Introduction
Good afternoon Mr. Chairman and members of the Subcommittee. I am Dr. Reid
Lyon, Chief of the Child Development and Behavior Branch of the National
Institute of Child Health and Human Development (NICHD) at the National
Institutes of Health (NIH). I am pleased to have been asked to address
your Subcommittee on the current state of educational research and the
impact of recent developments in neuroscience, cognition, and developmental
psychology on education, as well as the contributions of NICHD to the
Interagency Education Research Initiative (IERI). The NICHD considers that
teaching and learning in today's schools is not only a critical educational
and social issue, but also is a significant public health issue. Research
has shown that if children do not learn how use language to communicate
ideas and perspectives, to read and write, to calculate and reason
mathematically, and to solve problems, their opportunities for a fulfilling
and rewarding life are seriously compromised. Specifically, in our NICHD
longitudinal studies, we have learned that school failure has devastating
consequences with respect to self-esteem, social development, and
opportunities for advanced education and meaningful employment.
NICHD Research Efforts Relevant to Education, Teaching and School Learning
The NICHD has developed and supports a large research network consisting of
42 sites in North America, Europe, and Asia that are working in a concerted
multidisciplinary fashion to identify: (1) the critical environmental,
experiential, cognitive, genetic, neurobiological, and instructional
conditions that foster strong reading and writing development; (2) the risk
factors that predispose children to difficulties in learning to read and
write; and (3) the instructional approaches and procedures that foster
optimal reading development, as well as practices and procedures for
preventing and remediating reading and writing difficulties.
This research effort has been sustained over the past 34 years, since its
inception in 1965, and has been designed to ensure: programmatic coherence
and communication among scientists at all 42 sites, accumulation of
converging evidence using multiple research methodologies to inform
assessment and instructional efforts in an optimal fashion, testing of
specific theories and assumptions that guide educational practices, and the
translation of basic research findings to classroom settings and practices.
Because many of the studies conducted by scientists in the NICHD Reading
and Learning Disabilities Research Network have been devoted to
understanding conditions critical to the normal development of oral
language, reading, and written language skills, 21,860 children with robust
reading and writing skills have been studied, some for as long as 13
years. Likewise, significant programmatic effort has also been deployed to
understand why many children have difficulties learning to read and write.
To address this issue, 12,641 individuals with reading and writing
difficulties and disorders have been studied, many also for as long as 13
years. Moreover, in 1985, the NICHD, building on the knowledge gained from
studies addressing reading development and disorders, designed an
initiative to develop and apply early identification methods to pinpoint
those children during kindergarten and the first-grade who are at risk for
reading failure. These studies have provided the foundation for several
ongoing prevention, early identification, and instructional studies under
way at 12 sites in North America. Since 1985, 7,669 children (including
1,423 good readers) have participated in these reading instruction studies,
and 3,600 youngsters are currently enrolled in longitudinal intervention
studies in Texas, Washington, Georgia, Massachusetts, New York, Florida,
Colorado, California, North Carolina, and Washington, D.C. These studies
involve the participation of 1,012 classroom teachers, working in 266
schools and 985 classrooms. Mr. Chairman, I would be pleased to submit a
more detailed summary of the NICHD Reading Research Program for inclusion
in the hearing record.
This year, the NICHD designed and initiated a systematic research effort to
identify the instructional conditions under which children whose first
language is Spanish are most likely to succeed in developing English oral
language, reading, and literacy skills. Similar to the studies conducted
in the English language Reading Research Program, this initiative
incorporates a multidisciplinary approach utilizing concepts and
methodologies from neuroscience, cognitive and developmental psychology,
educational psychology, and reading instruction. The Office of Education
Research and Improvement (OERI) within the Department of Education is
collaborating with the NICHD in this effort.
In the past five years, the NICHD has also developed a similar initiative
to identify critical cognitive, linguistic, neurobiological, experiential,
and instructional factors and conditions critical to the development of
mathematics calculation and mathematics reasoning skills. We anticipate
that this initiative will utilize collaborations with both OERI and the
National Science Foundation.
Conceptual and Methodological Characteristics of the NICHD Research
Programs Relevant to Education, Teaching and Learning
Extensive and Long-term Collaborations With the Scientific Community -- The
research initiatives described above were developed and designed in close
collaboration with scientists in education, psychology, linguistics,
special education, pediatrics, neurology, genetics, neuroscience, reading
and written language, mathematics, demographics/epidemiology, and
quantitative and qualitative research methodologies. The purpose of these
collaborations is to identify critical gaps in the scientific knowledge
base concerned with (1) oral language, reading, writing, and mathematics
development, (2) difficulties and disorders in acquiring these academic
skills, (3) the development and application of efficacious
instructional-teaching approaches, methods, and strategies, and (4) the
development of research designs that enhance both basic and applied
research in these complex educational areas. Scientists from the external
research community meet on a formal basis with NICHD program scientists to
determine what is known, what is not known, and how best to study critical
educational targets to close the knowledge gaps. These collaborations
typically result in the setting of a formal research agenda and the
publication of a solicitation to stimulate the necessary research.
An Emphasis on Programmatic, Coordinated, and Sustained Research Programs
-- The NICHD employs programmatic mechanisms to develop multi-site,
multidisciplinary, and multi-methodology research networks that conduct
research on a sustained, longitudinal basis. This particular emphasis has
consistently resulted in the necessary replication of studies, the
accumulation of converging evidence to inform practice and policies, the
promotion of essential collaboration across sites, and the integration of
critical information about development, learning, and instruction that are
informed by multiple disciplines. For example, studies are now under way
that incorporate educational, psychological, and neurobiological methods
and concepts to determine which teaching approaches are most beneficial for
children with reading difficulties and to further determine how brain
physiology changes in response to instruction and improvements in reading
behavior.
Theoretically Based and Hypothesis Driven -- NICHD supported research
requires that the specific research questions, hypotheses and analytic
methods be derived from a carefully considered set of ideas and supporting
evidence. The research plan must be exquisitely designed and clear
linkages must exist across theoretical elements, hypotheses, measures, and
data analytic methods.
Measurement Quality -- Standardized tests, laboratory tasks, observational
measures, interview schedules, and other assessment/observational
procedures (e.g., dynamic assessments, case studies, ethnographic studies)
must be selected for the proposed research on the basis of known
reliability, validity, trustworthiness, and appropriateness to the
sample(s) under study. Moreover, NICHD initiatives relevant to education
also require the measurement of cognitive, linguistic, and academic growth
over time to capture changes in development under a variety of conditions
and across a variety of settings.
Longitudinal Perspective -- A major goal of the NICHD research programs
relevant to education is to provide long-term improvement in the
development of critical cognitive and academic skills. In order to
determine if different types of instructional approaches and strategies
produce any perceived benefits, it is essential that children be studied
over time. Longitudinal research has to be the cornerstone of any effort
examining cause and effect and the long-term outcome of a range of
influences on children’s cognitive, behavioral, and academic abilities.
Longitudinal designs have enabled us to determine the effects of different
reading instructional strategies applied with children differing in
cognitive, academic, and sociocultural characteristics, and to apply these
findings to classroom practice and policy with confidence. Within the
reading domain, longitudinal designs are providing us with the means to
determine if different types of interventions that show a positive effect
on reading development during preschool, kindergarten, and the primary
grades are maintained over time. This is critical given that educational
trends and policies, as well as teacher preparation course content, are
frequently based upon research that measures the effects of a particular
reading instructional strategy at only one point in a child's life and
offers absolutely no information about the maintenance and generalizability
of the effects of that strategy as youngsters develop and change
instructional settings.
An Emphasis on Clear Definitions of Samples, Methods, and
Treatment/Instructional Procedures -- NICHD supported educational research
must be conducted on samples of individuals who are clearly defined so that
independent replication of the study can be accomplished. Specifically,
all participants selected for study must be defined with respect to age,
grade level (if applicable), gender, ethnicity, socioeconomic status,
geographic region, previous and concurrent educational placements and
programs, and cognitive, linguistic, and instructional characteristics.
Likewise, instructional studies must include rigorous definitions of the
exact instructional components, instructional procedures, and instructional
settings to ensure that complete and independent replication is possible.
The Use of Well Developed and Objective Peer (Expert) Review Procedures --
A hallmark of NIH and NICHD supported research is the emphasis that is
placed on the objective and rigorous review and assessment of the quality
of the science that is proposed. This same care and quality of review is
applied to the NICHD programs of research that are relevant to education.
The review process is critical to the development and improvement of
research initiatives, and serves these functions by providing extensive
feedback to investigators via written critiques that serve to hone and
elevate the quality of the science.
Consistent and Regular Reflection on What Has Been Learned and What New
Research Needs to be Conducted -- The NICHD program planning process
provides a consistent opportunity to evaluate the products derived from
ongoing research and to rapidly adapt to scientific opportunities uncovered
by the research in progress. In addition, the NICHD research programs
relevant to education require that investigators from each of the sites in
the research networks meet at least once a year, and frequently several
times a year, to evaluate progress, identify common methodological and
measurement issues that require modification, and identify critical new
areas of research.
Selected Findings Derived From NICHD Research Relevant to Education and
Their Impact on Practice and Policies
Major advances in our knowledge about reading development, reading
difficulties, and reading instruction have been derived from the NICHD
supported research initiatives described earlier. Specifically, over the
past 34 years a great deal of converging evidence has improved our
understanding of how children learn to read, what factors impede reading
development, and which instructional approaches are most beneficial at
different stages of reading development. We have learned that the
development of skilled reading abilities requires the integration of
phonological skills, phonics skills, the development of accurate and fluent
textual reading capabilities, and the development and application of
reading comprehension strategies. We have learned that early language and
literacy experiences from birth onward are extremely important in fostering
these specific foundational skills. We have developed inexpensive
screening and assessment methods to identify children in kindergarten and
first grade who are at-risk for reading failure. This is a significant
development given that we have also learned that children after the age of
nine have an extremely difficult time improving their reading abilities.
We have learned that girls are as likely as boys to have difficulties
learning to read, but are frequently overlooked in the assessment process
and are not likely to receive appropriate specialized instruction. We have
learned that some instructional approaches, methods, and philosophies are
clearly not appropriate for certain children, but continue to be employed
in classrooms due to a lack of adequate teacher preparation in colleges of
education. We have also learned that instructional approaches that are
designed on the basis of the converging research findings work remarkably
well with children who have had difficulties learning to read as long as
well trained teachers provide the instruction early enough in the
youngsters school tenure.
These research findings have now had some influence on instructional
reading practices as well as on Federal and State educational policies and
initiatives. The NICHD reading research was relied upon heavily in the
development of the Reading Excellence Act and in state educational
initiatives in California, Texas, Nebraska, and several other states.
However, we have learned that it is extremely difficult to utilize research
findings to inform practices in school settings and classrooms. This
appears to be due to many factors, including inadequate teacher
preparation, the tendency for educational practices and policies to be
guided by philosophical and ideological factors rather than scientific
factors, and the persistent poor quality of much of the educational
research conducted to date. We have found that many teachers and
administrators who could benefit from converging research evidence do not
yet trust the idea that educational research can inform their teaching.
When asked why, they typically report that the research lacks authority, is
frequently of poor quality, is not easily accessible, is not practical, and
is usually communicated in an incomprehensible manner. Further, many
teachers and administrators report that educational research is frequently
used to tout a particular instructional magic bullet, which typically fails
to accomplish what was expected and then is replaced by the next
innovation. Analysis of these magic bullets almost always reveals that
they are based upon assumptions that have either never been adequately
tested or have been assessed using weak research methodology.
The State of Educational Research
In 1997, Congress requested that the Director of the NICHD, in consultation
with the Secretary of the Department of Education, convene a National
Reading Panel (NRP) to determine from existing research the most effective
approaches for teaching children to read. While the work of this Panel is
still ongoing, their initial efforts have indicated that educational
research is in need of improvement. Many others have reached this
conclusion, but the initial NRP findings are instructive.
The NRP has organized its activities to ensure a rigorous and objective
evaluation of the quality of research efforts that have been undertaken to
inform the reading community about the best approaches for teaching the
reading skills of decoding, word recognition, reading fluency, and reading
comprehension. The NRP is also evaluating the extant research relevant to
teacher preparation and the use of technology to teach reading. The Panel
developed a research evaluation methodology and a set of criteria to assess
individual studies with respect to (1) whether the study participants are
carefully described; (2) whether the instructional methods/ procedures are
described in sufficient detail to permit independent replication; (3)
whether the fidelity of the instruction being delivered was assessed; (4)
whether there was a full description of outcome measures; and (5) whether
there was an appropriate control or contrast group included in the study.
The initial data indicate that the majority of existing studies reported in
the educational literature could not be used in a meta-analysis because of
a lack of sufficient information or design flaws.
The lack of rigor in traditional educational research is of course due to
many complex factors. There appears to be a growing consensus that
research carried out within the educational academic community should take
place within a more rigorous context, be based on well developed scientific
principles, should encourage the integration of multiple disciplines and
methodologies, and incorporate an expert peer review system to assess the
scientific quality of proposed research. Moreover, for educational
research to realize its full potential, a sustained programmatic emphasis
must be established to ensure continuity, the analysis of children’s
learning and response to different forms of instruction over time and
across settings, and to provide opportunities for replication. In
addition, research training opportunities must be developed and improved in
order to equip both researchers in training and education faculty members
with a solid foundation in the inquiry skills that are necessary to address
well defined gaps in the current knowledge base relevant to teaching and
learning.
The Interagency Education Research Initiative
The goal of the Interagency Education Research Initiative (IERI) is to
develop interdisciplinary knowledge and research methods that allow for the
implementation and evaluation of large-scale educational interventions, the
results of which will inform both educational policy and practice. Of
critical interest is the validation of instructional procedures and
approaches to enhance reading, mathematics, and science knowledge, and the
application of validated approaches on a scale that reflects the complexity
of classroom and school system settings and interactions. Within this
context, the NICHD has worked closely with the NSF and the OERI to develop
the initial solicitation and peer review procedures, and is continuing to
work closely with these agencies to prepare a second solicitation for
applications. We are confident that initiatives such as the IERI can help
to improve the quality of education research by requiring outstanding
scientific merit, innovation, and proposed ideas and methods that are
capable of testing the applicability of concepts and principles derived
from small-scale and highly controlled studies to actual classroom and
school system settings. This goal can only be realized through the
development of a focused programmatic and sustainable research initiative
that is based on the highest scientific standards and the most rigorous
peer review process. Moreover, this initiative must continually be refined
and improved to ensure that NICHD, OERI, and NSF clearly of a different
scope and magnitude than research currently fund the research that is
supported.
Summary and Conclusions
It must be concluded that too little education research conducted over the
past century has been based on scientific principles that have proven
successful in expanding our knowledge in other arenas critical to child
health and development. Indeed, much of the educational research conducted
over the past 20 years has been predicated on the notion that scientific
findings are relative--in the eyes of the beholder--and that science is not
the process of discovering the ultimate truth of nature, but rather a
social construction that changes over time. These types of anti-scientific
ideologies and philosophical positions have been expressed within a culture
of post-modern thinking where a major premise is that there is no genuine
scientific method, but rather a sense that anything and everything goes.
This is unfortunate. The scientific process has proven itself in every
scientific discipline including physics, biology, chemistry, psychology,
neuroscience, medicine, and even reading development, reading disorders,
and reading instruction.
Educational research is at a crossroads. The educational academic
community can choose to be part of the modern scientific community or it
can isolate itself and its methods from mainstream scientific thought and
progress. The scientific method has been adapted to study and understand
the most complex of physical, biological, social, and behavioral systems
and interactions. Surely, the teaching and learning process deserves no
less. In order to develop the most effective instructional approaches and
interventions, we must clearly define what works, the conditions under
which it works, and what may not be helpful. This requires a thoughtful
integration of experimental, quasi-experimental and qualitative/descriptive
methodologies. Education research can be strengthened by beginning to
define an exact set of conditions--variables that can be quantified and
manipulated--and determine what happens in the presence and absence of
these conditions. These observations, no doubt, must be enriched with
qualitative insights that add ecological context to the quantitative
scaffold. Education research must be open to taking the next step of
formulating specific hypotheses that can be tested and confirmed or
refuted. By careful experimentation, we now understand and can treat
complex conditions that reflect a confluence of biology and environment.
If educational research is to participate in, and contribute to the
scientific community and the lives of our children, leaders within the
academic educational establishment must be willing to show the next
generation of educational researchers the way. I am confident it can be
done, and hopeful that it will occur in the near future.
I would be pleased to respond to any questions you may have.
