Comparing international curriculum systems: the international instructional systems study

ABSTRACT

This paper sets out the main findings of the International Instructional Systems Study (IISS), conducted by the UCL Institute of Education and funded by the Center on International Education Benchmarking (CIEB). The study examined the instructional systems and intended curricula of six ‘high performing’ countries and two US states. The study ultimately focused on nine specific aspects of those systems: the aims of the education system; how centralised or decentralised management of the instructional system is; principles and methods of accountability; what compulsory and optional subjects are included in the programmes of study; the degree to which curriculum is organised by discipline or integrated across disciplines; whether curriculum is common or differentiated; how twenty-first century skills are embedded in the curriculum; the clarity and content of curriculum for secondary vocational pathways; and how assessments are created and what stakes they have and for whom.

KEYWORDS:

• Curriculum
• standards
• twenty-first century skills
• assessment
• integrated curricula
• vocational pathways
• ability grouping
• International Instructional Systems Study

Acknowledgments

The data for this research were obtained from a study supported by a grant from the Center for International Education Benchmarking (CIEB), National Center on Education and the Economy (NCEE), Washington, DC.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.

Notes

1. The Common Core State Standards Initiative has created a single set of standards in mathematics and English – and is working on science – for kindergarten through 12th grade. The aim is to ensure that students who graduate from high school are ready for university or the workplace. For more information, see the Common Core website: http://www.corestandards.org.

2. A number of assumptions have been made to create a common format for all jurisdictions. We have assumed that Finland has on average 38 weeks of school per year and lessons of 45 minutes, that Singapore has on average 40 weeks of school per year and Alberta has 950 hours of instruction per year.

3. Some scholars argue that the summative/formative distinction is not the same as the distinction between assessment of and assessment for learning, for example, see Bennett, R. E. (2011). Formative assessment: a critical review. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 18 (1), p. 5–25.

4. Jerrim's (2014) recent work with ethnic Chinese students in Australia is interesting in this regard. He found that even in Western environments East Asian children outperform their counterparts, presumably due to out of school factors

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Brian Creese

Brian Creese is a research and development officer at UCL Institute of Education. He is attached to two centres: the National Research and Development Centre for adult literacy and numeracy (NRDC) which deals with adult English and mathematics and the Centre for Education in the Criminal Justice system (CECJS), which specialises in prison education. He also teaches on the adult PGCE maths education course. Recent projects have included working with such diverse funders as the Royal Society, the Government of Malta and the Ministry of Defence.

Alvaro Gonzalez

Alvaro González is currently a PhD candidate at the UCL Institute of Education, where he previously obtained a master's degree in school effectiveness and school improvement. Alvaro has worked as a research assistant at the Institute of Education, and before that he was an associate researcher at the Pontificia Universidad Católica de Valparaíso (PUCV) in his home country, Chile.

Tina Isaacs

Tina Isaacs is a senior lecturer at the UCL Institute of Education. She is the programme director for the MA in Educational Assessment and a former Director at the Institute's Centre for Post-14 Research and Innovation. Tina returned to higher education in November 2009, before which she worked for 16 years at the National Council for Vocational Qualifications (NCVQ), the Qualifications and Curriculum Authority (QCA) and the Office of Qualifications and Examinations Regulation (Ofqual) specialising in 14–19 qualifications development, implementation, accreditation and monitoring.