Your search found 157055 results.

Descriptors:
Achievement Gap; State Standards; Mathematics Instruction; Science Instruction; Biology; Numbers; Foreign Countries; Content Analysis; Comparative Analysis; Core Curriculum; Grade 6; Mathematics Achievement; Standards; Guidelines

Abstract:
This study aimed to compare Mathematics and Science programs focusing on TIMSS content domains of Numbers and Biology that produced the largest achievement gap among students from Turkey and the USA. Specifically, it utilized the content analysis method within Turkish and New York State (NYS) frameworks. The procedures of study included matching the behaviors for the content domains of Numbers and Biology, as defined in the TIMSS 2007 framework, with the teaching program and guidebook for Mathematics courses (grades 6 through 8) in Turkey and NYS learning standards and core curriculum for Science and Mathematics for the U.S. Results of the study indicated differences between Turkey and NYS in terms of existence and distribution of and emphasis on TIMSS content domains of Numbers and Biology across the grade levels. (Contains 4 tables.) Note:The following two links are not-applicable for text-based browsers or screen-reading software. Show Hide Full Abstract

Related Items: Show Related Items

Full-Text Availability Options:

 ERIC Full Text (316K) |  More Info:
Help Find in a Library

Descriptors:
Day Programs; Developmental Disabilities; Staff Development; Job Training; Instructional Effectiveness; Teaching Methods; Feedback (Response); Consultants; Comparative Analysis; Job Performance

Abstract:
This study evaluated two methods of training staff who were working with individuals with developmental disabilities: pyramidal training and consultant-led training. In the pyramidal training, supervisors were trained in the principles of applied behavior analysis (ABA) and in delivering feedback. The supervisors then trained their direct-care staff and, subsequently, provided ongoing performance feedback. In the consultant-led training, the direct-care staff was trained in the principles of ABA. Both groups learned similar amounts of knowledge of ABA principles, but pyramidal training was more effective in teaching staff to use correct teaching procedures with consumers. In addition, the pyramidal training group maintained the improvement in their teaching procedures at a 3-month follow up, while the consultant-led training group's performance declined. (Contains 2 tables and 1 figure.) Note:The following two links are not-applicable for text-based browsers or screen-reading software. Show Hide Full Abstract

Related Items: Show Related Items

Full-Text Availability Options:

More Info:
Help | Tutorial Help Finding Full Text |  More Info:
Help Find in a Library |  Publisher's website

Descriptors:
Adults; Mental Retardation; Developmental Disabilities; Selection; Correlation; Independent Living; Institutionalized Persons; Residential Institutions; Severity (of Disability)

Abstract:
This article examines everyday choices made by 8,892 adults with intellectual and developmental disabilities (IDD) and support-related choices made by 6,179 adults with IDD receiving services from 19 state developmental disabilities program agencies that participated in the 2008-2009 National Core Indicators Project. Controlling for physical and sensory impairment, age, behavioral support, communication, and state, people in residential settings with 16 or more people had less everyday choice than those in other living arrangements. People with mild and moderate IDD had more control over everyday choices when living in their own homes, whereas people with severe and profound IDD had more control when living in agency homes of 3 or fewer residents. For people of all levels of IDD, institutional settings of 16 or more residents offered the lowest levels of everyday choice. Controlling for the same covariates, individuals with all levels of IDD living in their own homes had significantly more support-related choices than those in any other residential arrangement. Controlling for individual and residential setting characteristics, the state in which sample members lived was notably predictive of support-related choice. Overall, the tested variables accounted for 44% of the variability in everyday choice and 31% in support-related choice. Note:The following two links are not-applicable for text-based browsers or screen-reading software. Show Hide Full Abstract

Related Items: Show Related Items

Full-Text Availability Options:

More Info:
Help | Tutorial Help Finding Full Text |  More Info:
Help Find in a Library |  Publisher's website

Descriptors:
Travel; State Programs; Patients; Veterans; Costs; Public Policy; Medical Services; Eligibility; Regression (Statistics); Rural Areas; Comparative Analysis; Access to Health Care

Abstract:
Purpose: The reimbursement rate that eligible veterans receive for travel to Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) facilities increased from 11 to 28.5 cents per mile on February 1, 2008. We examined the effect of this policy change on utilization of outpatient, inpatient, and pharmacy services, stratifying veterans based on distance from a VA facility. Methods: We compared health care utilization and costs on a sample of VA patients in the 10.5 months before the reimbursement rate increase and the 10.5 months after the reimbursement rate increase. Using a difference-in-difference technique, we ran multivariable logistic and count regressions for utilization and generalized linear models (GLM) for cost outcomes. Regressions were stratified based on urban and rural residence, as well as by distance thresholds. Findings: Our cohort contained 250,958 veterans, 76.7% (n = 192,559) of whom were eligible to receive a travel reimbursement. After the reimbursement rate increase, eligible veterans at all distances were 6.8% more likely to have an outpatient encounter and had 2.6% more outpatient encounters in the VA compared to those not eligible for the reimbursement (P less than 0.001). Similar results were found for prescription fills at all distances, but inpatient encounters remained generally unaffected. Conclusions: Our results suggest that this policy change was successful in increasing access to VA care for patients regardless of location of residence. Note:The following two links are not-applicable for text-based browsers or screen-reading software. Show Hide Full Abstract

Related Items: Show Related Items

Full-Text Availability Options:

More Info:
Help | Tutorial Help Finding Full Text |  More Info:
Help Find in a Library |  Publisher's website

Descriptors:
Behavior Problems; Intervention; Behavior Disorders; Behavior Modification; Standards; Program Effectiveness; Elementary School Students; Comparative Analysis; Screening Tests; At Risk Students; Time on Task; Student Behavior; Academic Ability; Response to Intervention; Gender Differences; Minority Group Children; English (Second Language); Special Education; Staff Development; Program Implementation; Classroom Environment; Observation

Abstract:
This article examined the efficacy of a primary-level, standard-protocol behavior intervention for students with externalizing behavioral disorders. Elementary schools were randomly assigned to treatment (behavior intervention) or control (business as usual) conditions, and K-3 students were screened for externalizing behavior risk status. The final sample included 7 treatment schools (n = 44 students) and 6 control schools (n = 26 students). Results of multilevel models showed that students with externalizing behavior in the treatment schools had significantly lower levels of problem behavior than those in the control schools. A positive but statistically nonsignificant treatment trend was observed for increased on-task behavior. No effects were observed for academic skills. The positive effects of the behavior intervention were smaller in schools serving higher proportions of students with low socioeconomic status and for students who had higher baseline levels of externalizing behavior. The discussion includes the results, practical importance, and limitations. (Contains 4 tables and 2 figures.) Note:The following two links are not-applicable for text-based browsers or screen-reading software. Show Hide Full Abstract

Related Items: Show Related Items

Full-Text Availability Options:

More Info:
Help | Tutorial Help Finding Full Text |  More Info:
Help Find in a Library |  Publisher's website

Descriptors:
Evidence; Electronic Learning; Distance Education; Online Courses; Educational Technology; Costs; Virtual Classrooms; Intermode Differences; Cost Effectiveness; Expenditure per Student; Student Costs; Audits (Verification); Statistical Bias; Error of Measurement; Predictor Variables; Research Reports; Measurement Objectives; Measurement Techniques; Research Methodology; Evaluation Methods; Evaluation Problems; Research Problems; Robustness (Statistics); Educational Policy; Educational Practices; Comparative Analysis; Technology Uses in Education

Abstract:
Schools and school systems throughout the nation are increasingly experimenting with using various instructional technologies to improve productivity and decrease costs, but evidence on both the effectiveness and the costs of education technology is limited. A recent report published by the Thomas B. Fordham Institute sets out to describe "the size and range of the critical cost drivers for online schools in comparison to traditional brick-and-mortar schools" (p. 2). The study divides online learning into two broad categories--virtual schools and blended-learning schools--and, based on data from 50 experts, reports that "the average overall per-pupil costs of both models are significantly lower than the $10,000 national average for traditional brick-and-mortar schools" (p. 1). These findings, however, are undermined by a general lack of clarity about the models being studied and problematic data and methods. While the report addresses an important topic, the utility of its cost estimates are limited. Of more value are the qualitative findings about how various cost drivers affect the overall costs of online learning. The study would be more useful if it provided a rigorous analysis of a set of well-defined promising models of online learning as the basis for its cost estimates. (Contains 7 notes.) [This paper reviews the following document: "The Costs of Online Learning. Creating Sound Policy for Digital Learning: A Working Paper Series from the Thomas B. Fordham Institute" (ED528948).] Note:The following two links are not-applicable for text-based browsers or screen-reading software. Show Hide Full Abstract

Related Items: Show Related Items

Full-Text Availability Options:

 ERIC Full Text (436K)

Descriptors:
Evidence; Evolution; State Standards; Genetics; Biology; Teaching Methods; Investigations; Teacher Attitudes; Educational Practices; Academic Achievement; Comparative Analysis; High Schools; Science Teachers; Earth Science; Scientific Concepts

Abstract:
High school biology teachers face many challenges as they teach evolution. State standards for evolution may provide support for sound evolution instruction. This study attempts to build upon previous work by investigating teachers' views of evolution standards and their evolution practices in a state where evolution standards have been much-contested. This study employed a sequential explanatory mixed methods approach investigating the views of 129 Ohio high school biology teachers. Participants completed two surveys targeting their views of evolution standards and evolution teaching practices. Using a checklist, participants also indicated the evolution topics they addressed. All participants were invited to provide qualitative responses to the survey, and 16% of the respondents answered four open-ended questions via a follow-up email. Overall, teachers regarded evolution standards positively and reported spending an average of 11.6 hours teaching evolution. With respect to specific evolution teaching practices, teachers most often indicated that they addressed the mechanism of natural selection, anatomical evidence for evolution, adaptation, fossil record, connections between genetics and evolution, and information about Charles Darwin. Furthermore, statistical comparisons revealed that teachers who held more positive views of the evolution standards covered more standards-based and non-standards based evolutionary topics than their less positive colleagues. (Contains 4 tables.) Note:The following two links are not-applicable for text-based browsers or screen-reading software. Show Hide Full Abstract

Related Items: Show Related Items

Full-Text Availability Options:

More Info:
Help | Tutorial Help Finding Full Text |  More Info:
Help Find in a Library |  Publisher's website

Descriptors:
Academic Achievement; Academic Aspiration; Academic Persistence; Academic Standards; Achievement Tests; African American Students; Alignment (Education); American Indian Students; Articulation (Education); Asian American Students; Benchmarking; Career Readiness; College Bound Students; College Entrance Examinations; College Readiness; Comparative Analysis; Core Curriculum; Economic Development; Educational Assessment; Educational Attainment; Educational Improvement; Educational Needs; Educational Practices; Educational Policy; English Instruction; Ethnicity; High School Graduates; Higher Education; Hispanic American Students; Mathematics Instruction; Occupational Aspiration; Pacific Islanders; Postsecondary Education; Race; Reading Instruction; Science Instruction; Scores; Secondary Education; State Standards; Student Behavior; Tables (Data); White Students

Abstract:
Annually, ACT provides a snapshot of the college and career readiness of ACT-tested high school graduates. This report is offered as a service to inform policymakers and practitioners about selected indicators of effectiveness and how that translates into readiness. It is designed to stimulate discussion, inquiry, and action. This report is designed to help inform the following questions driving national efforts to strengthen P-16 education in Colorado: (1) Are students prepared for college and career? (2) Are enough students taking core courses? (3) Are core courses rigorous enough? (4) Are younger students on target for college and career? (5) What other dimensions of college and career readiness should be tracked? (6) How is the 2011 graduating class doing? (Contains 7 endnotes.) [For related reports, see "The Condition of College & Career Readiness, 2012" (ED534761), "ACT Profile Report: National. Graduating Class 2012" (ED534873), and "ACT Profile Report: National. Graduating Class 2012. Hispanic/Latino Students" (ED534874).] Note:The following two links are not-applicable for text-based browsers or screen-reading software. Show Hide Full Abstract

Related Items: Show Related Items

Full-Text Availability Options:

 ERIC Full Text (2541K)

Descriptors:
Academic Achievement; Academic Aspiration; Academic Persistence; Academic Standards; Achievement Tests; African American Students; Alignment (Education); American Indian Students; Articulation (Education); Asian American Students; Benchmarking; Career Readiness; College Bound Students; College Entrance Examinations; College Readiness; Comparative Analysis; Core Curriculum; Economic Development; Educational Assessment; Educational Attainment; Educational Improvement; Educational Needs; Educational Practices; Educational Policy; English Instruction; Ethnicity; High School Graduates; Higher Education; Hispanic American Students; Mathematics Instruction; Occupational Aspiration; Pacific Islanders; Postsecondary Education; Race; Reading Instruction; Science Instruction; Scores; Secondary Education; State Standards; Student Behavior; Tables (Data); White Students

Abstract:
Annually, ACT provides a snapshot of the college and career readiness of ACT-tested high school graduates. This report is offered as a service to inform policymakers and practitioners about selected indicators of effectiveness and how that translates into readiness. It is designed to stimulate discussion, inquiry, and action. This report is designed to help inform the following questions driving national efforts to strengthen P-16 education in Alaska: (1) Are students prepared for college and career? (2) Are enough students taking core courses? (3) Are core courses rigorous enough? (4) Are younger students on target for college and career? (5) What other dimensions of college and career readiness should be tracked? (6) How is the 2011 graduating class doing? (Contains 7 endnotes.) [For related reports, see "The Condition of College & Career Readiness, 2012" (ED534761), "ACT Profile Report: National. Graduating Class 2012" (ED534873), and "ACT Profile Report: National. Graduating Class 2012. Hispanic/Latino Students" (ED534874).] Note:The following two links are not-applicable for text-based browsers or screen-reading software. Show Hide Full Abstract

Related Items: Show Related Items

Full-Text Availability Options:

 ERIC Full Text (2527K)

Descriptors:
Academic Achievement; Academic Aspiration; Academic Persistence; Academic Standards; Achievement Tests; African American Students; Alignment (Education); American Indian Students; Articulation (Education); Asian American Students; Benchmarking; Career Readiness; College Bound Students; College Entrance Examinations; College Readiness; Comparative Analysis; Core Curriculum; Economic Development; Educational Assessment; Educational Attainment; Educational Improvement; Educational Needs; Educational Practices; Educational Policy; English Instruction; Ethnicity; High School Graduates; Higher Education; Hispanic American Students; Mathematics Instruction; Occupational Aspiration; Pacific Islanders; Postsecondary Education; Race; Reading Instruction; Science Instruction; Scores; Secondary Education; State Standards; Student Behavior; Tables (Data); White Students

Abstract:
Annually, ACT provides a snapshot of the college and career readiness of ACT-tested high school graduates. This report is offered as a service to inform policymakers and practitioners about selected indicators of effectiveness and how that translates into readiness. It is designed to stimulate discussion, inquiry, and action. This report is designed to help inform the following questions driving national efforts to strengthen P-16 education in Arkansas: (1) Are students prepared for college and career? (2) Are enough students taking core courses? (3) Are core courses rigorous enough? (4) Are younger students on target for college and career? (5) What other dimensions of college and career readiness should be tracked? (6) How is the 2011 graduating class doing? (Contains 7 endnotes.) [For related reports, see "The Condition of College & Career Readiness, 2012" (ED534761), "ACT Profile Report: National. Graduating Class 2012" (ED534873), and "ACT Profile Report: National. Graduating Class 2012. Hispanic/Latino Students" (ED534874).] Note:The following two links are not-applicable for text-based browsers or screen-reading software. Show Hide Full Abstract

Related Items: Show Related Items

Full-Text Availability Options:

 ERIC Full Text (2545K)