A Case Study of Three Alternative Schools : an Analysis from a Black Perspective
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
Samuel Clemens Carriage House) 351 Farmington Avenue WABS Hartford Hartford County- Connecticut
MARK TWAIN CARRIAGE HOUSE HABS No. CT-359-A (Samuel Clemens Carriage House) 351 Farmington Avenue WABS Hartford Hartford County- Connecticut WRITTEN HISTORICAL AND DESCRIPTIVE DATA REDUCED COPIES OF THE MEASURED DRAWINGS PHOTOGRAPHS Historic American Buildings Survey National Park Service U.S. Department of the Interior Washington, D.C. 20013-7127 m HISTORIC AMERICAN BUILDINGS SURVEY MARK TWAIN CARRIAGE HOUSE HABS NO. CT-359-A Location: Rear of 351 Farmington Avenue, Hartford, Hartford County, Connecticut. USGS Hartford North Quadrangle, Universal Transverse Mercator Coordinates; 18.691050.4626060. Present Owner. Occupant. Use: Mark Twain Memorial, the former residence of Samuel Langhorne Clemens (better known as Mark Twain), now a house museum. The carriage house is a mixed-use structure and contains museum offices, conference space, a staff kitchen, a staff library, and storage space. Significance: Completed in 1874, the Mark Twain Carriage House is a multi-purpose barn with a coachman's apartment designed by architects Edward Tuckerman Potter and Alfred H, Thorp as a companion structure to the residence for noted American author and humorist Samuel Clemens and his family. Its massive size and its generous accommodations for the coachman mark this structure as an unusual carriage house among those intended for a single family's use. The building has the wide overhanging eaves and half-timbering typical of the Chalet style popular in the late 19th century for cottages, carriage houses, and gatehouses. The carriage house apartment was -
Downtown Development Plan
Chapter 7 One City, One Plan Downtown Development Plan KEY TOPICS Downtown Vision Hartford 2010 Downtown Goals Front Street Downtown North Market Segments Proposed Developments Commercial Market Entertainment Culture Regional Connectivity Goals & Objectives Adopted June 3, 2010 One City, One Plan– POCD 2020 7- 2 recent additions into the downtown include the Introduction Downtown Plan relocation of Capitol Community College to the Recently many American cities have seen a former G. Fox building, development in the movement of people, particularly young profes- Adriaen’s Landing project area, including the sionals and empty nesters, back into down- Connecticut Convention Center and the towns. Vibrant urban settings with a mix of uses Connecticut Center for Science and Exploration, that afford residents opportunities for employ- Morgan St. Garage, Hartford Marriott Down- ment, residential living, entertainment, culture town Hotel, and the construction of the Public and regional connectivity in a compact pedes- Safety Complex. trian-friendly setting are attractive to residents. Hartford’s Downtown is complex in terms of Downtowns like Hartford offer access to enter- land use, having a mix of uses both horizontally tainment, bars, restaurants, and cultural venues and vertically. The overall land use distribution unlike their suburban counterparts. includes a mix of institutional (24%), commercial The purpose of this chapter is to address the (18%), open space (7%), residential (3%), vacant Downtown’s current conditions and begin to land (7%), and transportation (41%). This mix of frame a comprehensive vision of the Downtown’s different uses has given Downtown Hartford the future. It will also serve to update the existing vibrant character befitting the center of a major Downtown Plan which was adopted in 1998. -
1 . Name of Property Other Name/Site
NPS Form 10-900 34-OQ18 (Rev. 8-86) RECE United States Department of the Interior National Park Service 2\ 1995 NATIONAL REGISTER OF HISTORIC PLACES REGISTRATION FORM JNTERAGENCY RESOURCES OMSION 1 . Name of Property historic name: ______ DEPARTMENT STORE HISTORIC DISTRICT ______________ other name/site number: _______N/A ______________________________ 2 . Location street & number: 884-956 Main Street. 36 Talcott Street __________ not for publication: N/A city/town: _____ Hartford __________ vicinity: N/A ________ state: CT county: Hartford______ code: 003 zip code: 06103 3 . Classification Ownership of Property: private, public-local ____ Category of Property: district_______________ Number of Resources within Property: Contributing Noncontributing 3 1 buildings ____ ____ sites 1 1 structures __ objects 2_ Total Number of contributing resources previously listed in the National Register: 1 Name of related multiple property listing: Historic Resources of Hartford USDI/NPS NRHP Registration Form Page 2 4. State/Federal Agency Certification As the designated authority under the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended, I hereby certify that this X nomination ___ request for determination of eligibility meets the documentation standards for registering properties in the National Register of Historic Places and meets the procedural and professional requirements set forth in 36 CFR Part 60. In my opinion, the property X meets does not meej: the National Register Criteria. ___ See cont. sheet. 2/15/95_______________ Date John W. Shannahan, Director Connecticut Historical Crmni ggj ran State or Federal agency and bureau In my opinion, the property ___ meets does not meet the National Register criteria. __ See continuation sheet. -
CE 001 572 the Recognition of Continuing Education: Working
DOCUMENT RESUME ED 090 421 CE 001 572 TITLE National Task Force on a Uniform Measurement Unit for the Recognition of Continuing Education: Working Papers; and The Continuing Education Unit: A Uniform Unit of Measure for Non-Credit Continuing Education Programs (An Interim Statement of the National Task Forces) . INSTITUTION National Univ. Extension Association, Washington, D.C. PUB DATE Jul 70 NOTE 33p.; There is no page 7 in the Working Papers EDRS PRICE MF-$0.75 HC-$1.85 PLUS POSTAGE DESCRIPTORS Administrator Guides; *Adult Education; *Adult Education Programs; Adult Educators; Guidelines; *Noncredit Courses; Pilot Projects; Post Secondary Education; Program Development; Program Planning; Recordkeeping IDENTIFIERS CEU; *Continuing Education Unit ABSTRACT In 1968, a national planning conference, under the joint sponsorship of 34 organizations responsing to continuing education needs, created the National Task Force to determine the feasibility of a uniform unit of measurement and develop a proposal for field testing the concept. Stressing that continuing education units should supplement, not supplant the credit hour, a working paper was issued suggesting a program of action that included general standards and criteria, questions to be answered, potential subcommittee tasks, and design of forms. In 1973, after two years of deliberation, the National Task Force issued an interim statement defining the Continuing Education Unit (CEU) as: "ten contact hours of participation in an organized continuing education experience under responsible sponsorship, capable direction, and qualified instruction." This document, forming a basic framework for future development and utilization of the also sets forth purposes and objectives, administrative requirements, suggested applications, and practical guidelines. It concludes with the announcement of a pilot project to test the report recommendations. -
Program for Continuing Education Policy Guidelines and Procedures
Program for Continuing Education Policy Guidelines and Procedures I. Purpose The P.E.O. Program for Continuing Education is a D. Grants may be awarded for one term of need based grant program providing one-time academic or technical courses, including online financial assistance to women whose education programs offered by educational institution in has been interrupted and who find it necessary to the United States or Canada. return to school to complete a degree or E. The applications of individuals who satisfy certification that improves their marketable skills for these eligibility criteria will be evaluated on a employment to support them. nondiscriminatory basis without consideration of race, national origin, religious affiliation, II. Eligibility disability, or P.E.O. connection. A. A woman is eligible for recommendation by a III. Amount of Grant local chapter if she: • is a citizen or legal permanent resident of the The maximum grant is $3,000. A request for less United States or Canada; than a maximum grant is encouraged when the • is enrolled in a certification or degree full amount is not essential. The total grant program from an accredited institution; awarded is based on the availability of funds and • is living and studying in the United States or applicants’ individual needs. Regardless of the Canada for the entire course of study; amount awarded, recipients are only eligible to • has had at least 24 consecutive months as a receive one PCE grant. nonstudent sometime in her adult life; Grants to Canadian women will be paid in • is within 18 consecutive months of Canadian dollars unless attending an educational completing her educational program which, at program in the U.S.; then payment may be in the conclusion of, will lead to employment or U.S. -
Glossary of Data Terms
Glossary of Terms The Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board has produced this Glossary of commonly used Texas higher education terms. By its nature, the Glossary will be an evolving document. If you have suggestions for clear wording for terms in the Glossary or for terms whose definition you would like to have included, please send your suggestions to Torca Bunton at [email protected] at the Coordinating Board. TEXAS HIGHER EDUCATION COORDINATING BOARD Educational Data Center Glossary of Terms August 14, 2017 AAT Associate of Arts in a Teaching degree. Board-approved collegiate degree programs consisting of lower-division courses intended for transfer to baccalaureate programs that lead to initial Texas teacher certification. (CTC CBM009) Academic Course Guide Manual (ACGM) The official list of approval numbers for general academic transfer courses that may be offered for state funding by public community and technical colleges in Texas. It lists a basic core of general academic courses which are freely transferable among all public institutions of higher education in Texas in accordance with the Texas Education Code, §61.051(g). TCCNS numbers are assigned to most courses in the manual. Academic courses reported on the CTC CBM004 must appear either on this list of approved courses or in the Special Approval/Unique Need Inventory. See Lower Division Academic Course Guide Manual. (CTC CBM004) Academic Credit Course A college-level course that, if successfully completed, can be applied toward the number of courses required for achieving a degree, diploma, certificate, or other formal award. Academic Program Instructional program leading toward an associate’s, bachelor’s, master’s, doctor’s, or first-professional degree or resulting in credits that can be applied to one of these degrees. -
Governing Post-Secondary Education and Skills in Canada Alison Howard, Jessica Edge
Centre for Skills and Post-Secondary Education POLICIES, LAWS, AND REGULATIONS Governing Post- Secondary Education and Skills in Canada. REPORT NOVEMBER 2014 For the exclusive use of Joseph Mior, [email protected], Fleming College. Policies, Laws, and Regulations: Governing Post-Secondary Education and Skills in Canada Alison Howard, Jessica Edge Preface This report analyzes the policies, laws, and regulations governing post- secondary education (PSE) and skills in Canada. It is one of three foundational studies by The Conference Board of Canada’s Centre for Skills and Post- Secondary Education. The report strives to understand and make sense of past efforts, including successes and failures, and to identify priority areas for action on policies, laws, and regulations reform that will lead to future, ongoing success in the skills and PSE environment. To cite this report: Howard, Alison and Jessica Edge. Policies, Laws, and Regulations: Governing Post-Secondary Education and Skills in Canada. Ottawa: The Conference Board of Canada, 2014. © 2014 The Conference Board of Canada* Published in Canada | All rights reserved | Agreement No. 40063028 | *Incorporated as AERIC Inc. ® The Conference Board of Canada and the torch logo are registered trademarks of The Conference Board, Inc. Forecasts and research often involve numerous assumptions and data sources, and are subject to inherent risks and uncertainties. This information is not intended as specific investment, accounting, legal, or tax advice. © The Conference Board of Canada. All rights reserved. Please contact cboc.ca/ip with questions or concerns about the use of this material. Acknowledgements This report has been prepared by The Conference Board of Canada, under the direction of Dr. -
Kindergarten Teacher's Pedagogical Knowledge and Its Relationship with Teaching Experience
International Journal of Academic Research in Progressive Education and Development Vol. 9 , No. 2, 2020, E-ISSN: 2226-6348 © 2020 HRMARS Kindergarten Teacher’s Pedagogical Knowledge and Its Relationship with Teaching Experience Norzalikah Buyong, Suziyani Mohamed, Noratiqah Mohd Satari, Kamariah Abu Bakar, Faridah Yunus To Link this Article: http://dx.doi.org/10.6007/IJARPED/v9-i2/7832 DOI:10.6007/IJARPED/v9-i2/7832 Received: 13 April 2020, Revised: 16 May 2020, Accepted: 19 June 2020 Published Online: 29 July 2020 In-Text Citation: (Buyong, et al., 2020) To Cite this Article: Buyong, N., Mohamed, S., Satari, N. M., Abu Bakar, K., & Yunus, F. (2020). Kindergarten Teacher’s Pedagogical Knowledge and Its Relationship with Teaching Experience. International Journal of Academic Research in Progressive Education & Development. 9(2), 805-814. Copyright: © 2020 The Author(s) Published by Human Resource Management Academic Research Society (www.hrmars.com) This article is published under the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY 4.0) license. Anyone may reproduce, distribute, translate and create derivative works of this article (for both commercial and non-commercial purposes), subject to full attribution to the original publication and authors. The full terms of this license may be seen at: http://creativecommons.org/licences/by/4.0/legalcode Vol. 9(2) 2020, Pg. 805 - 814 http://hrmars.com/index.php/pages/detail/IJARPED JOURNAL HOMEPAGE Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://hrmars.com/index.php/pages/detail/publication-ethics -
Definitions and Classifications of the OECD International Education Statistics
33 Chapter 4 Definitions and classifications of the OECD international education statistics This chapter sets out the definitions and classifications used for the collection of OECD international education statistics, for each of the following: 1) students and graduates, 2) educational personnel, 3) school organisation and the curriculum, 4) educational institutions, and 5) educational expenditure. OECD HANDBOOK FOR INTERNATIONALLY COMPARATIVE EDUCATION STATISTICS © OECD 2017 34 CHAPTER 4 Definitions and classifications of the OECD international education statistics This chapter sets out the definitions and classifications used for the collection of OECD international education statistics, for each of the following: 1) students and graduates 2) educational personnel 3) school organisation and the curriculum 4) educational institutions 5) educational expenditure. Chapter 5 covers the definition and classification of educational programmes alongside guidance on the implementation of the International Standard Classification of Education (ISCED 2011). The key definitions in each section are highlighted to distinguish them from the rest of the text, which discusses issues of interpretation and practical implementation. While much has been done over the years to improve the clarity of these definitions, this work is not exhaustive and the text discusses any remaining areas of ambiguity. 4.1 Students and graduates 4.1.1 Students and student enrolments In the OECD international education statistics, a student is defined as any individual participating in formal educational programmes. The term “student” applies to pupils and students alike. Formal education is institutionalised, intentional and planned, and provided by public organisations and recognised private bodies. It consists primarily of initial education designed for children and young people before they first enter the labour market. -
ALE Process Guide (Final)
Alternative Education Process Guide Division of Elementary and Secondary Education, Alternative Education Unit March 2021 Alternative Education Unit Contact Information Jared Hogue, Director of Alternative Education Arkansas Department of Education Division of Learning Services 1401 West Capitol Avenue, Suite 425 Little Rock, AR 72201 Phone: 501-324-9660 Fax: 501-375-6488 [email protected] C.W. Gardenhire, Ed.D., Program Advisor Arkansas Department of Education Division of Learning Services ASU-Beebe England Center, Room 106 P.O. Box 1000 Beebe, AR 72012 Phone: 501-580-5660 Fax: 501-375-6488 [email protected] Deborah Bales Baysinger, Program Advisor Arkansas Department of Education Division of Learning Services P.O. Box 250 104 School Street Melbourne, AR 72556 Phone: 501-580-2775 Fax: 501-375-6488 [email protected] 2 Introduction The purpose of this document is to supplement the Arkansas Department of Education - Division of Elementary and Secondary Education (DESE) Rules Governing Distribution of Student Special Needs Funding and the Determination of Allowable Expenditures of Those Funds, specifically Section 4.00 Special Needs - Alternative Learning Environment (ALE). Individuals using this document will be guided through particular contexts in the alternative education process. Each context provides a list of sample forms that can be used to satisfy regulatory compliance, a walk-through of those forms, and an overview of the process. Resources are provided where appropriate. For more information, please contact the Division of Elementary and Secondary Education, Alternative Education Unit. Throughout the document, green text boxes containing guidance will offer information and requirements for ALE programming. -
Preschool to Kindergarten IEP Transition
Preschool to Kindergarten IEP Preschool to Kindergarten IEP Transition OFFICE OF EARLY LEARNING AND SCHOOL READINESS September 2019 Introduction The Office of Early Learning and School Readiness provides technical assistance and resources for our partners working with families, preschool staff and communities to meet the individual needs of preschool children with disabilities. The goal of this manual is to offer information to preschool programs and school districts that are responsible for planning, developing and implementing the individualized education program (IEP) of a child who is leaving preschool to enter kindergarten. This guidance will help the child’s IEP team plan for his or her success, making the transition from preschool to elementary school a positive experience. Please contact the Preschool Special Education team for further assistance at [email protected] or (614) 369-3765. PAGE 2 | Preschool to Kindergarten IEP Transition | September 2019 One Combined, Preschool and Kindergarten IEP or Two Subsequent IEPs: (Preschool then Kindergarten)? First, the IEP team must decide whether it will develop and implement one IEP for the preschool special education student that will transition with the child to kindergarten or develop a preschool IEP and later assemble the school-age IEP team to develop a subsequent school-age IEP for the child’s kindergarten year. The team should consider the advantages and disadvantages of both scenarios and which set-up best meets the needs of the child. The team also must ensure the child’s special education and related services are not interrupted in the preschool to kindergarten transition. Option 1: Combined IEP Developing and implementing a combined IEP may streamline the process for the child transitioning from preschool to kindergarten by reducing the paperwork required and minimizing scheduling difficulties for IEP team members. -
Life Science Journal 2014;11(12S) Http
Life Science Journal 2014;11(12s) http://www.lifesciencesite.com Comparative study of American and Russian students’ attitude towards alternative education Roza Alexeyevna Valeeva and Dilara Ildusovna Vafina Kazan (Volga region) Federal University, Mezhlauka str. 1, Kazan, 420021, Russia Tel.: +7-906-113-7120; E-mail address: [email protected] Abstract. The article presents the results of comparative study of students’ attitude to the alternative education in American and Russian schools. The study was held in a number of Montessori schools in Minnesota USA (Sunshine Montessori School, Seward Montessori School, Great River School). Methods of observation, survey, questionnaire, personal interviews with students and teachers of schools were used. Questioning of American students was held in Great River School. The study surveyed 100 school students. They answered questions about their learning experiences in an alternative school. The questionnaire was anonymous and consisted of 14 questions. The questions were both of direct and expanded character, with a choice of options. Russian students from three secondary schools in the Republic of Tatarstan, Kazan answered the same questions. The study showed that despite the differences in the production of alternative education in the United States and Russia, among the characteristics of alternative education inherent in the American and Russian schools, students noted student-centered character of education, overcoming authoritarianism in teaching and creativity and cognitive activity. [Valeeva R.A., Vafina D.I. Comparative study of American and Russian students’ attitude towards alternative education. Life Sci J 2014;11(12s):821-824] (ISSN:1097-8135). http://www.lifesciencesite.com. 177 Keywords: alternative education, didactical values, educational practice, alternative school, American students, Russian students, educational process, self-development, self-realization Introduction Wheelock & M.E.