DOCSLIB.ORG

Change Recommendations for the Mount Ephraim School District

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Change Recommendations for the Mount Ephraim School District Best Practices in a High Quality Preschool Program: Change Recommendations for the Mount Ephraim School District by Kimberly C. Seifring An executive position paper submitted to the faculty of Wilmington University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Education In Innovation and Leadership Wilmington University October, 2010 Best Practices in a High Quality Preschool Program: Change Recommendations for the Mount Ephraim School District by Kimberly C. Seifring I certify that I have read this dissertation and that in my opinion it meets the academic and professional standards required by Wilmington University as a dissertation for the degree of Doctor of Education in Innovation and Leadership: Lynne L. Svenning, Ph.D. Chairperson of Dissertation Committee Linda H. Frazer, Ph.D., Member of Dissertation Committee James J. Lavender, Ed. D., Member of Dissertation Committee ________________________________________________________________________ Betty J. Caffo, Ph.D., Provost and Vice President of Academic Affairs ii Abstract This executive position paper proposes recommendations for changes to the Mount Ephraim preschool program based on research-based best strategies for high quality preschool programming using developmentally appropriate practices. A narrative of the current program is provided and research highlighting best practices for preschool programming. One of the aspects reviewed included research on the five state-approved preschool curriculum options for New Jersey. Observational data and teacher interviews were completed on four of these five curriculum programs to assist with curriculum adoption recommendation. Programmatic change recommendations to the Mount Ephraim program were made in regards to curriculum acquisition, inclusion of gross motor activities, how to increase parental involvement, aspects of student assessment and program assessment. iii October, 2010 Copyright 2010 by Seifring, Kimberly C. All Rights Reserved iv This executive position paper is dedicated, first, to my family; my husband, Dan, and children, Liam, Kelsey and Caitlyn who consistently love me and support me. Those attributes focused me and kept me driven through the entire doctoral program. I would not have been able to complete a life long dream of completing a doctoral program if it were not for their selflessness and willingness to make some sacrifices of their own in regards to my time. Secondly, I would like to dedicate it to my parents, Robert and Barbara Bolton, for not only laying the groundwork during my childhood about the importance of education but for the constant words of encouragement, positive reinforcement and assistance with my children during my time in the doctoral program. You individuals are the best part of my life and have consistently supported me with love, guidance and patience. Finally, it is dedicated to my dissertation committee. Dr. Svenning, thank you for the time and guidance you provided me throughout the dissertation process. Dr. Frazer, thank you for your willingness to answer all my questions even prior to the assignment of a dissertation chair. Dr. Lavender, thank you for your willingness to assist an educational colleague in her pursuit of becoming a doctor. v CONTENTS Abstract………………………………………………………………………………..….iii Dedication………………………………………………………………………………...iv Chapter I –Preschool Programming in the Mount Ephraim School District…………...…1 Introduction………………………………………………………………………..1 Preschool History in the Mount Ephraim School District……………………...…3 District Demographic Background………………………………………………..8 Statement of the Problem………………………………………………………….9 Purpose of the Research……………………………………………………….…10 Need for Preschool Programming Alterations in the Mount Ephraim School District…………………………………………………………………………....10 Research Questions……………………………………………………………....12 Chapter II – Review of the Best Practices in Preschool Education……………………...14 Introduction………………………………………………………………………14 Research Methodology…………………………………………………………..14 Historical Perspective…………………………………………………………....15 Cost/Benefit Analyses of Preschool Programs…………………………………..18 Effects on Students that Participate in a Preschool Program…………………….20 National Perspective in Preschool Education…………………………………....22 Early Learning Standards………………………………………………………...23 New Jersey Perspective on Preschool Education………………………………...26 High Quality Programs…………………………………………………………..31 Child Development and Preschool Education Programs………………………...34 vi Cognitive Development……………………………………………………....34 Literacy Instruction…………………………………………………………...36 Math…………………………………………………………………………..38 Social/Emotional Growth………………………………………………….….41 Dramatic Play………………………………………………….……………...43 Gross Motor…………………………………………………………………..44 Early Childhood Curriculum……………………………………………………..45 Preschool Curricular Accreditation by NAEYC……………………………...49 State of New Jersey’s Preschool Curriculum Options…………………………...49 Tools of the Mind Project…………………………………………………….50 High Scope Preschool Curriculum…………………………………………....54 Bank Street Developmental Interaction Approach…………………………...56 The Creative Curriculum for Preschool……………………………………....57 Curiosity Corner………………………………………………………………59 Program Assessment…………………………………………………………..…62 Early Childhood Rating Scale – Revised (ECERS) ………………………….64 Classroom Assessment Scoring System (CLASS)………………………...…65 Literacy Indicators and Interactions in the Classroom (LIIC)………………..66 Support for Early Literacy Assessment (SELA) ……………………………..67 Preschool Classroom Mathematics Inventory (PCMI) ………………………68 Child Development Assessment……………………………………..…………..69 Assessment Cautions…………………………………………………..……..73 Parental Involvement………………………………………………………….....73 vii Parameters of a High Quality Preschool Program……………………………….77 Chapter III – Functional Review of State Approved Preschool Curriculum…………….79 Research Approach Utilized for Curriculum Reviews…………………………..79 Tools of the Mind Project………………………………………………………..79 District Background…………………………………………………………..80 Classroom Observation…………………………………………………….…80 Teacher Interview………………………………………………………….…82 High Scope Preschool Curriculum…………………………………………….…83 District Background…………………………………………………………..83 Classroom Observation…………………………………………………….…83 Teacher Interview………………………………………………………….…85 Bank Street Developmental Interaction Approach……………………………....88 The Creative Curriculum for Preschool……………………………………….…88 District Background………………………………………………………..…88 Classroom Observation……………………………………………………….88 Teacher Interview…………………………………………………………….89 Curiosity Corner………………………………………………………………….91 District Background……………………………………………………..……91 Classroom Observation……………………………………………………….91 Teacher Interview…………………………………………………………….92 Curriculum Comparisons………………………………………………………...93 Chapter IV – Programmatic Change Recommendation for the Mount Ephraim School District Preschool Program……………………………………………………………..103 viii Introduction……………………………………………………………………..103 Curriculum……………………………………………………………………...103 Curriculum Approval Recommendation…………………………………….104 Professional Development to Support Recommended Curriculum…………106 Gross Motor Programming……………………………………………………..107 Gross Motor Play Recommendation………….……………………………..107 Parental Involvement………………………………….………………………..108 Parental Involvement Recommendation………………….…………………109 Child Assessment………………………………………………….……………111 TCCP Assessment Recommendation……………………………….………112 Program Assessment…………………………………………………………....114 Program Assessment Recommendation…………………………………..…116 Conclusion……………………………………………………………………...117 References……………………………………………………………………………....123 Appendix A……………………………………………………………………..………135 Appendix B………………………………………………………………………..……137 Appendix C……………………………………………………………………………..139 ix LIST OF TABLES Table 1: Enrollment rates in Mount Ephraim school district preschool program………...5 Table 2: Strengths of New Jersey’s State Approved Preschool Curriculum Programs…94 Table 3: Weaknesses of New Jersey’s State Approved Preschool Curriculum Programs…………………………………………………………………………………97 Table 4: Home/School Communication System Incorporated into New Jersey’s State Approved Preschool Curriculum Programs ..……………………………………………99 Table 5: Assessment Program Incorporated into New Jersey’s State Approved Preschool Curriculum Programs ………………………….……………………………………….101 Table 6: Summary of Programmatic Change Recommendations….…………………..119 Table 7: Summary of Fiscal Impact Based on Programmatic Change Recommendations………………………………………………………………………121 x Chapter I Preschool Programming in the Mount Ephraim School District Introduction Research indicates that students demonstrate long-lasting educational benefits from participating in a preschool program (Jacobson, 2004; Preschool Teaching and Learning Standards, 2009) and that participation in preschool is a key to later success (National Association for the Education of Young Children, 2003). Bredekamp and Copple (1997) indicate that “the preschool years are now recognized as a vitally important period of human development” (p. 97) and significant growth in the social, physical, emotional and cognitive domains occurs during this time frame. In particular, research demonstrates that preschool programming for disadvantaged youth is favorable and yields long lasting results (Schweinhart &Weikart, 1998). Gormley, Jr., Gayer, Phillips and Dawson (2005) report on a meta-analysis of 13 state funded preschool programs that found “statistically significant positive impacts on some aspect of child development (cognitive, language, or social)” (p. 873)
Load more

Recommended publications
  • A Review of Standardized Testing Practices and Perceptions in Maine
    A Review of Standardized Testing Practices and Perceptions in Maine Janet Fairman, Ph.D. Amy Johnson, Ph.D. Ian Mette, Ph.D Garry Wickerd, Ph.D. Sharon LaBrie, M.S. April 2018 Maine Education Policy Research Institute Maine Education Policy Research Institute McLellan House, 140 School Street 5766 Shibles Hall, Room 314 Gorham, ME 04038 Orono, ME 04469-5766 207.780.5044 or 1.888.800.5044 207.581.2475 Published by the Maine Education Policy Research Institute in the Center for Education Policy, Applied Research, and Evaluation (CEPARE) in the School of Education and Human Development, University of Southern Maine, and the Maine Education Policy Research Institute in the School of Education and Human Development at the University of Maine at Orono. The Maine Education Policy Research Institute (MEPRI), is jointly funded by the Maine State Legislature and the University of Maine System. This institute was established to conduct studies on Maine education policy and the Maine public education system for the Maine Legislature. Statements and opinions by the authors do not necessarily reflect a position or policy of the Maine Education Policy Research Institute, nor any of its members, and no official endorsement by them should be inferred. The University of Maine System does not discriminate on the basis of race, color, religion, sex, sexual orientation, national origin or citizenship status, age, disability, or veteran's status and shall comply with Section 504, Title IX, and the A.D.A in employment, education, and in all other areas of the University. The University provides reasonable accommodations to qualified individuals with disabilities upon request.
    [Show full text]
  • Ced Education Boilerplate
    MEASURING WHAT MATTERS Using Assessment and Accountability to Improve Student Learning A STATEMENT BY THE RESEARCH AND POLICY COMMITTEE OF THE COMMITTEE FOR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT MEASURING WHAT MATTERS Using Assessment and Accountability to Improve Student Learning A STATEMENT BY THE RESEARCH AND POLICY COMMITTEE OF THE COMMITTEE FOR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Committee for Economic Development. Research and Policy Committee. Measuring what matters : using assessment and accountability to improve student learning / a statement by the Research and Policy Committee of the Committee for Economic Development p. cm. “December 15, 2000.” Includes bibliographical references. ISBN 0-87186-139-9 1. Educational tests and measurements — United States. 2. Educational accountability — United States. 3. School improvement programs — United States. I. Title. LB3051 .C632 2001 371.26'0973 — dc21 2001017186 First printing in bound-book form: 2001 Paperback: $15.00 Printed in the United States of America Design: Rowe Design Group COMMITTEE FOR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 477 Madison Avenue, New York, N.Y. 10022 (212) 688-2063 2000 L Street, N.W., Suite 700, Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 296-5860 www.ced.org CONTENTS RESPONSIBILITY FOR CED STATEMENTS ON NATIONAL POLICY iv PURPOSE OF THIS STATEMENT viii CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION AND SUMMARY 1 CHAPTER 2: MEASURING STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT 5 Issues in designing direct measures of student learning 5 Setting standards for learning 5 Designing assessments 7 Reporting scores 9 Challenges
    [Show full text]
  • WISCONSIN STANDARDS for English Language Arts
    WISCONSIN STANDARDS FOR English Language Arts WisconsinWisconsin Department Department ofof Public Public Instruction Instruction WISCONSIN STANDARDS FOR English Language Arts Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction Carolyn Stanford Taylor, State Superintendent Madison, Wisconsin This publication is available from: Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction 125 South Webster Street Madison, WI 53703 (608) 266-8960 dpi.wi.gov/ela May 2020 Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction The Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction does not discriminate on the basis of sex, race, color, religion, creed, age, national origin, ancestry, pregnancy, marital status or parental status, sexual orientation, or ability and provides equal access to the Boy Scouts of America and other designated youth groups. Wisconsin Standards for English Language Arts ii Foreword On May 27, 2020, I formally adopted the Wisconsin Standards for English Language Arts. This revised set of academic standards provides a foundational framework identifying what knowledge and skills Wisconsin students in English language arts should learn at different grade levels or bands of grades. The adoption of this revised set of standards was part of a concerted effort led by Wisconsin educators and stakeholders who shared their expertise in English language arts and teaching from kindergarten through higher education. Feedback was provided by the public and the Wisconsin State Legislature for the writing committee to consider as part of Wisconsin’s Academic Standards review and revision process. English language arts is an essential part of a comprehensive PK-12 education for all students. Through English language arts, Wisconsin students learn to use literacy to understand and improve themselves and their worlds.
    [Show full text]
  • ELCC Standards for Presentation to NCATE (National Council for the Accreditation of Teacher Education) in the Fall of 2010
    EDUCATIONAL LEADERSHIP PROGRAM Recognition Standards: Building Level For institutions undergoing NCATE Accreditation and ELCC Program Review Page | 2 For Advanced Programs at the Master, Specialist, or Doctoral Level that Prepare Assistant Principals, Principals, Curriculum Directors, Supervisors, and other Education Leaders in a School Building Environment November 2011 National Policy Board For Educational Administration (NPBEA) Page | 3 TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction 3 ELCC Program Standard 1.0 4 ELCC Program Standard 2.0 7 ELCC Program Standard 3.0 10 ELCC Program Standard 4.0 12 ELCC Program Standard 5.0 15 ELCC Program Standard 6.0 17 ELCC Program Standard 7.0 19 Appendix 1 Assessments Description 21 Reviewer Evaluation Rubric for Standards 1.0-6.0 21 Reviewer Evaluation Rubric for Standard 7.0 22 Policies for Making Program Report Decisions 24 Appendix 2 Alignment of ELCC Program Standards with 27 NCATE Standard Principles Appendix 3 Commentary and Research Support for Standards 27 References 48 Appendix 4 Glossary 72 Page | 4 INTRODUCTION Rationale The importance of clearly defining what successful learning or performance looks like has become increasingly evident during the past decade. Without a doubt, the better one understands what excellence looks like, the greater one’s chances are for achieving – or surpassing - that standard. Ensuring effective school leadership begins with the following questions: o What do our P-12 students need to know, understand, and do? o What do our teachers and related staff need to know, understand, and do to increase student learning? o What do our school building leaders need to know, understand, and do to support teachers and building-level personnel to increase student learning? Effective use of leadership preparation standards requires multiple, high integrated and highly interdependent variables and assessments.
    [Show full text]
  • Standards, Equity and Cultural Diversity
    Northeast and Islands Regional Educational Laboratory A Program of The Education Alliance at Brown University Cultural Diversity Equityand Standards, Mary AnnLachat Standards, Equity and Cultural Diversity Mary Ann Lachat Northeast and Islands Regional Educational Laboratory At Brown University (LAB) The LAB, a program of The Education Alliance at Brown University, is one of ten federally supported educational laboratories in the nation. Our goals are to improve teaching and learning, advance school improvement, build capacity for reform, and develop strategic alliances with key members of the region’s education and policy making community. The LAB develops educational products and services for school administrators, policymakers, teachers, and parents in New England, New York, Puerto Rico, and the Virgin Islands. Central to our efforts is a commitment to equity and excellence. Information about LAB programs and services is available by contacting: LAB at Brown University Education Alliance 222 Richmond Street, Suite 300 Providence, RI 02903-4226 Phone: 800-521-9550 Email: [email protected] Web: http://www.lab.brown.edu Fax: 401-421-7650 The Center for Resource Management (CRM), based in South Hampton, New Hampshire, is a LAB partner organization. About the author: Mary Ann Lachat is president of CRM and program leader of the LAB’s Standards, As- sessment and Instruction Initiative. Copyright © 1999 The Education Alliance, LAB at Brown University. All rights reserved. This publication is based on work supported by the Office of Educational Research and Improvement (OERI), U.S. Department of Education, under Contract Number RJ96006401. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommenda- tions expressed in this material are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of OERI, the U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Developing Standards for Child-Friendly Schools in CEE/CIS 2
    Developing Standards for Quality Basic Education in Central and Eastern Europe and the Commonwealth of Independent States Prepared for UNICEF CEE/CIS Regional Office December 6, 2010 Miske Witt & Associates Inc. St. Paul, Minnesota USA By Nancy Clair, Ed.D. and Shirley Miske, Ph.D., with Deepa Patel, M.P.P. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Developing Standards of Quality Basic Education in Central and Eastern Europe and the Commonwealth of Independent States was commissioned by the UNICEF Regional Office for Central and Eastern Europe and the Commonwealth of Independent States. It is the result of collaboration between many individuals, and appreciation is extended to each of them. Nancy Clair designed the study and was the lead author of the report. Shirley Miske collaborated with Clair in the overall process, design, and writing. Deepa Patel conducted the initial literature review and contributed significantly to the writing. Country reviews were conducted by Anne Katz, Nils Kauffman, Jane Schubert, Shirley Miske and Nancy Clair. Jane Schubert also contributed to the final report. Sarah Koehler and Nancy Pellowski Wiger of Miske Witt and Associates Inc. provided administrative support to the authors and researchers. Philippe Testot-Ferry was responsible for the overall development and coordination of the project. Petronilla Murithi provided administrative assistance. Education specialists and their assistants from UNICEF country offices organized the field visits and provided valuable insights into quality basic education initiatives. Special thanks are extended to Alvard Poghosyan (Armenia), Kenan Mammadli (Azerbaijan), Sanja Kabil (Bosnia and Herzegovina), Kozeta Imami and Aferdita Spahiu (Kosovo), Liudmila Lefter (Moldova), Fatma Uluc (Turkey), and Yulia Narolskaya (Uzbekistan). Nora Sabani (Macedonia) also offered helpful insights.
    [Show full text]
  • English Language Arts Menu of Best Practices and Strategies
    2018 STRENGTHENING STUDENT EDUCATIONAL OUTCOMES English Language Arts Menu of Best Practices and Strategies English Language Arts: Menu of Best Practices and Strategies 2018 Authorizing legislation: RCW 28A.165 & 28A.655.235 Gayle Pauley, Assistant Superintendent, Special Programs and Federal Accountability Kathe Taylor, Assistant Superintendent, Learning and Teaching Aira Jackson, Director, K–12 English Language Arts, Learning and Teaching Prepared by: Joshua Lynch, Program Supervisor, LAP Behavior, Discipline, and Research [email protected], 360-725-4969 Kristi Coe, Program Supervisor, LAP, Math, and Research [email protected], 360-725-6190 Table of Contents Welcome ............................................................................................................ 1 Background and Philosophy ................................................................................ 3 Strengthening Student Educational Outcomes ................................................................................3 Learning Assistance Program ..........................................................................................................4 LAP K–4 Focus on Literacy .................................................................................................................... 4 LAP Eligibility ........................................................................................................................................ 4 Behavior Services ................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Strengthening Learning Through Play in Early Childhood
    in support of Learning through play Strengthening learning through play in early childhood education programmes 2 Learning through play Strengthening learning through play in early childhood education programmes Published by UNICEF Education Section, Programme Division Acknowledgements 3 United Nations Plaza New York, NY 10017, USA This advocacy brief was developed by the Education Section www.unicef.org/publications of UNICEF’s Headquarters Office, under the leadership and supervision of Ivelina Borisova (Early Learning Specialist). Special © United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF) acknowledgement is due to external consultants, namely Minju October 2018 Choi, Deborah Llewellyn, Marilou Hyson and Hsiao-Chen Lin for their support in drafting and editing different iterations of this document. Hsiao-Chen Lin also coordinated overall feedback and production Cover | © Jordi Matas/UNICEF of this brief. Colleagues from the UNICEF Education HQ and Regional Offices provided valuable feedback. Design by Paula Lopez Special thanks go to the ECD section at UNICEF Headquarters Office, especially Pia Britto and Ana Nieto, for their partnership and collaboration on this advocacy brief. We thank Anastasia Warpinski for editing the work, Paula Lopez for the design, and Hippocampus Learning Centres for sharing and authorizing the use of their images. UNICEF warmly thanks the LEGO Foundation for supporting this piece of work, and for its generous contribution and strong partnership. in support of Learning through play Strengthening learning through play in early childhood education programmes UNICEF, 2018 1. Introduction The importance of early learning is entrenched in the second target of This brief will help pre-primary stakeholders advocate for making play-based Sustainable Development Goal 4, which seeks to ensure that, by 2030, or playful learning a central aspect of expanding and strengthening the “all girls and boys have access to quality early childhood development, care pre-primary sub-sector.
    [Show full text]
  • Integration of Technology Enabled Education in Learning: a Comparative Study of the Influence of Learning Standards in the U.S., Japan, Singapore, and Finland
    Integration of Technology Enabled Education in Learning: a Comparative Study of the Influence of Learning Standards in the U.S., Japan, Singapore, and Finland Mackenzie Hird (Massachusetts Institute of Technology), Yuko Okubo (Fujitsu Laboratories of America), Richard Larson (Massachusetts Institute of Technology), and Kanji Uchino (Fujitsu Laboratories of America) Abstract This paper examines how technology enabled education (TEE) can be successfully integrated into the classroom by questioning whether national learning standards either incentivize or deter the adoption of TEE. For this purpose, we investigate practices and policies in 1) the development and implementation of learning standards in curriculum, teaching, assessment, and professional development, and 2) responses to these standards in the U.S., Japan, Singapore, and Finland. The adoption of the Common Core State Standards in the U.S. in 2012 has led to a first set of common national standards for American education. In Japan, Singapore, and Finland, national standards have been in place for decades with some modifications as a result of series of educational reforms. In particular, the paper discusses the following: the introduction of “integrated learning” in 2000 in Japan, the “Teach Less Learn More” (TLLM) policy announced in 2004 in Singapore, and the decentralization process that gave more autonomy to local authorities during the 1990s in Finland. Despite differences in the socio-economic, political, and cultural structures of the three countries, the three countries are trying to give more autonomy to teachers and local authorities in implementing their educational policies for national learning standards. Thus, a comparison of these three countries and the U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Massachusetts Arts Curriculum Framework
    Massachusetts Arts Curriculum Framework November 1999 Massachusetts Department of Elementary & Secondary Education 350 Main Street, Malden, MA 02148 Phone 781-338-3000 TTY: N.E.T. Relay 800-439-2370 www.doe.mass.edu Massachusetts Arts Curriculum Framework October 1999 October, 1999 Dear Colleagues, I am pleased to present to you the Massachusetts Arts Curriculum Framework that was adopted by the Board of Education in June, 1999. This second edition of the Arts Curriculum Framework presents the new statewide guidelines for learning, teaching, and assessment in dance, music, theatre, and visual arts for the Commonwealth’s public schools. Based on scholarship, sound research, and effective practice, the Framework will enable teachers and administrators to strengthen curriculum and instruction from PreKindergarten through grade 12. I am proud of the work that has been accomplished. The comments and suggestions received on the first edition of the Arts Curriculum Framework of 1996, as well as comments on subsequent working drafts, have strengthened this new edition. I want to thank everyone who worked with us to create a high quality document that provides challenging learning standards for Massachusetts students. We will continue to work with schools and districts in implementing the Arts Curriculum Framework over the next several years, and we encourage your comments as you use it. All of the curriculum frameworks are subject to continuous review and improvement, for the benefit of the students of the Commonwealth. Thank you again for your
    [Show full text]
  • Learning Standards, Teaching Standards and Standards for School Principals: a Comparative Study
    OECD Education Working Papers No. 99 Learning Standards, Teaching Standards Centre of Study for Policies and Practices in and Standards for School Education (CEPPE), Principals: A Comparative Chile Study https://dx.doi.org/10.1787/5k3tsjqtp90v-en Unclassified EDU/WKP(2013)14 Organisation de Coopération et de Développement Économiques Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development ___________________________________________________________________________________________ _____________ English - Or. English DIRECTORATE FOR EDUCATION AND SKILLS Unclassified EDU/WKP(2013)14 LEARNING STANDARDS, TEACHING STANDARDS AND STANDARDS FOR SCHOOL PRINCIPALS: A COMPARATIVE STUDY Centre of Study for Policies and Practices in Education (CEPPE), Chile OECD Education Working Papers No. 99 The study compares the development, characteristics and implementation of standards in different OECD countries, focusing on three different levels for which standards can be developed: (i) students and their learning, (ii) teachers and (iii) school principals and their expected performance. It analyses standards and related policies in general while focusing on the specific approaches adopted in a number of OECD and partner countries and regions, including: Australia (Queensland and Victoria), Brazil, Canada (British Columbia and Quebec), Chile, England, Germany, Korea, Mexico, New Zealand, Norway; and the United States (California and Texas). The text analyses information gathered during 2011. The study has been developed with contributions from different research teams of the Centre of Study for Policies and Practices in Education (CEPPE). Chapters about learning and teaching standards were developed by Cristián Cox, Elisa De Padua and Lorena Meckes. The section on standards for school principals has been developed by José Weinstein and Gonzalo Muñoz from Universidad Diego Portales and by Javiera Marfán, from the Fundación Chile.
    [Show full text]
  • Education Reform and the Transition to Standards-Based Grading in the United States
    Northwestern College, Iowa NWCommons Master's Theses & Capstone Projects Education Fall 2020 Education Reform and the Transition to Standards-Based Grading in the United States Lexa Mahr Follow this and additional works at: https://nwcommons.nwciowa.edu/education_masters Part of the Educational Assessment, Evaluation, and Research Commons EDUCATION REFORM AND STANDARDS-BASED GRADING 1 Education Reform and the Transition to Standards-Based Grading in the United States Lexa Mahr Northwestern College Literature Review Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements For the Degree of Master of Education Northwestern College Dr. Daniela Syed EDUCATION REFORM AND STANDARDS-BASED GRADING 2 Table of Contents Abstract .......................................................................................................................................... 3 Introduction .................................................................................................................................... 4 Literature Review........................................................................................................................... 7 Education Reform .............................................................................................................. 7 Elementary and Secondary Education Act ........................................................................ 8 National Assessment of Educational Progress ................................................................... 9 No Child Left Behind Act ...............................................................................................
    [Show full text]