Curriculum and Learning Time in International School Achievement Studies

Methodology of Educational Measurement and Assessment

Volumn , Issue , 2016, Pages 395-422

  Kuger, Susanne ^a  

^a GERMAN INSTITUTE FOR INTERNATIONAL EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH   (Germany)

Author keywords

Classroom time; Curriculum research; Instruction time; International school comparison; Teaching and learning

Indexed keywords

EID: 85151490162     PISSN: 2367170X     EISSN: 23671718     Source Type: Book Series    
DOI: 10.1007/978-3-319-45357-6_16     Document Type: Chapter

References (100)

1. Abadzi, H. (2009). Instructional time loss in developing countries: Concepts, measurement, and implications. The World Bank Research Observer, 24(2), 267–290.
2. Anders, Y., Roßbach, H.-G., & Kuger, S. (2016). Early childhood learning experiences. In S. Kuger, E. Klieme, N. Jude, & D. Kaplan (Eds.), Assessing contexts of learning: An international perspective . Dordrecht: Springer.
3. Anderson, L. W. (2002). Curricular alignment: A re-examination. Theory Into Practice, 41 (4), 255–260.
4. Aucejo, E. M., & Romano, T. F. (2014). Assessing the effect of school days and absences on test score performance. London: Centre for Economic Performance. http://cep.lse.ac.uk/pubs/download/dp1302.pdf. Accessed 25 May 2016.
5. Baker, D. P., Fabrega, R., Galindo, C., & Mishook, J. (2004). Instructional time and national achievement: Cross-national evidence. Prospects, 34(3), 311–334. doi:10.1007/s11125-004-5310-1.
6. Barro, R. J., & Lee, J. (2015). Education matters: Global schooling gains from the 19th to the 21st century. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
7. Bellei, C. (2009). Does lengthening the school day increase students’ academic achievement? Results from a natural experiment in Chile. Economics of Education Review, 28 (5), 629–640. doi:10.1016/j.econedurev.2009.01.008.
8. Berliner, D. (1990). What’s all the fuss about instructional time? In M. Ben-Peretz & R. Bromme (Eds.), The nature of time in schools (pp. 3–35). New York: Teachers College Press.
9. Bloom, B. S. (1968). Learning for mastery. Evaluation Comment, 1(2), 1–12.
10. Bray, M. (2010). Researching shadow education: Methodological challenges and directions. Asia Pacific Education Review, 11(1), 3–13. doi:10.1007/s12564-009-9056-6.
11. Bray, M., & Lykins, C. (2012). Shadow education: Private supplementary tutoring and its implications for policy makers in Asia. Manila: Asian Development Bank. http://adb.org/sites/default/files/pub/2012/shadow-education.pdf. Accessed 25 May 2016.
12. Bray, M., Mazawi, A. E., & Sultana, R. G. (2013). Private tutoring across the Mediterranean— power dynamics and implications for learning and equity. Rotterdam: Springer. doi:10.1007/978-94-6209-237-2.
13. Bryk, A. S. (2010). Organizing schools for improvement: Lessons from Chicago. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
14. Carlsson, M., Dahl, G. B., Öckert, B., & Rooth, D.-O. (2015). The effect of schooling on cognitive skills. The Review of Economics and Statistics, 97(3), 533–547.
15. Carroll, J. B. (1963). A model of school learning. The Teachers College Record, 64(8), 723–733.
16. Carroll, J. B. (1989). The Carroll model: A 25-year retrospective and prospective view. Educational Researcher, 18(1), 26–31.
17. Chaudhury, N., Hammer, J., Kremer, M., Muralidharan, K., & Rogers, F. (2006). Missing in action: Teacher and health worker absence in developing countries. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 20(1), 91–116. doi:10.1257/089533006776526058.
18. Clements, D. H. (2007). Curriculum research: Toward a framework for research based curricula. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 38, 35–70.
19. Clotfelter, C., Ladd, H., & Vigdor, J. (2007). Are teacher absences worth worrying about in the U.S.? Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research. doi:10.3386/w13648.
20. Cooper, H., Robinson, J. C., & Patall, E. A. (2006). Does homework improve academic achievement? A synthesis of research, 1987–2003. Review of Educational Research, 76(1), 1–62. doi:10.3102/00346543076001001.
21. Cortes, K. E., & Goodman, J. S. (2014). Ability-tracking, instructional time, and better pedagogy: The effect of double-dose algebra on student achievement. The American Economic Review, 104(5), 400–405.
22. Creemers, B., & Kyriakides, L. (2010). School factors explaining achievement on cognitive and affective outcomes: Establishing a dynamic model of educational effectiveness. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 54(3), 263–294. doi:10.1080/00313831003764529.
23. Dewey, J. (1985). Democracy and education. In J. Dewey (Ed.), The middle works (pp. 1899– 1924). Carbondale/Edwardsville: Southern Illinois University Press.
24. DiPrete, T. A., & Buchmann, C. (2013). The rise of women: The growing gender gap in education and what it means for American schools. New York: Russell Sage.
25. Duff, P. A. (2002). The discursive co-construction of knowledge, identity, and difference: An eth-nography of communication in the high school mainstream. Applied Linguistics, 23(3), 289– 322. doi:10.1093/applin/23.3.289.
26. European Commission. (2011). The challenges of shadow education: Private tutoring and its implications for policy makers in the European Union. Brussels. www.nesse.fr/nesse/activities/ reports/activities/reports/thechallenge-of-shadow-education-1. Accessed 25 May 2016.
27. Fitzpatrick, M. D., Grissmer, D., & Hastedt, S. (2011). What a difference a day makes: Estimating daily learning gains during kindergarten and first grade using a natural experiment. Economics of Education Review, 30(2), 269–279. doi:10.1016/j.econedurev.2010.09.004.
28. Fortus, D., & Krajcik, J. (2012). In J. B. Fraser, K. Tobin, & J. C. McRobbie (Eds.), Second international handbook of science education (pp. 783–798). Dordrecht: Springer. doi:10.1007/978-1-4020-9041-7_52.
29. Fortus, D., Sutherland Adams, L. M., Krajcik, J., & Reiser, B. (2015). Assessing the role of curriculum coherence in student learning about energy. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 52(10), 1408–1425. doi:10.1002/tea.21261.
30. Gamoran, A., Porter, A. C., Smithson, J., & White, P. A. (1997). Upgrading high school mathematics instruction: Improving learning opportunities for low-achieving, low-income youth. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 19(4), 325–338. doi:10.3102/01623737019004325.
31. Gándara, P., Rumberger, R., Maxwell-Jolly, J., & Callahan, R. (2003). English learners in California schools: Unequal resources, unequal outcomes. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 11, 36. doi:10.14507/epaa.v11n36.2003.
32. Ghuman, S., & Lloyd, C. (2010). Teacher absence as a factor in gender inequalities in access to primary schooling in rural Pakistan. Comparative Education Review, 54 (4), 539–554. doi:10.1086/654832.
33. Goodman, J. (2014). Flaking out: Student absences and snow days as disruptions of instructional time. Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research. doi:10.3386/w20221.
34. Gromada, A., & Shewbridge, C. (2016). Student learning time: A literature review. Paris: OECD.
35. Hansen, B. (2011). School year length and student performance: Quasi-experimental evidence. University of Oregon. doi:10.2139/ssrn.2269846.
36. Harnischfeger, A., & Wiley, D. E. (1985). Origins of active learning time. In C. W. Fisher & D. C. Berliner (Eds.), Perspectives on instructional time (pp. 133–156). New York: Longman.
37. Hattie, J. A. C. (2009). Visible learning: A synthesis of over 800 meta-analyses relating to achievement . New York: Routledge.
38. Hayes, M., & Gershenson, S. (2016). What differences a day can make: Quantile regression estimates of the distribution of daily learning gains. Economics Letters, 141, 48–51. doi: 10.1016/j. econlet.2016.01.023.
39. Hendricks, M., Luyten, H., Scheerens, J., & Sleegers, P. (2013). Productive time in education. In J. Scheerens (Ed.), Productive time in education: A review of the effectiveness of teaching time at school, homework and extended time outside school hours (pp. 47–70). Enschede: University of Twente. http://purl.utwente.nl/publications/86371. Accessed 25 May 2016.
40. Hickey, D. T. (1997). Motivation and contemporary socio–constructivist instructional perspectives. Educational Psychologist, 32(3), 175–193. doi:10.1207/s15326985ep3203\_3.
41. Huebener, M., Kuger, S., & Marcus, J. (2016). Increased instruction hours and the widening gap in student performance. Berlin: DIW Berlin German Institute for Economic Research. http://hdl.handle.net/10419/130217. Accessed 25 May 2016.
42. Klieme, E., & Kuger, S. (2016). PISA 2015 context questionnaires framework. In OECD (Ed.), PISA 2015 assessment and analytical framework: Science, reading, mathematic and financial literacy (pp. 101–127). Paris: OECD Publishing. doi:10.1787/9789264255425-7-en.
43. Kyriakides, L., Creemers, B., Antoniou, P., & Demetriou, D. (2010). A synthesis of studies searching for school factors: Implications for theory and research. British Educational Research Journal, 36(5), 807–830. doi:10.1080/01411920903165603.
44. Lamprianou, I., & Lamprianou, T. A. (2013). Charting private tutoring in Cyprus. In M. Bray, A. E. Mazawi, & R. G. Sultana (Eds.), Private tutoring across the Mediterranean-power dynamics and implications for learning and equity (pp. 29–56). Rotterdam: Springer.
45. Lavy, V. (2015). Do differences in schools’ instruction time explain international achievement gaps? Evidence from developed and developing countries. The Economic Journal, 125(588), F397–F424. doi:10.1111/ecoj.12233.
46. Marcotte, D. E. (2007). Schooling and test scores: A mother-natural experiment. Economics of Education Review, 26(5), 629–640. doi:10.1016/j.econedurev.2006.08.001.
47. Martin, M. O., Mullis, I. V., Gonzalez, E. J., & Chrostowski, S. J. (2004). TIMSS 2003 international science report. Boston: TIMSS & PIRLS International Study Center, Lynch School of Education.
48. Martin, M. O., Mullis, I. V., & Foy, P. (2008). TIMSS 2007 international science report. Boston: TIMSS & PIRLS International Study Center, Lynch School of Education.
49. Marzano, R. J. (2003). What works in schools: Translating research into action. Alexandria: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
50. McKay, S. (2009). Second language classroom research. In A. Burns & J. C. Richards (Eds.), The Cambridge guide to second language teacher education (pp. 281–288). New York: Cambridge University Press.
51. Meroni, E. C., & Abbiati, G. (2016). How do students react to longer instruction time? Evidence from Italy. Education Economics. doi:10.1080/09645292.2015.1122742.
52. Millot, B., & Lane, J. (2002). The efficient use of time in education. Education Economics, 10 (2), 209–228. doi:10.1080/09645290210126922.
53. Müller, K., Prenzel, M., Seidel, T., Schiepe-Tiska, A., & Kjærnsli, M. (2016). Science teaching and learning in schools: Theoretical and empirical foundations for investigating classroom-level processes. In S. Kuger, E. Klieme, N. Jude, & D. Kaplan (Eds.), Assessing contexts of learning: An international perspective. Dordrecht: Springer.
54. Mullis, I. V., Martin, M. O., Kennedy, A. M., & Foy, P. (2007). IEA’s progress in international reading literacy study in primary school in 40 countries. Chestnut Hill: TIMSS & PIRLS International Study Center, Boston College.
55. OECD. (2011). Quality time for students: Learning in and out of school . Paris: OECD. doi:10.1787/9789264087057-en.
56. OECD. (2013). PISA 2012 results: What makes schools successful? Resources, policies and practices (volume IV). Paris: OECD Publishing.
57. OECD. (2015). The ABC of gender equality in education: Aptitude, behaviour, confidence, PISA. Paris: OECD. doi:10.1787/9789264229945-en.
58. Palincsar, A. S. (1998). Social constructivist perspectives on teaching and learning. Annual Review of Psychology, 49(1), 345–375. doi:10.1146/annurev.psych.49.1.345.
59. Pallegedara, A. (2012). Demand for private tutoring in a free education country. The case of Sri Lanka. International Journal of Education Economics and Development, 3 (4), 375–393. doi:10.1504/IJEED.2012.052321.
60. Parinduri, R. (2014). Do children spend too much time in schools? Evidence from a longer school year in Indonesia. Economics of Education Review, 41, 89–104. doi: 10.1016/j. econedurev.2014.05.001.
61. Patall, E. A., Cooper, H., & Allen, A. B. (2010). Extending the school day or school year: A systematic review of research (1985–2009). Review of Educational Research, 80(3), 401–436. doi:10.3102/0034654310377086.
62. Paviot, L., Heinsohn, N., & Korkman, J. (2008). Extra tuition in southern and eastern Africa: Coverage, growth, and linkages with pupil achievement. International Journal of Educational Development, 28(2), 149–160. doi:10.1016/j.ijedudev.2007.02.003.
63. Petty, N. W., & Green, T. (2007). Measuring educational opportunity as perceived by students: A process indicator. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 18(1), 67–91. doi:10.1080/09243450601104750.
64. Piaget, J. (1963). The origins of intelligence in children. New York: W.W. Norton & Company, Inc.
65. Pinar, W. (2014). International handbook of curriculum research (2nd ed.). New York: Routledge.
66. Pischke, J.-S. (2007). The impact of length of the school year on student performance and earnings: Evidence from the German short school years. Economic Journal, 117(523), 1216–1242. doi:10.1111/j.1468-0297.2007.02080.x.
67. Porter, A. C. (2002). Measuring the content of instruction: Uses in research and practice. Educational Researcher, 31(7), 3–14.
68. Porter, A. C., Smithson, J., Blank, R., & Zeidner, T. (2007). Alignment as a teacher variable. Applied Measurement in Education, 20(1), 27–51.
69. Pramling Samuelsson, I., & Carlsson, M. A. (2008). The playing learning child: Towards a pedagogy of early childhood. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 52 (6), 623–641. doi:10.1080/00313830802497265.
70. Rice, J. M. (1897). The futility of the spelling grind. The Forum, 23, 163–172.
71. Rivkin, S. G., & Schiman, J. C. (2015). Instruction time, classroom quality, and academic achievement. The Economic Journal, 125(588), F425–F448. doi:10.1111/ecoj.12315.
72. Rowan, B., Camburn, E., & Correnti, R. (2004). Using teacher logs to measure the enacted curriculum: A study of literacy teaching in third-grade classrooms. The Elementary School Journal, 105(1), 75–101.
73. Safarzynska, K. (2013). Socio-economic determinants of demand for private tutoring. European Sociological Review, 29(2), 139–154. doi:10.1093/esr/jcr045.
74. Scheerens, J. (Ed.). (2013). Productive time in education: A review of the effectiveness of teaching time at school, homework and extended time outside school hours. Enschede. http://purl. utwente.nl/publications/86371. Accessed 25 May 2016.
75. Scheerens, J., & Bosker, R. J. (1997). The foundations of educational effectiveness (1st ed.). Oxford: Pergamon.
76. Scheerens, J., Luyten, H., Steen, R., & Luyten-de Thouars, Y. (2007). Review and meta-analyses of school and teaching effectiveness. Enschede: University of Twente.
77. Schmidt, W. H. (1999). Facing the consequences: Using TIMSS for a closer look at U.S. mathematics and science education. Dordrecht/Boston: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
78. Schmidt, W. H., & Houang, R. T. (2007). Lack of focus in the mathematics curriculum: Symptom or cause. In T. Loveless (Ed.), Lessons learned: What international assessments tell us about math achievement (pp. 65–84). Washington, DC: Brookings Press.
79. Schmidt, W. H., & Houang, R. T. (2012). Curricular coherence and the common core state standards for mathematics. Educational Researcher, 41(8), 294–308. doi:10.3102/00131 89X12464517.
80. Schmidt, W. H., McKnight, C. C., Houang, R. T., Wang, H. C., Wilez, D., Cogan, L. S., & Wolfe, R. G. (2001). Why schools matter: A cross-national comparison of curriculum and learning . San Francisco: Jossey-Bass A Wiley.
81. Schmidt, W. H., Wang, H. C., & McKnight, C. C. (2005). Curriculum coherence: An examination of US mathematics and science content standards from an international perspective. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 37(5), 525–559. doi:10.1080/0022027042000294682.
82. Schuh Moore, A.-M., DeStefano, J., & Adelman, E. (2012). Opportunity to learn: A high impact strategy for improving educational outcomes in developing countries. Washington, DC: USAID. www.epdc.org/sites/default/files/documents/EQUIP2_OTL_Book.pdf. Accessed 25 May 2016.
83. Seidel, T., & Shavelson, R. J. (2007). Teaching effectiveness research in the past decade: The role of theory and research design in disentangling meta-analysis results. Review of Educational Research, 77(4), 454–499. doi:10.3102/0034654307310317.
84. Silbereisen, R. K., & Eyferth, K. (1986). Development as action in context. In R. K. Silbereisen, K. Eyferth, & G. Rudinger (Eds.), Development as action in context: Problem behavior and normal youth development (pp. 3–16). Heidelberg: Springer.
85. Silova, I., Budiene, V., & Bray, M. (2006). Education in a hidden market-place: Monitoring of private tutoring. New York: Open Society Institute.
86. Sims, D. P. (2008). Strategic responses to school accountability measures: It’s all in the timing. Economics of Education Review, 27(1), 58–68.
87. Sobhy, H. (2012). The de-facto privatization of secondary education in Egypt: A study of private tutoring in technical and general schools. Compare: A Journal of Comparative and International Education, 42(1), 47–67. doi:10.1080/03057925.2011.629042.
88. Stevens, F. I., Wiltz, L., Bailey, M. (1998). Teachers’ evaluations of the sustainability of opportunity to learn (OTL) assessment strategies: A national survey of classroom teachers in large urban school districts. Washington, DC.
89. Taba, H., & Spalding, W. B. (1962). Curriculum development: Theory and practice. New York: Harcourt, Brace & World.
90. The PROBE team. (1999). Public report on basic education in India. New Delhi: Oxford University Press.
91. Traphagen, K., Davis, J., Farbman, D., & Kaplan, C. (2011). Strengthing science education: The power of more time to deepen inquiry and engagement . Boston: National Center on Time and Learning. http://www.timeandlearning.org/sites/default/files/resources/strengthening_sci-ence:education_full_report_.pdf. Accessed 25 May 2016.
92. Trautwein, U., & Köller, O. (2003). The relationship between homework and achievement—still much of a mystery. Educational Psychology Review, 15(2), 115–145. doi:10.1023/A:1023460414243.
93. Trautwein, U., Köller, O., Schmitz, B., & Baumert, J. (2002). Do homework assignments enhance achievement? A multilevel analysis in 7th-grade mathematics. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 27(1), 26–50. doi:10.1006/ceps.2001.1084.
94. Travers, K. J., & Westbury, I. (1989). The IEA study of mathematics I: Analysis of mathematics curricula (Vol. 1). Oxford: Pergamon Press.
95. UN. (1989). Convention on the rights of the child. G.A. Res. 44/25, Annex 44 U.N. gaor supp. (no.49) at 167, U.N. doc. a/44/49.
96. Vygotsky, L. S. (1980). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes . Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
97. Wagner, P., Schober, B., & Spiel, C. (2008). Time students spend working at home for school. Learning and Instruction, 18, 309–320.
98. Wang, M. C., Haertel, G. D., & Walberg, H. J. (1993). Toward a knowledge base for school learning. Review of Educational Research, 63(3), 249–294. doi:10.3102/00346543063003249.
99. Willms, J., & Tramonte, L. (2015). Towards the development of contextual questionnaires for the PISA for development study. OECD Education Working Papers, No. 118. Paris: OECD Publishing. http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/5js1kv8crsjf-en
100. Wößmann, L. (2003). Schooling resources, educational institutions and student performance: The international evidence. Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, 65(2), 117–170. doi:10.1111/1468-0084.00045.