of Rationality and the Rationality of Science?” A: This is the working title for a series of papers that focus on the following proposition: research on human decision making and rational judgment, which are at the core of the “cognitive revolution” in psychology, have had a profound impact on theories of teaching and learning, and on theories of organization and policy, but almost no impact on theories of education organization and policy. My goal is to focus on the missing link. That is, to explore how explicit attention to lessons from cognitive research—the science of rationality—might lead to a more rational science of education policy and a more reasonable set of expectations about the conduct and utility of education research. Q: How does this concept relate to the future of education research and policy? A: My hope is that this concept will be the basis for a new “pact” between education researchers and policy makers—one that embraces reasonable strategies rather than silver bullets, and reduces the tendency to react to the rhetoric of educational crisis with unrealistic and ultimately disappointing proposals for reform.
Q: How can public education benefit from more rigorous research? A: Education has already benefited greatly from rigorous research. For example, as I argue in my papers (and in many reports of the National Research Council), the cognitive revolution in psychology has led to breakthroughs in our understanding of how human beings learn and on models for training and education (in schools as well as in business organizations and the military). Other examples of rigorous research that have had an impact on public education are in the areas of measurement (testing and assessment), program evaluation, teaching of reading and mathematics, understanding the effects of race and class on educational attainment, the effects of computer and other information technologies on academic achievement, and the economics of resource allocation in schools. I am convinced that good science—which, by the way, must not be confounded with any particular methodology used by scientists—is fundamental to continuous learning about and improvement in public education. Q: How do you see research changing education policy over the next decade? A: There is currently widespread interest in strengthening the links between research and educational practice. And it is important that we view this relationship as a two-way street: the “wisdom of practice” needs to be more consciously integrated into rigorous scientific models of teaching, learning, and the organization of schools in order for the results of scientific research to be useful in policy and practice. That said, I hope that in our pursuit of more rigor and more science we do not inadvertently narrow the range of questions and the breadth of scholarship that is relevant to the accumulation of knowledge about teaching, learning, and the organization of schooling. For more information on the Burton and Inglis Lecture Series or other events at HGSE, please e-mail Shawn Wade Tuttle or call her at 617-496-5875.
HGSE News, Harvard Graduate School of Education
|
||||||||||||||||||
