
RELATED:
Index to Minnesota TIMSS Figures / Data
------
Return to SciMathMN's TIMSS main page. 
|
 |
 |
 |
Minnesota
TIMSS Report
Summary of Minnesota Eighth Grade
Achievement Results
The performance of Minnesota eighth grade students in mathematics and science
achievement reflects both strengths and weaknesses.
- Minnesota eighth-graders scored about the international average in mathematics.
- They scored well above the international average in science(among the top countries).
- They scored above the U.S. average in all specific content areas but showed the same
wide range of individual scores.
Being among the best in the U.S. is not the same as being first in the world.
- Minnesota's consistently strong performance in mathematics and science compared to the
rest of the U.S. looks different in an international context.
- Eighth grade mathematics in Minnesota is seventh grade mathematics by international
standards.
- As the recent results on U.S. NAEP testing show, some Minnesota students--particularly
some minority groups-- still lag far behind their peers in mathematics achievement at the
eighth grade, a fact hidden by the single average Minnesota score for mathematics on the
TIMSS tests.
We cannot ascribe Minnesota's relative success (compared to the rest of the U.S.) to
our homogeneous population.
- The range of student scores from top to bottom in Minnesota is similar to the range of
scores for all U.S. students.
- The high average performance in science and middling performance in mathematics were
achieved essentially by the same group of students (in other words, we have to look to
factors other than student background or socio-economic standing to account for the
difference in scores between mathematics and science).
- Unlike the U.S. results, there was a significant difference in performance between boys
and girls in science (though not in mathematics) in the Minnesota TIMSS testing.
TIMSS shows the importance of focus in curricular materials and instructional
practices.
- We are lowest in measurement and geometry in large part because we emphasize arithmetic,
without focus on geometry and measurement.
- We score high in earth sciences and life sciences primarily because we emphasize these
subjects at the seventh and eighth grade levels.
- Minnesota did particularly well in science (on TIMSS) primarily because the major
factors contributing to success were relatively well aligned.
- Course offerings are consistent statewide (eighth grade science in Minnesota is earth
science, the content area we scored highest in), and a majority of teachers use the same
or similar textbooks.
- There is little tracking in eighth grade science, as compared to eighth grade
mathematics.
- Teacher licensing supports the curriculum focus.
- The tradition of inquiry-oriented instruction and the long-standing availability of
appropriate materials (kits, etc.) also help explain Minnesota's strong showing in
science.
The focus and coherence of the components of the system, not any one part of the system
in isolation, make the difference in how Minnesota performs as a whole.
- The international TIMSS results show that it's not who is taking the test, or how much
homework or time on task students have, or length of school day or school year, that makes
the biggest difference in student performance.
- The U.S. performance on TIMSS shows the weaknesses of an unfocused curriculum and
instructional approaches, further complicated by use of diverse and unaligned assessments.
- Minnesota's performance on TIMSS illustrates the power of alignment (as reflected in our
science scores) and the problems with lack of focus (as reflected in our mathematics
performance).
- Even in science, we still need to improve -- to move beyond traditional approaches and
to close the gender gap (and similar performance gaps which may exist for other
under-performing groups of students).
- The national standards provide a potentially powerful source of direction and focus for
Minnesota mathematics and science, but the danger is uneven implementation (some districts
use the standards, some don't) or burden by addition (adding recommendations from the
standards without taking anything away from the existing curriculum).
|