Changing Approaches to Address Student Academic Achievement Gap: Recommendations for School Reforms and Reformers.

The Trend in International Mathematics and Science Study reveals how the math and science achievement of students in participating countries compares with that of their international peers. Since 1995, the results have been surprising and disappointing for some countries. Astonished and disappointed by such outcomes, scholars and educational leaders are turning to top-achieving countries for approaches to close the achievement gap. To reverse the achievement gap, it is imperative to consider whether approaches used in top-achieving countries deserve primacy over approaches used within-country. Using TIMSS data, findings from this study show that every country in the sample has schools from which reformers could draw approaches to close the achievement gap. Additionally, this study revealed existence of schools serving disadvantaged students achieving at the top and schools serving advantaged students achieving at the bottom. Based on these findings, we highlight the importance of considering approaches used within-country by proposing a framework for education reformers as to where and how to initiate reform to close the achievement gap. INTRODUCTION The Trend in International Mathematics and Science Study (“TIMSS”) is an international comparative study. TIMSS measures students’ academic achievement in mathematics and science at the fourthand eighth-grade levels. It is one of the studies of the International Association for the Evaluation of Educational Achievement (IEA). TIMSS assesses students’ academic achievement in participating countries on a regular 4-year cycle since 1995. Over the past 20 years, TIMSS has administrated five assessments (1995, 1999, 2003, 2007, and 2011). Each assessment shows student achievement in math and science in comparison to the achievement of international peers (Foy, Arora & Stanco, 2013). Some East Asian countries (e.g., Singapore, South Korea, Hong Kong, Chinese Taipei, and Japan) consistently take top positions. The average score in mathematics and science for eighth-graders in these countries is always among the highest since 1995 (IEA, 2015). Achievement that falls below expectations is disappointing and generates concerns in countries that spend enormous amounts on education (i.e. Saudi Arabia and the United States). Certain questions commonly arise: Why do some East Asian countries regularly take the top positions? What are they doing right that we are missing? Why do we rank at this level despite the resources that we invest in our education system? If we fall behind in math and science, how can we compete in the global knowledge economy? Following the release of the 2011 TIMSS assessment, the US Secretary of Education Arne Duncan issued a press release in which he called the results “unacceptable”. He expressed “the need to close the large and persistent achievement gaps. ” He had made a similar statement earlier in response to the 2009 PISA results. According to the statement, the PISA results “show that American students are poorly prepared to compete in today’s knowledge economy--Americans need to wake up to this educational reality” (Carnoy & Rothstein, 2013, p.7). Goodwin (2012) expressed similar concerns and stated that “there is a deep concern in the U.S. that the country is falling behind its peers across the globe, and that drastic reforms in education and in teaching are desperately needed to rectify this crisis” (p.186). Concerns and disappointments are not unique to the US. The 2007 TIMSS results show that students in the Middle East and North Africa continue to lag behind students of other countries (Bouhlia, 2011). Studies documented concerns about student achievement in Australia, Chile,