单项选择题

Throughout the nation’s more than 15,000 school (62) , widely differing approaches to teaching science and math (63) . Though there can be strength in (64) , a new international analysis suggests that this variability has instead contributed (65) lackluster (平淡的) achievement scores by U.S. children relative to their (66) in other developed countries.
Indeed, concludes William H. Schmidt of Michigan State University, who led the new analysis, "no single intellectually (67) vision (68) U.S. educational practice in math or science." The reason, he said, "is because the system is deeply and fundamentally (69) ."
The new analysis, (70) this week by the National Science Foundation in Arlington, Va., (71) data collected from about 50 nations as part of the Third International Mathematics and Science Study.
Not only (72) . approaches to teaching science and math vary among individual U.S. communities, the report finds, (73) there (74) little strategic focus within a school district’s (75) , its textbooks, or its teachers’ activities. This contrasts sharply (76) the coordinated national programs of most other countries.
(77) , U.S. students study more topics within science and math than their international (78) do. This creates an educational environment that "is a mile wide and an inch deep," Schmidt notes.
The new report "couldn’t come at a better time," says Gerald Wheeler, executive director of the National Science Teachers Association in Arlington."The new National Science Education Standards provide that focused vision," including the call "to do less, but in greater (79) ."
Implementing the new science standards and their math counterparts will be the challenge, he and Schmidt agree, because the (80) responsibility for education in the United States requires that any reforms be (81) and instituted one community at a time.

81（）

点击查看答案&解析