Your search found 9883 results.

Descriptors:
Learning Disabilities; State Standards; Educational Opportunities; Evidence; Adolescents; Social Studies; Academic Standards; History; Secondary School Teachers; Secondary School Students; Student Needs; Educational Needs; Teacher Expectations of Students; Teacher Student Relationship; History Instruction; Teaching Methods; Critical Thinking; Thinking Skills; Special Education Teachers

Abstract:
The Common Core State Standards for literacy in history and social studies present opportunities and challenges for teachers of and adolescents with learning disabilities (LD). In addition to reading challenges, students must engage in higher order thinking and reasoning. To provide opportunities for students to successfully respond to such challenges, teachers must have an understanding of the expectations in the Standards, and of the learning needs of students with LD. Teachers can assure success for adolescents with LD by selecting proven instructional procedures and engaging in collaboration to provide students with the supports they need. Examples of one evidence-based practice, Content Enhancement, are provided to illustrate instructional protocols for teachers of diverse classes that include adolescents with LD. (Contains 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:
Learning Disabilities; State Standards; Mathematics Skills; Mathematics Instruction; Elementary Secondary Education; Academic Standards; Mathematics Tests; Outcomes of Education; Mathematics Teachers; Evidence; Intervention; Basic Skills; Elementary School Teachers; Secondary School Teachers; Elementary School Students; Secondary School Students

Abstract:
The Common Core State Standards provide teachers with a framework of necessary mathematics skills across grades K-12, which vary considerably from previous mathematics standards. In this article, we discuss concerns about the implications of the Common Core for students with mathematics difficulties (MD), given that students with MD, by definition, struggle with mathematical skills. We suggest that instruction centered on the Common Core will be challenging and may lead to problematic outcomes for this population. We propose that working on foundational skills related to the Common Core standards is a necessary component of mathematics instruction for students with MD, and we provide teachers with a framework for working on foundational skills concurrent with the Common Core standards. We caution, however, that implementation of the Common Core is in its infancy, and the implications of the Common Core for students with MD need to be monitored carefully. (Contains 1 table 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:

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

Descriptors:
Learning Disabilities; State Standards; Guidance; Special Education Teachers; Elementary School Students; Elementary School Teachers; Teacher Expectations of Students; Academic Standards; Reading Instruction; Reading Tests; Language Arts

Abstract:
The K-5 reading standards within the English Language Arts Common Core State Standards provide guidance to teachers about grade level expectations for students. Though the authors of the standards acknowledge that some students may experience difficulty reaching the rigorous expectations, they explain that the standards outline a pathway to proficiency for all students, including those who struggle with literacy. Students with learning disabilities, who often have significant literacy difficulties, may face particular challenges when their instruction is framed by these standards. This article unpacks the complex K-5 reading standards and provides a discussion of the implications for students with learning disabilities and their general and special education teachers. Examples from K-5 lessons and recommendations for teachers and researchers are provided. (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:
Learning Disabilities; State Standards; Evidence; Writing (Composition); Special Education Teachers; Academic Standards; Writing Instruction; Writing Tests; Educational Environment; Secondary School Students; Secondary School Teachers; Writing Teachers

Abstract:
This article examines the Common Core State Standards as they apply to writing and students with learning disabilities (LD). We first consider why the implementation of these standards is advantageous to writing instruction for students with LD as well as the challenges in implementing them. Next, we make the following four recommendations in terms of their implementation: (1) increase general and special education teachers' knowledge about writing development; (2) create a writing environment in which students with LD can thrive; (3) employ evidence-based writing practices in general education classes (where most students with LD are taught); and (4) use evidence-based writing practices effective with students with LD. We conclude by considering research that still needs to be undertaken to help educators maximize the probability that students with and without LD meet the writing benchmarks proposed in these Standards. (Contains 3 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:
Learning Disabilities; Science Instruction; Academic Standards; State Standards; Science Tests; Language Arts; Scientific Concepts; Science Teachers; Secondary School Students; Secondary School Teachers

Abstract:
The Common Core Science Standards represent a new effort to increase science learning for all students. These standards include a focus on English and language arts aspects of science learning, and three dimensions of science standards, including practices of science, crosscutting concepts of science, and disciplinary core ideas in the various subject areas. Many of these issues bring important implications for students with learning disabilities, which we discuss in turn. With appropriate supports and applications, students with learning disabilities can potentially benefit greatly from these new standards. However, the demands of these standards may require a higher level of support than those commonly available for many students with learning disabilities. 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:
Teaching Methods; Social Studies; Reading Comprehension; Content Area Reading; Academic Achievement; Reading Improvement; Middle Schools; Grade 8; Comparative Analysis; Reading; Pretests Posttests; Intervention; Core Curriculum; State Standards; Alignment (Education)

Abstract:
This study aimed to determine the efficacy of a content acquisition and reading comprehension treatment implemented by eighth-grade social studies teachers. Using a within-teacher design, the eighth-grade teachers' social studies classes were randomly assigned to treatment or comparison conditions. Teachers (n = 5) taught the same instructional content to both treatment and comparison classes, but the treatment classes used instructional practices focused on teaching essential words, text as a source for reading and discussion, and team-based learning approaches. Students in the treatment conditions (n = 261) scored statistically higher than students in the comparison conditions (n = 158) on all three outcomes: content acquisition (ES = 0.17), content reading comprehension (ES = 0.29), and standardized reading comprehension (ES = 0.20). Findings are interpreted as demonstrating support for the treatment in improving both knowledge acquisition and reading comprehension within content area instruction. (Contains 8 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:
Core Curriculum; State Standards; Alignment (Education); Grade 2; Grade 3; Elementary Education; Language Arts; Beginning Reading; Reader Text Relationship; Difficulty Level; Reading Achievement; Pattern Recognition; Readability Formulas; Word Frequency

Abstract:
The Common Core Standards for the English Language Arts (CCSS) provide explicit guidelines matching grade-level bands (e.g., 2-3, 4-5) with targeted text complexity levels. The CCSS staircase accelerates text expectations for students across Grades 2-12 in order to close a gap in the complexity of texts typically used in high school and those of college and career. The first step of the band at second and third grades is examined because it marks the entry into the staircase and a critical developmental juncture. In this article, we examine the theoretical and empirical support for three assumptions that underlie the acceleration of text complexity in Grades 2-3. Then we identify patterns in American reading achievement and instruction to illustrate the potential and far-reaching consequences of an increase in the first step of the CCSS staircase. (Contains 1 figure and 2 notes.) 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; Higher Education; State Standards; Educational Technology; Evidence; Teacher Interns; Consortia; Expertise; Severity (of Disability); Alignment (Education); Internship Programs; Academic Standards; National Standards; Mentors; Needs Assessment; Educational Needs; Educational Improvement; Improvement Programs; Best Practices; Teacher Collaboration; College Faculty; Special Education Teachers

Abstract:
Teachers of students with moderate and severe disabilities must possess the skills and knowledge to address a unique set of needs and challenges. These may include, but are not limited to, management of challenging behaviors, performance of health-related procedures, use of assistive technology, and instruction using evidence-based strategies. This article describes the process undertaken by a higher education consortium of faculty with expertise in low incidence disabilities from across institutions of higher education in Kentucky to address the challenge of supporting 1st year teachers (i.e., interns) when assigned mentors and administrators who do not have expertise in this area. This consortium addressed this challenge by creating two documents: (a) an alignment of state standards to professional standards and (b) an addendum to the state internship materials. The intent of this article is to share the development process with others who may wish to design similar documents to address state and national standards for teacher interns. (Contains 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:
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:
Music Education; Educational Policy; Public Policy; Federal Legislation; Educational Legislation; High Schools; Graduation Requirements; Probability; Academic Standards; State Standards; Public Schools; Private Schools

Abstract:
This article reviews the political and empirical record within music education surrounding the Goals 2000: Educate America Act and reports a new study evaluating the effects of the law on music and arts education policies in U.S. high schools. School-level data (N = 670 schools) from the National Education Longitudinal Study of 1988 and the Education Longitudinal Study of 2002 were independently pooled to estimate the effects of Goals 2000 on the number of unique music courses high schools offered, the probability that schools would enforce a local arts graduation requirement, and the number of arts courses required for graduation. Results showed no effect on the number of unique music courses offered. However, for schools in states that prior to Goals 2000 had no arts education mandate or had a flexible arts education mandate, Goals 2000 significantly increased the probability of schools requiring the arts, as well as the number of arts credits required for graduation. The article concludes with implications for the arts in the current Common Core Standards movement. (Contains 6 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