|
|
Pub Date: |
2013-00-00 |
Pub Type(s): |
Journal Articles; Reports - Evaluative |
Peer Reviewed: |
Yes |
|
|
|
Descriptors:
Teacher Effectiveness; Accountability; Program Effectiveness; Stakeholders; Performance Based Assessment; Teacher Education; Teacher Education Programs; Graduates; Educational Change; Politics of Education; Educational Policy; Policy Analysis; Outcomes of Education; College Outcomes Assessment; Position Papers; College Programs; Curriculum Evaluation; Teacher Education Curriculum; Influences; Best Practices
Abstract:
Currently there are multiple teacher education reform policies being proposed, piloted, and debated at a variety of levels and by various interest groups, stakeholders, and policy-makers. Along with an unprecedented sense of urgency about these important goals, what most U.S. reforms have in common is increased accountability. Using a discourse approach to policy analysis, which we label "the politics of policy," this article analyzes three complicated and evolving contemporary accountability initiatives in the United States: (1) "Our Future, Our Teachers," which is the Obama administration's proposed blueprint for the reform of teacher education programs, in particular its call for the assessment of preparation programs based on the impact of program graduates on their eventual K-12 students' test scores; (2) the "Teacher Performance Assessment," which is a nationally accessible instrument for assessing beginning teaching performance currently being piloted in 25 states through a partnership of Stanford University and Pearson Education, Inc.; and, (3) "Building Better Teachers: A National Review of Teacher Preparation Programs," which is an evaluation of collegiate teacher preparation programs conducted by the National Council on Teacher Quality with results to appear in "U.S. News and World Report." Our analysis makes clear that policy (and policy proposals) is unavoidably political, and that policy-making involves contentious debate as well as complicated political maneuvering and strategies, including resistance and litigation. (Contains 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
|
|
|
Pub Date: |
2013-01-00 |
Pub Type(s): |
Journal Articles; Reports - Research |
Peer Reviewed: |
Yes |
|
|
|
Descriptors:
Safety Education; Special Education; Special Needs Students; Food Standards; Skill Analysis; Skill Development; Testing Accommodations; Accessibility (for Disabled); Best Practices; Item Analysis; Psychometrics; Nutrition Instruction; Food Service; Performance Based Assessment; Evaluation Methods; Educational Innovation; Program Effectiveness; Curriculum Evaluation
Abstract:
This article describes an innovative assessment tool designed to evaluate the effectiveness of a food safety skills curriculum for learners receiving special education services. As schools respond to the increased demand for training students with special needs about food safety, the need for effective curricula and tools is also increasing. A "Food Safety Education for High School and Transition Special Needs Students" curriculum served as the basis upon which our assessment tool was developed. The project was a collaborative effort by food safety and education professionals in Connecticut, Rhode Island and Massachusetts. This USDA-funded initiative emerged from teacher-generated data that identified critical gaps in food safety knowledge and skills among students with disabilities (SWD) receiving special education services. As an adjunct to this curriculum, a Food Safety Practices Assessment Tool was developed to: 1) conduct observations of students as they demonstrate food safety practices, and 2) use this information to design classroom-based learning activities that are aligned with students' Individual Education Plans (IEP). Pilot data suggest that the tool is valid and reliable for use in a kitchen-based setting. This is the first known tool of its kind to test food safety skills of individuals with special needs in a real-world environment. Further testing is needed to determine the usefulness of the tool for broader audiences. (Contains 3 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
|
Author(s): |
Alshammari, Ahmad |
Source: |
Online Submission, US-China Education Review A v3 n3 p181-186 Mar 2013 |
|
Pub Date: |
2013-03-00 |
Pub Type(s): |
Journal Articles; Reports - Research |
Peer Reviewed: |
|
|
|
|
Descriptors:
Foreign Countries; Science Teachers; Curriculum Implementation; Science Curriculum; Grade 7; Science Course Improvement Projects; Grade 6; Teacher Attitudes; Course Content; Questionnaires; Interviews; Curriculum Evaluation; Performance Factors; Educational Change
Abstract:
The MoE (Ministry of Education) in the state of Kuwait is starting to reform the science curriculum in all school academic stages: primary (1-5) grades, intermediate (6-9) grades, and secondary (10-12) grades. The purpose of this study was to explore the opinions of science teachers about Kuwait's new sixth and seventh grade science curriculum, which was implemented in 2008. This study focused on the teachers' views regarding curriculum content and revealed the challenges and difficulties they face in teaching this new curriculum. Data were collected from 136 teachers' questionnaires and four interviews. The findings indicated that the curriculum content did not help students work together and was not related to the students' culture and society. The findings also showed that science teachers faced many challenges in teaching the new curriculum, like a lack of teaching tools in the schools and the fact that the MoE did not provide any course training related to the new curriculum. To conclude, the findings suggest that the new curriculum should be reviewed and modified with the teachers' involvement. (Contains 2 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 (91K)
|
More Info:
Help
Find in a Library
|
|
|
Pub Date: |
2013-04-04 |
Pub Type(s): |
Reports - Research; Speeches/Meeting Papers |
Peer Reviewed: |
|
|
|
|
Descriptors:
Middle School Students; Grade 8; Chemistry; Biology; Secondary School Science; Intervention; Units of Study; Curriculum Development; Curriculum Evaluation; Misconceptions; Pretests Posttests; Difficulty Level; Test Items
Abstract:
Students often have trouble understanding key biology ideas, in part because they lack an understanding of foundational chemistry ideas. AAAS [American Association for the Advancement of Science] is collaborating with BSCS [Biological Sciences Curriculum Study] in the development of a curriculum unit that connects core chemistry and biology ideas in order to help eighth grade students build the conceptual foundation needed for high school biology. The unit is designed to engage students in (a) observing phenomena that are explicitly aligned to the targeted ideas and address common student misconceptions and difficulties and (b) using models to help interpret the phenomena in light of the targeted ideas. An initial draft of the unit was pilot tested at two schools in 2011. The results of the pilot test were used to revise the unit. In the spring of 2012, the revised unit and teacher materials were field tested with 677 eighth grade students from four states across the U.S. Pretests and posttests were used to measure the change in students' understanding of chemical reactions, conservation of mass, and biological growth. The data were analyzed using Rasch modeling and the racking and stacking methods. The stacking method showed that, overall, the students made statistically significant gains, suggesting that their understanding of the targeted ideas improved. The racking method showed that the difficulty of most of the items decreased as a result of the intervention, suggesting that the unit successfully covered most of the ideas. An analysis of distractor selections and written explanations of their answer choices showed that fewer students held misconceptions after participating in the unit. These results were used to inform a second round of revisions to the unit. (Contains 10 tables and 3 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:
ERIC
Full Text (172K)
|
|
|
Pub Date: |
2012-08-00 |
Pub Type(s): |
Journal Articles; Reports - Descriptive |
Peer Reviewed: |
|
|
|
|
Descriptors:
Associate Degrees; Community Colleges; Curriculum Evaluation; Relevance (Education); Education Work Relationship; Case Studies; Skill Development; Job Skills; Best Practices; College Role; Technology Education; College Programs
Abstract:
Community colleges serve on the front line of workforce development. With their focus on applied science associate degrees and technical certificate programs, they provide students with a high-quality, low-cost education that prepares them for careers in one to two years. And for students who can't take time away from their family or work to attend a four-year school, they offer much-needed flexibility, too. But how does a community college ensure that its curriculum is up-to-date and aligned with the skills its students need in the workforce? To answer this question, "Campus Technology" recently spoke with representatives from South Seattle Community College (Washington), whose area is home to Boeing and a growing aerospace-manufacturing industry, and Anne Arundel Community College (Maryland), whose local economy is built around government, military, and defense contractors. This article presents their three keys to providing students with the training that local industry wants.
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
|
|
|
Pub Date: |
2012-07-00 |
Pub Type(s): |
Journal Articles; Reports - Research |
Peer Reviewed: |
Yes |
|
|
|
Descriptors:
Educational Technology; Calculus; Mathematics Education; Lesson Plans; Engineering Technology; Student Centered Curriculum; Science Course Improvement Projects; Engineering Education; Mathematics Activities; Mathematics Curriculum; Curriculum Development; Curriculum Enrichment; Curriculum Evaluation; Learning Modules; Courseware; Teacher Attitudes; Instructional Material Evaluation; Teaching Methods; Educational Change
Abstract:
Engineering technology students can attain a meaningful mathematics learning if they are allowed to actively participate in hands-on activities. However, the current dissemination of knowledge in the classroom still focuses on teacher-centered paradigm of teaching. A study to explore lecturers' views regarding a newly developed integral calculus with Maple software module was conducted. Nine lecturers with at least eight years of teaching experience were involved in the evaluation of the module. They were brought to a computer laboratory at the university to evaluate the activities developed in the module using a newly developed manual. Within six hours, they attempted and evaluated the assigned activity in groups. Each of the lecturers wrote his or her comments on the activities, manual and lesson plans booklets. Their comments were qualitatively analyzed to provide a guideline in producing a meaningful module in teaching and learning of integral calculus. From their written comments, there were two main findings obtained. Firstly, they highlighted the importance of giving reflective questions at the end of each subtopic to train the engineering technology students to critically aware about their thinking skills. Secondly, some of the lecturers believed that by giving counter-examples, these students will develop a better conceptual understanding in each newly learnt topic. Apart from these two main findings, other comments were also considered in modifying the manual, lesson plans and set of six integral calculus activities. As a result, a module which emphasized on student-centered learning based on conceptual and procedural understanding and metacognitive awareness teaching approach will be produced. This module will be used to enhance students' procedural and conceptual understanding in learning integral calculus at the university. (Contains 7 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:
ERIC
Full Text (421K)
|
More Info:
Help
Find in a Library
|
|