Your search found 2394 results.

Descriptors:
Educational Change; Art Education; Educational Policy; Advocacy; Neurosciences; Creativity; Alternative Teacher Certification; Student Evaluation; Teacher Evaluation; Charter Schools; Economic Climate; Technological Advancement; Educational Research; National Competency Tests; Academic Standards; State Standards; Skills; Federal Legislation; Educational Legislation; At Risk Students; Preservice Teacher Education; Curriculum Development; Faculty Development

Abstract:
The field of education in the United States is in a period of unprecedented change. Educators in all disciplines are challenged to understand and respond to the waves of reform sweeping over the national education landscape. Linking these reforms to meaningful outcomes that will produce more rigorous and effective measures of quality and performance in our schools is an ongoing goal for all educators as they work to respond to calls for educational reform. Changes in the general field of education have direct implications for arts education policy and practice. Arts educators find themselves in the position of making sense of these landmark reforms and changes in the context of arts education and determining what courses of action and responses they should pursue on the road to meaningful reform. This report provides an overview of a selected number of contemporary developments in the general field of education, brief summaries of consequential studies and education-related reports, and an examination of some policy issues these developments and reports raise for arts educators as they work to shape the future landscape of arts education. 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:
Performance Based Assessment; Rating Scales; Scores; High Stakes Tests; National Competency Tests; Prevocational Education; Teachers; Foreign Countries

Abstract:
In recent years many countries have introduced authentic performance-based assessments in their national exam systems. Teachers' ratings of their own candidates' performances may suffer from errors of leniency and range restriction. The goal of this study was to examine the impact of manipulating the descriptiveness, balancedness, and polarity of the rating scales on the elevation and spread of the performance ratings. The study was conducted in the field setting of a (simulated) high-stakes national exam in Dutch pre-vocational education. A total of 55 teachers rated the performances of 652 candidates (aged [plus or minus]16) on four authentic performance-based tasks. Multivariate multilevel analyses found the psychometric quality of the teachers' performance ratings to be more favorable for positively unbalanced scales than for balanced scales. Positively unbalanced rating scales yielded the lowest (i.e., least generous) and most discriminative ratings. The descriptiveness and polarity of the rating scales were of lesser importance for the rating distributions. On the basis of the findings it was decided to introduce positively unbalanced scales in the national exams for pre-vocational education. (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:

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

Descriptors:
National Competency Tests; Measures (Individuals); African American Students; Comparative Analysis; Scores; Mathematics Tests; Mathematics Achievement; Gender Differences; Family Environment; Parent Child Relationship; Parent Participation; Academic Achievement

Abstract:
This study investigated within group differences between African American female and male students who participated in the 2009 National Assessment of Educational Progress mathematics assessment. Using results from participating states, we compare average scale scores of African American students based on home regulatory environment and interest in mathematics. Results indicated that African American male students who discussed studies 2-3 times a week scored higher than African American female students who discussed studies every day. In three states (Connecticut, Florida, and New Jersey), African American males who never or hardly ever discussed studies at home scored higher than African American males who never or hardly ever discussed studies at home in the state of Arkansas. In two states (Florida and New Jersey), African American males who discussed studies every few weeks scored higher than African American males who discussed studies every few weeks in Arkansas. In four states (Connecticut, Florida, Illinois, and New Jersey), the overall scale scores of African American males was higher than those of African American males in Arkansas. As a result of the findings, we present practical implications for parents of African American students. 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:
Difficulty Level; Mathematics Achievement; Academic Records; Credits; Program Effectiveness; National Competency Tests; Algebra; Geometry; Mathematics Curriculum; High School Graduates; Academic Achievement; Textbooks; Course Content; High School Students; Grade 12; Scores; Racial Differences; Comparative Analysis; Course Selection (Students)

Abstract:
The 2005 National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) High School Transcript Study (HSTS) found that high school graduates in 2005 earned more mathematics credits, took higher level mathematics courses, and obtained higher grades in mathematics courses than in 1990. The report also noted that these improvements in students' academic records were not reflected in twelfth-grade NAEP mathematics and science scores. Why are improvements in student coursetaking not reflected in academic performance, such as higher NAEP scores? The Mathematics Curriculum Study (MCS) explored the relationship between coursetaking and achievement by examining the content and challenge of two mathematics courses taught in the nation's public high schools--algebra I and geometry. Conducted in conjunction with the 2005 NAEP HSTS, the study used textbooks as an indirect measure of what was taught in classrooms, but not how it was taught. In other words, the textbook information is not used to measure classroom instruction. Textbooks served as an indicator of the intended course curriculum (Schmidt, McKnight, and Raizen 1997). The chapter review questions in each textbook were used to identify the mathematics topics covered (or subject matter content) and the complexity of the exercises (or degree of cognitive challenge). Chapter review questions, and not the entire textbook, were coded because the questions have been found to be representative of the chapter content and complexity level in previous studies (Schmidt 2012). The study uses curriculum topics to describe the content of the mathematics courses and course levels to denote the content and complexity of the courses. The results are based on analyses of the curriculum topics and course levels developed from the textbook information, coursetaking data from the 2005 NAEP HSTS, and performance data from the twelfth-grade 2005 NAEP mathematics assessment. The study addresses three broad research questions: (1) What differences exist within the curricula of algebra I and geometry courses?; (2) How accurately do school course titles and descriptions reflect the rigor of what is taught in algebra I and geometry courses compared to textbook content?; and (3) How do the curricula of algebra I and geometry courses relate to subsequent mathematics coursetaking patterns and NAEP performance? In this report, curriculum topics, course levels, and grade 12 NAEP mathematics scale scores are used to describe the findings of the study. Curriculum topics are based on summaries of the textbook content that a school reported covering in an algebra I or geometry course. The six broad categories of curriculum topics used to describe the mathematics content found in both algebra I and geometry textbooks are: elementary and middle school mathematics, introductory algebra, advanced algebra, two-dimensional geometry, advanced geometry, and other high school mathematics. A glossary is included. (Contains 3 charts, 15 figures and 10 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 (14478K)

Descriptors:
Outcomes of Education; Public Schools; Federal State Relationship; English Language Learners; Low Income; Disadvantaged; Grade 4; Grade 8; National Competency Tests; Governing Boards; Educational Assessment; Reading Achievement; Science Achievement; Mathematics Achievement; Achievement Gains; Comparative Analysis; Statistical Significance; Academic Achievement

Abstract:
California, Florida, Illinois, New York, and Texas enroll close to 40 percent of the nation's public school students. The importance of these "Mega-States" goes beyond the sheer size of their population. They now serve more than half of the nation's English language learners (ELL), as well as some of the largest concentrations of children from lower-income families. As policymakers and educators look at the nation's changing demographics and explore ways to close achievement gaps, the educational progress of children in these states is of interest far beyond their state borders. That's why the National Center for Education Statistics and the National Assessment Governing Board focused this special report on educational outcomes in the five largest states. This report provides a more in-depth look into the performance of specific student groups and performance by subject, including: (1) recent assessments; (2) comparisons to the nation and among the five states; (3) highlights of gains for student groups, including those that performed higher than their peers in the nation; and (4) student performance at or above the NAEP "Proficient level." The results presented by each subject area are for public school students only. The National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) reports results using widely accepted statistical standards; findings are reported based on a statistical significance level set at 0.05 with appropriate adjustments for multiple comparisons. Readers should note that writing results were not included in this report because the 2011 writing framework begins a new trend line. In addition, the 2011 computer-based writing assessment was not administered at the state level. Technical Notes are included. (Contains 19 figures, 7 tables, and 2 footnotes.) 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 (3890K)

Descriptors:
Academic Achievement; Accountability; Foreign Countries; Rewards; Educational Change; Responsibility; National Competency Tests; Incentives

Abstract:
Recent educational reforms in Norway include national tests and monitoring mechanisms to see if key outcomes are being achieved. At the same time, Norway has not established the follow-up mechanisms like high-stakes incentives and rewards that are characteristic of accountability policies in some other countries. As a consequence, one could argue that Norway has only moved "half-way" toward accountability. In contrast, this paper suggests that these developments in Norwegian policies demonstrate the difficulties of navigating the tensions between promoting two key aspects of accountability--answerability for the achievement of short-term goals and responsibility for the fulfillment of broader purposes--and the challenges of building capacity for both. Exploring developments in the Norwegian context highlights what it may take to develop policies that address both answerability and responsibility and reveals some of the cultural, geographic, political, and economic realities that make it difficult to do so. 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:
Economics Education; High School Seniors; Grade 12; Student Evaluation; Basic Business Education; Money Management; Free Enterprise System; National Norms; International Trade; Economic Factors; Economic Impact; Scores; National Competency Tests; Test Results; Private Schools; Public Schools; Economics; Achievement Gap; Achievement Gains; Ethnic Groups; African American Students; Hispanic American Students; Pacific Americans; Alaska Natives; Asian American Students; American Indians; White Students

Abstract:
Economic literacy is vital for functioning effectively in today's society. Consumers need to manage their finances, investors need to plan for their future, and voters need to choose among competing economic plans. As students move on to college or enter the workforce, their understanding of the economy will help them become financially responsible citizens. The National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) monitors students' attainment of these skills and knowledge with its twelfth-grade economics assessment. First administered in 2006, the NAEP economics assessment measures twelfth-graders' understanding of a wide range of topics in three main content areas: market economy, national economy, and international economy. This report provides results of the economics assessment in 2012 based on a nationally representative sample of nearly 11,000 twelfth-graders. Results from 2012 are compared with those from 2006 to investigate whether the nation's high school seniors are becoming increasingly literate in economics. Percentage of students and average scores in NAEP economics at grade 12, by selected characteristics: 2006 and 2012 are appended. Technical notes are included. (Contains 17 figures and 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 (3782K)

Descriptors:
National Competency Tests; Writing Tests; Data Analysis; Writing Evaluation; Grade 8; Writing Attitudes; Student Attitudes; Negative Attitudes; Positive Attitudes; Student Behavior; Effect Size; Sex; Females; Males; Relationship; Writing Achievement; Gender Differences

Abstract:
Based on eighth-grade writing assessment data from the 1998 (N = 20,586) and 2007 (N = 139,900) National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), this study examines the relationships among students' writing attitudes, learning-related behaviors, and gender in relation to writing performance. Overall, the effects of attitudes were slightly larger than the effects of learning behaviors on writing performance, and gender differences were more prominent in attitudes than learning behaviors related to writing. Perhaps the most surprising finding from the 2007 NAEP data was that females with the most negative attitudes toward writing outperformed males with the most positive attitudes (i.e., writing scores based on two measures of attitudes: females, 157 and 161; males, 151 and 149). Overall, a similar pattern was observed with learning behaviors and gender differences in writing scores. Furthermore, medium effect sizes of gender difference in writing scores (females scoring substantially higher than males) were present even though the students reported to be at the same level in terms of writing attitudes and learning behaviors. The present study demonstrates that gender disparity in students' writing performance is persistent and strong; it cannot be explained by gender differences in attitudes or behavior alone or in attitudes and behavior combined. (Contains 9 tables, 1 figure, and 1 note.) 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:
Foreign Countries; Student Attitudes; Elementary School Students; Secondary School Students; Grade 9; Science Tests; National Competency Tests; Test Anxiety; Motivation; Gender Differences

Abstract:
Although large-scale national tests have been used for many years in Swedish compulsory schools, very little is known about how pupils actually react to these tests. The question is relevant, however, as pupil reactions in the test situation may affect test performance as well as future attitudes towards assessment. The question is relevant also in light of the changing assessment culture in Sweden and other European countries. The main purpose of the present study was to explore how a sample of grade 9 pupils perceived their first encounter with national tests in science, mainly in terms of perceived importance of the test, reported invested effort, and feelings of test anxiety, and how these aspects were related to test performance. Results show that a majority of the pupils seemed to perceive the test as rather important and claimed that they spent effort on the test. There was, however, also a fair group of students who did not perceive the test as very important. Ratings of perceived importance and invested effort and motivation were positively related to performance, particularly for the boys. Many students also reported that they felt anxious before and during the test, but the relationship between test anxiety and test performance was rather weak. Findings illuminate how pupils may perceive and behave in the assessment situation, and point to the need of further studies investigating the psychology of test-taking. 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:
Disabilities; Academic Achievement; National Competency Tests; Class Activities; Learning Activities; Factor Structure; Grade 4; Educational Indicators; Achievement Gains; Performance Factors; Teacher Education; Professional Development; Access to Computers; Mathematics Achievement; Reading Achievement; Science Projects; Technology Uses in Education; Factor Analysis; Educational Opportunities; Calculators; Benchmarking; Predictor Variables; Student Characteristics; Item Response Theory; Standardized Tests; Individualized Education Programs; Measurement Techniques

Abstract:
Opportunity to Learn (OTL) stems from the basic premise that there is an important relationship between the quality and intensity of classroom instruction and students' levels of academic success. For many students with disabilities, an emphasis on OTL has become national priority, yet measuring its impact is a complex challenge. The first purpose of this study was to explore the factorial validity of OTL using indicators found in the 2005 4th grade National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP). The study entailed confirmatory factor analyses for potential OTL factors including teacher preparation, professional development, classroom activities, and access to technology. Separate factor analyses were conducted using the reading and mathematics datasets. The authors then looked at the degree to which OTL factors influenced NAEP estimates of ability for both students with disabilities and their non-disabled peers. The following three OTL factors differentially predicted student scores: classroom activities (reading), student constructed projects (reading), and using calculators for instruction (mathematics). For the remaining three reading factors and seven mathematics factors, there were no differences in the relationship between the factors and scores for students with and without disabilities. (Contains 13 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 (520K) |  More Info:
Help Find in a Library