Highlights From the TIMSS

1999 Video Study of Eighth-Grade 

Science Teaching

U.S. Department of Education

Institute of Education Sciences NCES 2006-017

The Third International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS) 1999 Video 

Study is a follow-up and expansion of the TIMSS 1995 Video Study of 

mathematics teaching. Larger and more ambitious than the first, the 1999 

study investigated eighth-grade science teaching as well as mathematics teaching, 

expanded the number of countries, and included more countries with relatively high 

achievement on TIMSS assessments in comparison to the United States. The results 

of the mathematics portion of the study are presented elsewhere (Hiebert et al. 2003). 

Discussion of the results from the 1995 Video Study can be found in Stigler et al. (1999) 

and Stigler and Hiebert (1999). This document highlights key findings from the science 

lessons and is based on the full report, Teaching Science in Five Countries: Results From 

the TIMSS 1999 Video Study (Roth et al. 2006).

Who Participated in the Study 

and How Were Lessons Selected?

The TIMSS student assessments of mathematics and science were conducted in 

1994-95, in 1998-99, and again in 2003. The countries participating in the science 

portion of the TIMSS 1999 Video Study included Australia, the Czech Republic, 

Japan, the Netherlands, and the United States. The countries were selected based on 

their performance in mathematics in 1995. At that time, the other four countries 

outperformed the United States (on average) in science as well as in mathematics. In 

2003, U.S. students’ average score in science was not measurably different from the 

average score in Australia and the Netherlands, but remained significantly below the 

average score of Japanese students. The Czech Republic did not participate in TIMSS 

2003. The TIMSS 1995, 1999, and 2003 average science scores for these countries are 

displayed in table 1.1

1

 Rescaled TIMSS 1995 science scores are reported here (Gonzales et al. 2000). The average for Australia in 2003 cannot be compared to the averages in 1995 and 1999 due to national level changes in the starting age/date for school. The 1995 and 1999 

averages are those reported in Gonzales et al. 2000. The 2003 average is the one reported in Gonzales et al. 2004. Since the TIMSS 

1999 Video Study sample selection of countries is based on the 1995 averages, and the target population for Australia in both 1995 

and in 1999 was a mix of eighth and ninth grades, table 1 presents the averages for that population.
2

TABLE 1. Average science scale scores of eighth-grade students, by country: 1995, 1999, and 2003

1995 1999 2003

Country Average

Standard 

error Average

Standard 

error Average

Standard 

error

Australia1 527 4.0 540 4.4 527 3.8

Czech Republic 555 4.5 539 4.2 — —

Japan 554 1.8 550 2.2 552 1.7

Netherlands1 541 6.0 545 6.9 536 3.1

United States2 513 5.6 515 4.6 527 3.1

—Not available. The Czech Republic did not participate in the 2003 assessment.

1

 Nation did not meet international sampling and/or other guidelines in 1995. See Beaton et al. (1996) for details.

2 Nation did not meet international sampling and/or other guidelines in 2003. See Gonzales et al. (2004) for details.

NOTE: Rescaled TIMSS 1995 science scores are reported here (Gonzales et al. 2000). The average for Australia in 2003 

cannot be compared to the averages in 1995 and 1999 due to national level changes in the starting age/date for school. 

The 1995 and 1999 averages are those reported in Gonzales et al. 2000. The 2003 average is the one reported in 

Gonzales et al. 2004.

SOURCE: Gonzales, P., Calsyn, C., Jocelyn, L., Mak, K., Kastberg, D., Arafeh, S., Williams, T., and Tsen, W. (2000). 

Pursuing Excellence: Comparisons of International Eighth-Grade Mathematics and Science Achievement 

from a U.S. Perspective, 1995 and 1999 (NCES 2001-028). Washington, DC: Government Printing Office. Gonzales, 

P., Guzman, J.C., Partelow, L., Pahlke, E., Jocelyn, L., Kastberg, D., et al. (2004). Highlights from the Trends in 

International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS) 2003. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.

The science portion of the TIMSS 1999 Video Study included 439 eighth-grade science 

lessons collected from the five participating countries. In each country, the lessons 

were randomly selected to be representative of eighth-grade science lessons overall. 

Each country was required to sample 100 schools. The response rates of the final 

sample of schools participating in the study ranged from 81 percent (weighted) in the 

Netherlands and the United States, to 100 percent in the Czech Republic.2

 From the 

schools that agreed to participate, one eighth-grade science class was randomly chosen 

from a list of all science courses in the school in which eighth-graders were enrolled. 

The randomly selected science class was videotaped for one complete period or 

lesson. No substitutions of schools or science classes were permitted. In each country, 

videotapes were collected across the school year to try to capture the range of topics 

and activities that can take place throughout an entire school year. In addition, teachers 

and students were asked to complete a questionnaire regarding the videotaped lesson. 

How Should Science Teaching 

Across Countries Be Described? 

Conceptual Framework

Multiple approaches were taken to organize and prioritize study goals, research 

questions, and coding dimensions. First, analysis of field test lesson videos by an 

international team of researchers (the Science Code Development Team) led to 

hypotheses about important features of science teaching in each of the participating 

countries. Next, an extensive literature review, including analyses of research studies as 

well as standards and curriculum documents from each of the participating countries 

2

 Twelve of the lessons selected from the initial sample of 100 schools in the Czech Republic included only economic and political 

geography content and were excluded from the sample of eligible science lessons. See table A.1 in appendix A of the full report by 

Roth et al. 2006.
3

(American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) 1990, 1993; Australian 

Education Council 1994; Czech Ministry of Education 1996; Dutch Ministry of 

Education, Culture, and Science 1998; Kolavova 1998; Ministry of Education, Science, 

and Culture [Monbusho] 1999; National Research Council (NRC) 1996; Nelesovska 

and Spalcilova 1998) provided an exhaustive list of features of science teaching that 

might be investigated in the study.3

 Five U.S. science educators serving as advisors on 

a steering committee to the project and a national research coordinator from each of 

the five participating countries then reviewed and prioritized the nominated research 

questions and coding dimensions. Finally, the Science Code Development Team, 

which included representatives from each of the participating countries, compared the 

important features of science teaching emerging from the literature review, the advisors’ 

recommendations of high priority lesson features to examine, and their own review 

of lessons from the data set to develop an overarching conceptual framework and a 

set of research questions that guided decisions about coding priorities as well as the 

organization of the presentation of the results in this report. 

Figure 1 presents the conceptual framework for the TIMSS 1999 Video Study analysis 

of science lessons. The TIMSS conceptual framework emphasizes the centrality of the 

lesson as the unit of analysis in this study and emphasizes the importance of capturing 

aspects of all of Schwab’s four commonplaces of teaching—the teacher, the learners, 

the subject matter, and the social milieu (Schwab 1969, 1971, 1973). There was strong 

consensus among the study’s advisors and national research coordinators that the study 

not be limited to identifying teacher actions; there must also be an examination of the 

science content and the students’ actions and opportunities for learning. Thus, teaching 

is more than the teacher’s actions—it is an interaction among the teacher’s actions, the 

LESSON

Science

Content

Teacher

Actions

Student

Actions

CULTURE

FIGURE 1. TIMSS 1999 Video Study: Science conceptual framework

3

 Of the five participating countries, three have national curricula (the Czech Republic, Japan, and the Netherlands). Australia 

and the United States do not have national curricula; rather, decisions regarding curricula are taken at the state, provincial, 

or local level. Reference is made throughout this report to standards, curricular guidelines and reform documents from each 

of the countries. In the case of the Czech Republic, Japan, and the Netherlands, these are the official documents that guide 

classroom teaching and learning decisions. In Australia and the United States, these documents are produced by large national 

professional and scientific organizations that promote standards and improvement for science teaching and learning. However, 

these documents should not be construed as official or definitive statements of national, state, provincial or local governments 

in these two countries. Rather, they represent the most widely referenced and distributed curricular and standards documents 

available in these two countries
4

students’ actions, and the science content. In this study, cultural differences were not 

directly observed but may be reflected in unique country patterns that emerged from 

observations of the teachers, students, and science content in the lessons

Guiding Research Questions

The main research question guiding the conceptual framework was: 

What opportunities did the lesson provide for students to learn science? This main 

research question was supported by three guiding questions to examine students’ 

opportunities to learn in each of the three areas represented in the conceptual 

framework—teacher actions, science content, and student actions:

• How did the teacher organize the lesson to support students’ opportunities 

to learn science?

• How was science represented to students in the lesson?

• What opportunities did students have to participate in science learning activities?

Each guiding question was then explored through a set of four to fifteen more specific 

questions. Although this is a study of classroom teaching, the focus of analysis was 

placed on students and the ways in which teaching actions provided different kinds of 

opportunities for students to learn science. This focus on student opportunity to learn 

fits well with the research literature on student thinking and learning, and with one of 

the key stimuli for the study—the differences in student achievement as evidenced on 

TIMSS 1995 and 1999 assessments (Martin et al. 2000). 

How Were the Videotaped Lessons Analyzed?

Three teams were assembled to develop and apply codes that would capture teaching 

activities and behaviors observed in the videotaped lessons. The Science Code 

Development Team (mentioned previously) included science specialists, researchers, 

and representatives from each of the participating countries who identified and 

developed codes, trained coders and established reliability, organized quality control 

measures, and managed the analyses and reporting of the data. The Science Code 

Development Team worked closely with two advisory groups consisting of national 

research coordinators representing each of the countries in the study and a steering 

committee of five U.S. science education researchers. The International Video Coding 

Team represented all of the participating countries and applied the developed codes 

to each of the videotaped lessons. The Science Content Coding Team included U.S. 

representatives with expertise in science content who developed and applied codes to 

all of the scientific content of the videotaped lessons. 

Extensive training was conducted for the International Video Coding Team and the 

Science Content Coding Team. Reliability was established for codes that identified an 

activity or behavior and measured how long the activity or behavior took place. For 
5

certain codes, the members of the Science Content Coding Team each established 

reliability through consensus coding. 

Finally, to obtain reliable comparisons among the participating nations, the data were 

appropriately weighted to account for sampling design. 

Comparisons made in this document have been tested for statistical significance at the 

.05 level. Differences between averages or percentages that are statistically significant 

are discussed using comparative terms such as “higher” or “lower.” Moreover, these 

differences are noted using the greater than symbol (>) in the footnotes of each table 

or figure included in this document. Differences that are not statistically significant 

are either not discussed or referred to as “no measurable differences found” or “not 

statistically significant.” Failure to find a statistically significant difference should not be 

interpreted to mean that the estimates are the same or similar; rather, failure to find a 

difference may also be due to measurement or sampling error. 

The purpose of this report is to introduce new NCES survey data through the 

presentation of selected descriptive information. Readers are cautioned not to draw 

causal inferences based solely on the bivariate results presented. It is important to 

note that many of the variables examined in this report are related to one another, 

and complex interactions and relationships have not been explored here. Release of 

the report is intended to make the information available to the public and encourage 

more in-depth analysis of the data.

Limitations in an international video study of this type are related to the intensive and 

extensive nature of the data collection and coding processes. For example, a limited 

number of countries, and classrooms within the countries, were included in the TIMSS 

1999 Video Study. As a result, the sample of four relatively higher-achieving countries 

in this study may not be representative of all the countries with students performing 

well on international assessments of science. In addition, the TIMSS 1999 Video Study 

cannot address differences in topic-specific teaching approaches because a wide range of 

topics were covered; not enough lessons covering any single topic were observed to allow 

within-topic analyses or comparisons across topics. Because the focus of the TIMSS 1999 

Video Study is on recording and interpreting a complex set of teaching practices, it does 

not address students’ classroom behaviors and other characteristics of students. Finally, 

the reader is cautioned that direct inferences about links between classroom teaching 

and student achievement cannot be drawn from a study of this type. 

What Can Be Learned From a Video Study 

of Teaching Across Cultures?

Across cultures, classroom teaching is a complex process aimed at helping students 

learn. The TIMSS 1999 Video Study is based on the premise that the more educators 

and researchers can learn about teaching as it is actually practiced across cultures, the 

more effectively educators can identify factors that might enhance student learning 
6

opportunities and, by extension, student achievement. The detailed portraits of what 

actually happens in mathematics and science classrooms that emerged from the video 

study can contribute to further research into features of teaching that may influence 

students’ learning. 

Comparing teaching across cultures has additional advantages:

• Comparing teaching across cultures allows educators to examine and reflect on 

their own teaching practices from a fresh perspective.

• Comparing teaching across cultures can reveal alternative pedagogical approaches 

and stimulate discussion about the choices being made within a country. 

Observations of teaching across cultures can stimulate debate about the best 

approaches for achieving the learning goals defined within a country. 

Using national video surveys to study teaching has special advantages:

• Video enables the detailed examination of complex activities from different points 

of view, while preserving classroom activity. Videos can be slowed down and viewed 

multiple times by many people with different kinds of expertise. 

• Collecting a random national sample provides information about students' actual 

experiences across a range of conditions. The ability to generalize nationally can 

elevate policy discussions beyond the anecdotal. 

What Are the Major Findings From the TIMSS 

1999 Video Study of Eighth-Grade Science Teaching?

Eighth-grade science teaching shares some common general features

across all five of the participating countries, including countries

that have historically achieved at a variety of levels.

Although the study highlights differences across the countries, all five countries shared 

some general features of teaching eighth-grade science. Features common in all the 

countries were observed in three major domains that are used to organize the reporting 

of these results: 

• instructional organization, 

• science content, and

• student actions. 

Some of these commonalities are features that appeared in most lessons in all of the 

countries, while others are features that were observed with low frequencies in all of 

the countries.
7

Commonalities Regarding Instructional Organization

• Whole-class seatwork (i.e., presentation and discussion periods) occurred in at least 

98 percent of eighth-grade science lessons in all the countries, and at least some 

time was spent developing new science content in 95 percent or more of the lessons 

(data not shown). 

• Some form of practical activity (e.g., showing objects to the whole class or students 

working independently on experiments or model-building activities) occurred in at 

least 72 percent of lessons across the countries, although there were differences in 

the amount of time spent on these activities.

Commonalities Regarding Science Content

• Across all of the countries, 84 percent or more of the eighth-grade science 

lessons included at least some public attention to science canonical knowledge—

the generally accepted facts, ideas, concepts, and theories shared within the 

scientific community.

• Knowledge about the nature of science (i.e., its values, dispositions, processes, 

politics, or history), meta-cognitive strategies (i.e., learning strategies or reflecting 

on the learning process), and safety accounted for no more than a combined total of 

2 percent of public talk time (sections of the lesson when the intended audience of 

the teacher or student speaking was the whole class) in any of the countries. Science 

canonical knowledge was more prominent in the science lessons of all five countries 

than any other type of science knowledge investigated. 

Commonalities Regarding Student Actions

• During whole-class interactions, students participated in some form of discussion 

in at least 81 percent of the lessons in each of the countries.

• Although the percentages of science lessons and instruction time allocated for 

student independent work on practical activities varied across the participating 

countries, students in all the countries were more likely to observe phenomena 

during independent practical activities rather than to design and make models, 

to carry out dissections or classification activities, or to conduct controlled 

experiments.

• Students wrote a paragraph or more of text during independent practical 

activities in no more than 11 percent of lessons in the countries where there were 

enough observations for reliable estimates (Australia, the Netherlands, and the 

United States).

• Students generated their own research questions and designed procedures for 

practical investigations in no more than 10 percent of lessons in countries with 

sufficient observations to calculate reliable estimates (Australia, Japan, and the 

United States).
8

Though the five countries share some commonalities in the teaching of 

science, they also implement distinct approaches.

Each of the countries has a distinct approach to science teaching, although the pattern 

in the United States is different from the other countries in its use of a variety of 

teaching approaches rather than one consistent, core instructional approach. The 

different approaches to eighth-grade science teaching taken in each of the countries 

provide students with different ways to learn science. 

The ways the lessons varied in their instructional organization, science content, and the 

students’ actions are described below. Following these presentations, a summary of the 

science teaching pattern for each country is presented.

Differences in Instructional Organization

• Instructional purposes: In each country except the Czech Republic, at least 

three-quarters of lesson time was devoted to developing new content (table 2). 

However, when this activity is compared to other lesson purposes, country-specific 

differences emerge. For example, teachers in Japan allocated more lesson time 

(93 percent) to developing new content than did teachers in three other countries. 

Czech science lessons included more time for review (19 percent) and assessment (9 

percent) than did lessons in three other countries. Students in Dutch science lessons 

spent relatively more time going over homework (12 percent) than did students 

in three other countries. Czech and Japanese science lessons allocated a smaller 

average percentage of lesson time for “other” purposes, such as administrative tasks, 

compared to the other three countries.

TABLE 2. Average percentage distribution of eighth-grade science lesson time devoted to different types of 

lesson purposes, by country: 1999

Purpose

Australia

(AUS)

Czech 

Republic

(CZE) 

Japan

(JPN)

Netherlands

(NLD)

United 

States

(USA) 

Developing new content1 85 67 93 78 79

Reviewing previous content2 8 19 3 1! 8

Going over homework3 # 1! ‡ 12 3

Assessing student learning4 ‡ 9 1 2 3

Other purposes5 7 4 3 7 8

# Rounds to zero.

! Interpret data with caution. Estimate is unstable.

 ‡ Reporting standards not met. Too few cases to be reported.

1 Developing new content: AUS, JPN, USA>CZE; JPN>NLD, USA. 

2 Reviewing previous content: CZE>AUS, JPN, NLD, USA; USA>JPN, NLD. 

3 Going over homework: NLD>AUS, CZE, USA.

4 Assessing student learning: CZE>JPN, NLD, USA; NLD>JPN. 

5 Other purposes: AUS, NLD, USA>CZE, JPN. 

NOTE: Detail may not sum to 100 because of rounding and missing data. The tests for significance take into account the 

standard error for the reported differences. Thus, a difference between averages of two countries may be significant 

while the same difference between two other countries may not be significant.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Third International Mathematics 

and Science Study (TIMSS), Video Study, 1999.
9

• Social organization: Lessons also were organized differently in terms of wholeclass and independent work and in terms of the opportunity for students to engage 

in practical work (hands-on, laboratory) versus seatwork (reading, writing, and 

discussing) activities. 

• Independent practical activities occurred in fewer Czech and Dutch science lessons 

than in Australian and Japanese science lessons. In the United States, fewer lessons 

than Australia and more lessons than the Czech Republic provided students with 

independent practical activities (data not shown). 

• A similar pattern emerges when use of instructional time is examined. Australian 

and Japanese science lessons allocated more time for independent practical 

activities than Czech and Dutch lessons. Four percent of instructional time was 

spent on independent practical activities in Czech science lessons, less than in the 

science lessons of the other countries (figure 2).

• Dutch science lessons allocated more time for independent seatwork activities than 

Czech and Japanese science lessons (figure 2).

• In contrast with the other four countries, practical activities within Czech 

science lessons occurred more often as a whole-class activity than an independent 

activity (figure 2). 

19 13 15

28 23

33 34

19 22

38 42 42 50

4

71

8 9 10 9 4

0

20

40

60

80

100

AUS CZE JPN NLD USA

Country1

Percent

Whole-class practical

activities2

Whole-class seatwork

activities3

Independent practical

activities4

Independent seatwork

activities5

FIGURE 2. Average percentage distribution of science instruction time in eighth-grade science lessons 

devoted to each combination of social organization type and science activity, by country: 1999

1 AUS=Australia; CZE=Czech Republic; JPN=Japan; NLD=Netherlands; and USA=United States.

2 Whole-class practical activities: AUS, CZE, JPN>USA. 

3 Whole-class seatwork activities: CZE>AUS, JPN, NLD, USA; USA>AUS.

4 Independent practical activities: AUS, JPN, NLD, USA>CZE; AUS, JPN>NLD. 

5 Independent seatwork activities: NLD>CZE, JPN; USA>CZE.

NOTE: Detail may not sum to 100 because of rounding and data not presented for “divided class work.” Analysis is limited to those portions of lessons focused on science instruction. See table 3.2 and figure 3.2 in the full report (Roth et al. 2006).

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Third International Mathematics 

and Science Study (TIMSS), Video Study, 1999.
10

Differences in Science Content

• Topics: Within the United States, no differences were found between the 

percentages of eighth-grade science lessons that addressed topics in earth science, 

life science, physics, chemistry, or other areas (nature of science, technology, 

environment and resource issues, science and other disciplines) (figure 3). In 

contrast, physics and chemistry topics were addressed in more Japanese science 

lessons than earth science and life science. Within Australia, more lessons focused 

on physics topics than earth science, life science, and chemistry topics. Life science 

and physics topics were addressed in more Dutch lessons than chemistry, with too 

few earth science lessons for reliable estimates.

8 9 10

20

15

25 37 9

17

49 29

36

47 16

24 36 19 32

18

‡ 

5 7

‡ ‡ 

28

0

20

40

60

80

100

AUS CZE JPN NLD USA

Country1

Percent

Earth science

Life science

Physics

Chemistry

Other areas

FIGURE 3. Percentage distribution of eighth-grade science lessons devoted to life science, earth science, physics, 

chemistry, and other areas, by country: 1999

‡Reporting standards not met. Too few cases to be reported. 

1 AUS=Australia; CZE=Czech Republic; JPN=Japan; NLD=Netherlands; and USA=United States.

NOTE: Detail may not sum to 100 because of rounding. Other areas include: interactions of science, technology, and 

society, nature of scientific knowledge, and science and mathematics. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Third International Mathematics 

and Science Study (TIMSS), Video Study, 1999.

• Types of science knowledge: Different types of knowledge were addressed in the 

science lessons. Comparing across countries, Czech eighth-grade science lessons 

allocated a larger percentage of public talk time, on average, to address canonical 

science knowledge (generally accepted scientific facts, ideas, concepts, or theories) 

than the lessons of the other four countries (figure 4). Across-country differences 

also were evident in the percentage of public talk time devoted to procedural 

and experimental knowledge. Japanese science lessons addressed procedural and 

experimental knowledge (information about how to do science-related practices 

such as manipulating materials and performing experimental processes) for a 

larger average percentage of public talk time (25 percent) compared to the lessons 
11

35

59

44

33 31

0

20

40

60

80

100

AUS CZE JPN NLD USA

Country1

Percent

FIGURE 4. Average percentage of public talk time in eighth-grade science lessons devoted to canonical 

knowledge, by country: 1999

1

 AUS=Australia; CZE=Czech Republic; JPN=Japan; NLD=Netherlands; and USA=United States.

NOTE: CZE>AUS, JPN, NLD, USA; JPN>USA. Analysis is limited to public talk time. The above category was not applied 

to non-public segments of the lesson because of the nature of independent work and the limitations of the video methodology. During non-public talk segments, students were typically working independently on a set of tasks that may 

involve different types of knowledge.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Third International Mathematics 

and Science Study (TIMSS), Video Study, 1999.

of the other countries (between 11 and 17 percent). Further, Japanese lessons 

allocated a smaller percentage of public talk time (6 percent) to science-related 

real-life issues (e.g., societal issues or students’ personal experiences) than lessons 

in all of the other countries except Australia (14, 15, and 17 percent for the Czech 

Republic, Netherlands, and United States, respectively; 12 percent for Australia; 

data not shown). 

• Challenge and density of science content: In general, Czech lessons contained 

more content ideas and more challenging ideas than lessons in the other countries 

with reliable estimates. Based on expert judgments, Czech teachers included a mix 

of basic and challenging content in 56 percent of the science lessons and mostly 

challenging content in 25 percent of lessons (figure 5). In contrast, 47 to 65 percent 

of the lessons in the other countries included only basic content. In addition, more 

eighth-grade science lessons in the Czech Republic contained a high density of 15 

or more canonical ideas (26 percent) compared to lessons in Japan (7 percent) (data 

not shown). Other evidence of the higher level of challenge and density of science 

content in Czech lessons was the inclusion of more unrepeated science terms during 

public talk in a lesson (56 per lesson, on average), and more unrepeated highly 

technical science terms during public talk (33 per lesson, on average) compared 

to science lessons in the other four countries (data not shown). In addition, more 

Czech science lessons included theoretical ideas (49 percent) than lessons in Japan 

and the Netherlands (15 and 19 percent, respectively; data not shown). 
12

• Content coherence: The lessons varied in how closely content ideas and activities 

were woven together to form a coherent, strongly linked lesson. A higher 

percentage of Australian and Japanese science lessons focused on engaging students 

in learning content and doing activities with strong conceptual links (58 and 70 

percent, respectively) compared to lessons in the Netherlands and the United States 

(27 and 30 percent, respectively; figure 6). Twenty-seven percent of U.S. science 

lessons focused on doing activities, with no attention to content or only brief 

mentions of science content terms or ideas and no conceptual links among them. 

65

48

33

56

29

37 32

25 13

18 

47 

57

19 

 7 9! 

0

20

40

60

80

100

AUS CZE JPN NLD USA

Country1

Percent

Challenging content2

Basic and challenging content3

Basic content4

FIGURE 5. Percentage distribution of eighth-grade science lessons that were judged to contain challenging 

content, basic and challenging content, and basic content, by country: 1999

! Interpret data with caution. Estimate is unstable.

1 AUS=Australia; CZE=Czech Republic; JPN=Japan; NLD=Netherlands; and USA=United States.

2 Challenging content: CZE>JPN. 

3 Basic and challenging content: CZE>AUS, JPN, USA. 

4 Basic content: AUS, JPN, NLD, USA>CZE.

NOTE: Totals may not sum to 100 due to rounding. The level of challenge in the science content could not be determined in 3 percent of Dutch lessons and 1 percent each of Australian, Czech, and U.S. lessons because these lessons did 

not include publicly-presented canonical ideas. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Third International Mathematics 

and Science Study (TIMSS), Video Study, 1999.
13

30 50

24

65

44

12

27

58

50

70

30

27

6 ‡ 8

0

20

40

60

80

100

AUS CZE JPN NLD USA

Country1

Percent

Doing activities with no

conceptual links2

Learning content with weak

or no conceptual links3

Learning content with strong

conceptual links4

FIGURE 6. Percentage distribution of eighth-grade science lessons by focus and strength of conceptual links, by 

country: 1999

 ‡ Reporting standards not met. Too few cases to be reported. 

1 AUS=Australia; CZE=Czech Republic; JPN=Japan; NLD=Netherlands; and USA=United States.

2 Doing activities with no conceptual links: USA>JPN, NLD. 

3 Learning content with weak or no conceptual links: CZE>JPN; NLD>AUS, JPN.

4 Learning content with strong conceptual links: AUS, JPN>NLD, USA; CZE>NLD. 

NOTE: Detail may not sum to 100 because of rounding and data not reported. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Third International Mathematics 

and Science Study (TIMSS), Video Study, 1999.

• Making connections versus acquiring information: Japanese students were 

supported in activities that focused on making connections among ideas, 

experiences, patterns, and explanations in more science lessons (72 percent) than 

in any other country except Australia. More Australian lessons focused primarily 

on making connections (58 percent) than did Czech and Dutch science lessons 

(figure 7). In contrast, students in eighth-grade science lessons within the Czech 

Republic, the Netherlands, and the United States were more likely to be focused on 

acquiring knowledge in the form of facts, definitions, or algorithms (72, 73, and 

66 percent of lessons, respectively) than on making connections. Further analysis 

revealed that making connections in Australian and Japanese science lessons was 

most often accomplished through an inquiry or inductive approach wherein data 

were collected and then used to develop new ideas in 43 and 57 percent of lessons, 

respectively (data not shown). 
14

• Content supported by evidence in the form of first-hand data and phenomena: In 

Australia and Japan, more eighth-grade science lessons supported every main idea 

in the lesson with multiple sets of first-hand data and with multiple phenomena 

than in the science lessons of the other three countries (figure 8). 

• Content supported by evidence in the form of visual representations: In the Czech 

Republic and Japan, multiple visual representations supported all the main ideas in 

science lessons more often than in the Netherlands (figure 8).

• Content supported by multiple types of evidence: Further analysis showed that 

more Japanese science lessons (65 percent) supported every main idea with at 

least one set of first-hand data, at least one phenomenon, and at least one visual 

representation than lessons in the other countries. Australian lessons were more 

likely to use all three types of evidence to support all the main ideas (47 percent) 

than Dutch and U.S. lessons (14 and 18 percent, respectively) (data not shown). 

• Content developed with real-life issues: Science ideas were developed using reallife issues and examples in more Czech eighth-grade science lessons than in the 

lessons of the other countries except Australia (data not shown). In Australia, reallife issues were used to support the development of science ideas in more lessons 

than in Japan. Within the United States, a larger proportion of instruction time, on 

average, was spent presenting real-life issues as topic-related sidebars rather than 

using real-life issues to develop science ideas. The opposite was observed within 

Czech science lessons. 

42

72

28

73 66

58

29

72

27 34

0

20

40

60

80

100

AUS CZE JPN NLD USA

Country1

Percent

Making connections2

Acquiring facts, definitions,

and algorithms3

FIGURE 7. Percentage distribution of eighth-grade science lessons that developed science content primarily by 

making connections and by acquiring facts, definitions, and algorithms, by country: 1999

1 AUS=Australia; CZE=Czech Republic; JPN=Japan; NLD=Netherlands; and USA=United States.

2 Making connections: AUS, JPN>CZE, NLD; JPN>USA. 

3 Acquiring facts, definitions, and algorithms: CZE, NLD>AUS, JPN; USA>JPN.

NOTE: Detail may not sum to 100 because of rounding.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Third International Mathematics 

and Science Study (TIMSS), Video Study, 1999.
15

56

29

67

21 26

45

22

55

15 18

40

54 59

23

42

0

20

40

60

80

100

AUS CZE JPN NLD USA

Country 1

Percent

More than one set of first-hand

data2

More than one phenomenon3

More than one visual

representation4

FIGURE 8. Percentage of eighth-grade science lessons that supported all main ideas with more than one set of 

first-hand data, phenomena, and visual representations, by country: 1999

1 AUS=Australia; CZE=Czech Republic; JPN=Japan; NLD=Netherlands; and USA=United States.

2 More than one set of first-hand data: AUS, JPN>CZE, NLD, USA. 

3 More than one phenomenon: AUS, JPN>CZE, NLD, USA. 

4 More than one visual representation: CZE, JPN>NLD. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Third International Mathematics 

and Science Study (TIMSS), Video Study, 1999

Differences in Student Actions

Among the major activity types examined in this study, independent practical activities 

(observing and manipulating objects), independent seatwork activities (reading, 

writing, and small group discussions), and whole-class discussions engage students 

most actively in doing science work. 

• Independent practical activities: Across-country differences, described and 

presented previously in figure 2, indicated that Australian and Japanese science 

lessons focused more time on independent practical activities than did Czech and 

Dutch lessons. 

• Independent seatwork activities: Dutch lessons focused more time on independent 

seatwork activities compared to Czech and Japanese lessons (figure 2). 

• Whole-class discussions: Whole-class discussions accounted for 10 to 33 percent 

of the instruction time (figure 9), and they occurred in at least 81 percent of the 

lessons in all of the countries (data not shown). Lessons in the Czech Republic 

allocated a larger percentage of science instruction time, on average, to public 

discussions (33 percent) compared to all the other countries (figure 9).
16

More detailed analysis within these three major activity types assessed students’ 

opportunities to use textbooks and read about science, to write about science, to 

engage in a variety of science inquiry processes, to participate in potentially motivating 

activities, and to take responsibility for their own learning (through working 

independently on lesson-opening tasks without any direction from the teacher, 

organizing their own science notebooks, being prepared to work or be graded publicly 

in front of the class, monitoring their own pace on long-term homework assignments, 

and checking their own work as they proceeded on long-term assignments).

• Using textbooks and reading about science: Students used textbooks and/or 

workbooks in more Dutch science lessons compared to lessons in the other 

countries (data not shown). In addition, Dutch students spent 20 percent of 

instructional time reading about science while students in Australia, the Czech 

Republic, and Japan spent no more than 8 percent of instructional time reading 

(data not shown).

• Writing about science: Writing tasks included taking notes during whole-class 

work, selecting answers during independent work, and generating phrases, 

sentences, or paragraphs, such as a lab report or essay writing. Students in the 

Czech Republic were expected to write about science for less instructional time 

(15 percent) than students in all of the other countries (34 to 44 percent; data not 

shown). Within Dutch and U.S. science lessons, students were given more time to 

generate written responses than to provide labels or one-word answers. Within the 

Netherlands, for example, students spent 36 percent of instructional time generating 

written responses and only 6 percent of the time providing labels or one-word 

responses (data not shown). 

31

45 37 35 34

10 13 19

33

15

0

20

40

60

80

100

AUS CZE JPN NLD USA

Country1

Percent

Public discussions2

Public presentations3

FIGURE 9. Average percentage distribution of science instruction time per eighth-grade science lesson devoted to 

public presentations and discussions during whole-class work, by country: 1999

1

AUS=Australia; CZE=Czech Republic; JPN=Japan; NLD=Netherlands; and USA=United States.

2

Public discussions: CZE>AUS, JPN, NLD, USA; AUS, USA>JPN.

3

Public presentations: CZE>AUS, JPN, NLD, USA.

NOTE: Percentage of science instruction time devoted to public talk during independent work and to demonstrations is 

not reported. See figure 3.6, chapter 3 in Roth et al. (2006) for the distribution of instruction time between whole-class 

and independent work.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Third International Mathematics 

and Science Study (TIMSS), Video Study, 1999
17

• Scientific inquiry practices: Teachers sometimes provide opportunities for students 

to engage in different types of inquiry practices, that is, scientific actions that 

students are asked to do before, during, and after independent practical activities. 

Before independent practical work, students may be expected to generate research 

questions, design procedures to investigate the research question, or make 

predictions about the outcomes. During independent practical work, students 

may collect and record data. After the investigation, students may be expected to 

manipulate the data collected, or to interpret the data. Students engaged in using a 

variety of scientific inquiry practices related to their work on independent practical 

activities (table 3). Students in Japan made predictions in 23 percent of the eighthgrade science lessons. Students had opportunities to collect and record first-hand 

data or phenomena related to independent practical activities in more Australian 

and Japanese science lessons than in Czech, Dutch, and U.S. science lessons. In 

addition, Australian and Japanese students were guided by the teacher or textbook 

to organize or manipulate data in more science lessons than in the Netherlands. 

Students in Australian science lessons were more likely to interpret results of 

independent practical activities than students in both Czech and Dutch lessons. 

Within Czech science lessons, students were more likely to be asked to interpret 

results than collect and record data. 

TABLE 3. Percentage of eighth-grade science lessons in which students engaged in different inquiry activities 

before, during, and after independent practical work, by country: 1999

Student activity Australia

(AUS)

Czech 

Republic

(CZE)

Japan

(JPN)

Netherlands

(NLD)

United 

States

(USA)

Generated the research question1 3! ‡ ‡ ‡ ‡

Designed procedures for investigations2 10 ‡ 5! ‡ 5

Made predictions3 11 ‡ 23 4! 8

Interpreted the data or phenomena4 56 20 43 24 33

Collected and recorded data5 62 8 59 29 31

Organized or manipulated data collected independently6 9 ‡ ‡ 8 8

Organized or manipulated collected data guided by teacher 

or textbook7 27 3! 37 8 19

 ‡ Reporting standards not met. Too few cases to be reported.

! Interpret data with caution. Estimate is unstable.

1 Generated the research question: No measurable differences detected. 

2 Designed procedures for investigations: No measurable differences detected. 

3 Made predictions: JPN>NLD. 

4 Interpreted the data or phenomena: AUS>CZE, NLD; JPN>CZE. 

5 Collected and recorded data: AUS, JPN, NLD, USA>CZE; AUS, JPN>NLD, USA. 

6 Organized or manipulated data collected independently: No measurable differences detected. 

7 Organized or manipulated collected data guided by the teacher or the textbook: AUS, JPN>CZE, NLD; USA>CZE. 

NOTE: Totals for students organized or manipulated data on their own or under the direction of the teacher or textbook do not sum to students collected and recorded data because students do not always manipulate collected data.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Third International Mathematics 

and Science Study, Video Study, 1999.

 
18

•	 Motivating activities: Although many kinds of activities may motivate students 

(e.g., practical activities, reading and writing activities), some teachers included 

activities in the science lessons that had the potential to be of high interest to 

students and motivate them to engage in the learning process. These activities 

included such things as games, puzzles, surprising and dramatic demonstrations, 

competitive activities, and role plays. More eighth-grade science lessons in the 

United States (63 percent) included potentially motivating activities (data not 

shown) and more instructional time was allocated for these motivating activities (23 

percent; figure 10) than science lessons in all of the other countries except Australia. 

23 3 4 11 5 0

20

40

60

80

100

AUS CZE JPN NLD USA

Country1

Percent

Figure 10. Average percentage of science instruction time in eighth-grade science lessons allocated to 

motivating activities, by country: 1999

1	AUS=Australia; CZE=Czech Republic; JPN=Japan; NLD=Netherlands; and USA=United States.

NOTE: USA>CZE, JPN, NLD; AUS>CZE.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Third International Mathematics and Science Study 

(TIMSS), Video Study, 1999.

•	 Taking responsibility for learning: Students were expected to take responsibility

for their own learning in a variety of ways, and these varied by country. Strategies

included expecting students to start working independently, without any direction

from the teacher, on a lesson-opening task that is posted on the board or overhead

projector, to organize their notes and other science work in a special science

notebook, to be prepared to work or be graded publicly in front of the class, to work

on assigned homework outside the classroom, to monitor their own pace on longterm homework assignments, and to check their own work as they proceeded on

long-term assignments. In the United States, students independently started their

science lesson by working on posted lesson openers in 26 percent of the lessons.

Students kept organized science notebooks in at least 50 percent of the lessons in

all of the countries except the United States. Public work by students and public

assessment of student learning was a more common practice in the Czech Republic
19

compared to most of the other countries. Assignment of homework occurred in 

66 percent of Dutch lessons, more than in the Czech Republic and Japan. Dutch 

students frequently were expected to pace themselves on long-term assignments 

and to check their own work as they progressed on these assignments. In addition, 

Dutch students spent more time in class reviewing homework than students in all 

the other countries where reliable estimates could be made (data not shown).

How is Teaching Science Approached in Each Country?

 Each of the countries has an observable pattern of science teaching.

Based on the analyses conducted for the study, the following observations can be made 

about the typical pattern of eighth-grade science teaching in each of the five countries.

Czech Republic: Talking About Science Content

The data suggest that eighth-grade science lessons in the Czech Republic can 

be characterized as whole-class events that focused on getting the content right. 

Instruction time focused on review, assessment, and development of canonical science 

knowledge, with relatively little time allocated for students to work independently on 

practical activities. Review and the public oral assessment of students was a prominent 

feature of Czech science lessons. The main topic areas addressed in science lessons were 

life science, physics, and chemistry. The content of Czech science lessons was judged to 

be challenging, dense, and theoretical, and also was found to be organized more often 

around acquiring facts and definitions than making conceptual connections. Perhaps 

because of the high density of ideas and the high percentage of lessons organized as 

discrete bits of information, half of the science lessons were found to have weak or 

no conceptual links that tied ideas together. On the other hand, half of the science 

lessons were found to be connected with strong conceptual links and the frequent 

presence of goal and summary statements also may have contributed to content 

coherence. Main ideas in Czech science lessons often were developed with the use of 

visual representations. In fact, all of the main ideas in the majority of science lessons 

were supported by multiple visual representations. Czech eighth-grade students were 

engaged actively in the work of learning science primarily through frequent whole-class 

discussions, opportunities to present their work in front of the class, and oral quizzes 

on science content in front of their peers. 

Netherlands: Learning Science Independently

Eighth-grade science lessons in the Netherlands focused on students’ independent 

learning of the science content. During independent seatwork activities, students read 

from the textbook and generated written responses to questions (beyond selecting 

answers) about life science and physics topics. Homework was typically assigned and 

was often observed to be the focus of either independent work in the lesson (working 

on assignments in class) or whole-class work (going over homework together). 

Students worked on homework assignments outside of class as well as during class. 
20

Students were expected to pace themselves on a long-term schedule of assignments, 

to check their own work in answer books, and to keep organized science notebooks. 

When Dutch science lessons included independent practical activities (30 percent 

of lessons), students were sent off to work on their own for most of the lesson, with 

their only direction being procedural guidelines. Public discussion of the results of 

independent practical activities was infrequently observed. Whole-class time in Dutch 

science lessons included going over homework assignments together. Dutch students 

also demonstrated responsibility for their own learning by initiating their own contentrelated questions during whole-class interactions. 

Japan: Making Connections Between Ideas and Evidence

Japanese eighth-grade science lessons typically focused on developing a few physics 

and chemistry ideas by making connections between ideas and evidence through an 

inquiry-oriented, inductive approach in which data were collected and interpreted 

to build up to a main idea or conclusion. Based on observations of the videotapes, 

Japanese science lessons were found to be conceptually coherent with an emphasis 

on identifying patterns in data and making connections among ideas and evidence. 

Independent practical work played a central role in the development of main ideas. 

Before carrying out such activities, Japanese eighth-grade students were usually 

informed of the question they would be exploring in the investigation, and were 

sometimes asked to make predictions. During and after practical work, Japanese 

students were guided by the teacher or textbook in manipulating and organizing 

the data into graphs or charts and then interpreting the data. Discussions after 

independent practical activities typically led to the development of one main 

conclusion—the main idea of the lesson. Few public canonical ideas were presented 

in Japanese science lessons, and these ideas were not judged to be challenging or 

theoretical. However, all of the main ideas in Japanese science lessons were developed 

with the use of data and/or phenomena. In fact, all main ideas were often supported 

by more than one set of data or more than one phenomenon. Thus, it appears that 

few ideas were developed in Japanese science lessons, but each idea was treated in 

depth, with multiple sources of supporting evidence. 

Australia: Making Connections Between 

Main Ideas, Evidence, and Real-Life Issues

Like the Japanese eighth-grade science lessons, Australian lessons tended to focus 

on developing a limited number of ideas by making connections between ideas and 

evidence. Ideas were developed through an inquiry, inductive approach in which 

data were collected during practical activities carried out independently by the 

students. During and after the practical work, Australian students were often guided 

in manipulating and organizing the data and in interpreting the data. All of the main 

ideas in Australian science lessons were supported by data or phenomena in at least 

45 percent of lessons. 

Australian science lessons used real-life issues (69 percent) and first-hand data (56 

percent) to support the development of science ideas, most often in the area of physics. 
21

In addition, students in Australian lessons typically participated in two or more types 

of activities likely to be engaging to students (real-life issues, independent practical 

activities, and motivating activities). Thus, Australian lessons appeared to have a 

strong focus on developing ideas through an inquiry, inductive process and supporting 

canonical ideas with examples of real-life issues while also providing multiple types of 

activities that had the potential to engage students’ interest. 

United States: Implementing a Variety of Activities

The data suggest that U.S. eighth-grade science lessons can be characterized by a 

variety of activities that may engage students in doing science work, with less focus 

on connecting these activities to the development of science content ideas. In terms of 

student activities, U.S. eighth-grade science lessons kept students busy on a variety of 

activities, with a roughly equal emphasis on involving students in independent practical 

activities (e.g., hands-on, laboratory), independent seatwork activities (e.g., reading, 

writing, small-group discussions), and whole-class discussions. In addition, U.S. science 

teachers attempted to engage students’ interest and active involvement through the use 

of real-life issues and motivating activities (e.g., games, puzzles, role play). Twenty-three 

percent of U.S. instructional time was spent on motivating activities.

Variety was found in science content topics as well, with lessons spread across the areas 

of earth science, life science, physics, chemistry, and other topics (nature of science, 

and interactions of science, technology, and society). Students in U.S. eighth-grade 

science lessons had the opportunity to encounter some challenging content in the 

form of laws and theories, as well as some exposure to various forms of evidence (data, 

phenomena, visual representations, and real-life examples). These various sources of 

evidence, though, were not frequently linked to larger science ideas to create coherent, 

connected, in-depth treatment of science content in the lessons. Instead, the various 

pieces of content were typically organized as discrete bits of factual information or 

problem-solving algorithms rather than as a set of connected ideas. For example, reallife issues were more often mentioned in U.S. lessons as interesting sidebars rather 

than being used as an integral part of developing science content ideas. In addition, the 

content of 44 percent of lessons included weak or no conceptual links while 27 percent 

of the lessons did not develop science content ideas at all, but instead focused almost 

completely on carrying out activities. 

Do the Four Relatively Higher-Achieving Countries 

(Compared to the United States) Share Any Commonalities?

The four higher-achieving countries share two commonalities:

 high content standards and a content-focused instructional approach.

The data suggest that compared to the United States, the four relatively higherachieving countries (based on the TIMSS 1995 assessments and consistent with the 

1999 assessments) in eighth-grade science participating in this study—Australia, 
22

the Czech Republic, Japan, and the Netherlands—shared two commonalities. First, 

eighth-grade science lessons in these four countries appeared to focus on high 

content standards and expectations for student learning. However, there were varying 

definitions across these four countries for what counts as high content standards. 

Second, instead of exposing students to a variety of pedagogical approaches and 

content, the science lessons within each of the four relatively higher-achieving countries 

appeared to reflect a common instructional approach that was content-focused.

In the Czech Republic, the content standards were high in terms of the density and 

challenge of science content ideas, and the instructional approach focused on talking in 

a whole-class setting about science ideas. In Australia and Japan, the content standards 

were high in terms of developing ideas with the support of evidence in the form of firsthand data and phenomena, and the instructional approach focused on connecting ideas 

and data through an inquiry, inductive process. In the Netherlands, science content 

expectations were high in terms of students being held responsible for their own 

independent learning, and the instructional approach featured independent, seatwork 

activities focused around textbook-centered reading and writing activities. 

Summary

The results of the TIMSS 1999 Video Study of eighth-grade science teaching suggest 

different country-specific patterns of eighth-grade science teaching in each of the 

participating countries and highlight the role of content and a core instructional 

approach in the relatively higher-achieving countries. Despite some commonalities 

across the countries, each of the countries, including the four higher-achieving 

countries, had a distinct approach to science teaching, providing students with different 

opportunities to learn science and different visions of what it means to understand 

science. The countries varied in the organizational features, content features, and the 

ways in which students were involved in actively doing science work in the science 

lessons. Thus, no single approach was shared by the four higher-achieving countries, 

but science lessons in the higher-achieving countries were all characterized by a core 

instructional approach that included a consistent instructional and content organization 

strategy that held students to some type of high content standards. Eighth-grade science 

lessons in the United States were also observed to have a core instructional approach, 

but that approach focused on variety rather than consistency in the science lessons. 

Although students were exposed to a variety of organizational structures, variety of 

content, and variety of activities, these features were not typically used to develop 

content ideas in ways that would make the science content storyline visible, coherent, 

and challenging for eighth-grade students.

To learn more about the results of this study and to view video clip examples on CDROM, see the information below about how to access the full report, Teaching Science 

in Five Countries: Results From the TIMSS 1999 Video Study (Roth et al. 2006).
23

References

American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS). (1990). Science for All Americans. New 

York: Oxford University Press.

American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS). (1993). Benchmarks for Science Literacy. 

New York: Oxford University Press.

Australian Education Council. (1994). Science: A Statement on Science for Australian Schools. Carlton, 

Victoria, AU: Curriculum Corporation.

Beaton, A.E., Martin, M.O., Mullis, I.V.S., Gonzalez, E.J., Smith, T.A., and Kelly, D.L. (1996). Science 

Achievement in the Middle School Years: IEA’s Third International Mathematics and Science Study. 

Chestnut Hill, MA: Center for the Study of Testing, Evaluation, and Educational Policy, Boston 

College.

Czech Ministry of Education. (1996). Educational Program Basic School: Grades 1–9. Prague: Ministry of 

Education. 

Dutch Ministry of Education, Culture, and Science. (1998). Attainment Targets, 1998–2003: Basic 

Secondary Education in the Netherlands. The Hague, The Netherlands: Dutch Ministry of 

Education.

Gonzales, P., Calsyn, C., Jocelyn, L., Mak, K., Kastberg, D., Arafeh, S., Williams, T., and Tsen, W. (2000). 

Pursuing Excellence: Comparisons of International Eighth-Grade Mathematics and Science 

Achievement from a U.S. Perspective, 1995 and 1999 (NCES 2001-028). Washington, DC: U.S. 

Government Printing Office. 

Gonzales, P., Guzmán, J.C., Partelow, L., Pahlke, E., Jocelyn, L., Kastberg, D., and Williams, T. (2004). 

Highlights From the Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS) 2003 (NCES 

2005-005). Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.

Hiebert, J., Gallimore, R., Garnier, H., Givvin, K., Hollingsworth, H., Jacobs, J. Chui, A., Wearne, D., 

Smith, M., Kersting, N., Manaster, A., Tseng, E., Etterbeek, W., Manaster, C., Gonzales, P., 

and Stigler, J. (2003). Teaching Mathematics in Seven Countries: Results from the TIMSS 1999 

Video Study. (NCES 2003–013). U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education 

Statistics. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.

Kolavova, R. (1998). What Should Pupils of Elementary School (K–8) Know from Physics, Chemistry, and 

Biology? Prague: Prometheus. 

Ministry of Education, Science, and Culture [Monbusho]. (1999). National Course of Study for Secondary 

Schools. Tokyo: Government of Japan.

National Research Council (NRC). (1996). National Science Education Standards. Washington, DC: 

National Academy Press.

Nelesovska, A., and Spalcilova, H. (1998). Didaktika III. Olomouc, Czech Republic: VUP.

Martin, M.O., Mullis, I.V.S., González, E.J., Gregory, K.D., Smith, T.A., Chrostowski, S.J., Garden, R.A., 

and O’Connor, K.M. (2000). TIMSS 1999 International Science Report: Findings from IEA’s Repeat 

of the Third International Mathematics and Science Study at the Eighth Grade. Chestnut Hill, MA: 

Boston College.
24

April 2006

Roth, K.J., Druker, S.L., Garnier, H., Lemmens, M., Chen, C., Kawanaka, T., Rasmussen, D., Trubacova, 

S., Warvi, D., Okamoto, Y., Gonzales, P., Stigler, J., and Gallimore, R. (2006). Teaching Science in 

Five Countries: Results From the TIMSS 1999 Video Study. (NCES 2006-011). U.S. Department of 

Education. Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics.

Schwab, J. (1969). The practical: A language for curriculum. School Review, 78(1): 1-23. 

Schwab, J. (1971). The practical: Arts of the eclectic. School Review, 79(4): 493-542. 

Schwab, J. (1973). The practical: Translation into curriculum. School Review, 81(4): 501-522. 

Stigler, J.W., Gonzales, P., Kawanaka, T., Knoll, S., and Serrano, A. (1999). The TIMSS Videotape Classroom 

Study: Methods and Findings from an Exploratory Research Project on Eighth-Grade Mathematics 

Instruction in Germany, Japan, and the United States. (NCES 1999-074). U.S. Department of 

Education. Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics. 

Stigler, J.W., and Hiebert, J. (1999). The Teaching Gap: Best Ideas from the World’s Teachers for Improving 

Education in the Classroom. New York: Free Press.

This publication is available for downloading on the NCES web site: http://nces.ed.gov/pubsearch.

To obtain a single free copy of the complete report from which this brochure was developed (NCES 

2006-011), call toll free 1-877-4ED-PUBS; or order online at

http://www.edpubs.org/webstore/content/search.asp.

For more information on TIMSS, visit http://nces.ed.gov/timss, contact the TIMSS customer service 

number (202-502-7421), or send an e-mail (iap@ed.gov).

Content contact: 

Patrick Gonzales, patrick.gonzales@ed.gov or (415) 920-9229.