首页> 外文学位 >Reading First/Bay State Reading Initiative: Public vs Private Implementation---Which Produces the Best Results?
【24h】

Reading First/Bay State Reading Initiative: Public vs Private Implementation---Which Produces the Best Results?

机译:首先阅读/海湾国家阅读计划:公共与私人实施—哪个产生最佳结果?

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例

摘要

The dissertation is a study to determine which program, Reading First or Bay State Reading Initiative, will demonstrate the greatest gains in reading for students in grades K--3 using a 3-Tier Reading Model. The findings from this study are intended to provide pertinent information on which best practices work in increasing student achievement for reading. Education reform continues to be a hot topic at all levels within the United States. With the spending of billions of federals, state and local dollars, the persistent talk of accountability is ongoing. Since NCLB inception, the year 2014 when all students need to reach proficiency in statewide standardized tests in mathematics and reading, continues to be a threatening time period. With each state setting its own definition and determination of what proficiency is, it is measured by the Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP). This AYP measurement will determine each school's progress incrementally until it reaches 100% in 2014. 48% of all schools in Massachusetts failed to make their AYP in 2004. It is predicted that by 2014, 90% of schools in Massachusetts will not reach its APY obligation (MassPartners for Public Schools, 2005). With the pursuit of reaching AYP, the search is still on for what best practices work in increasing student achievement.;This study utilizes a mixed method research design; including quantitative analysis of the reading scores, a qualitative analysis of teacher and administrator perspective on the effectiveness of each program and a financial cost-effectiveness comparison of the two programs. The quantitative research design includes comparing DIBELS and GRADE results of two elementary schools for students in grades K--3 each of which uses a different reading program. School A uses the Houghton Mifflin Reading Series for their core reading curriculum while School B uses Scott Foresman Reading Street. In addition to comparing the aggregate scores of each school to each other, a number of sub-groups will also be compared. These groups will include low income students (students who receive free and reduced lunch), students with limited English proficiency (LEP), and special education students. Mean comparisons will be utilized to identify which program produces the best results.;In order to identify strengthens and weaknesses of each approach a questionnaire will be utilize to obtain this information from teachers and the administrators who took part in implementing both programs.;In these times of tight budgets and difficult decisions on how to meet the needs of all students it is imperative that cost effectiveness is examined between the two programs. Which of these two programs will provide the greatest gain? How much will that gain cost? Which program will reap the best results for the least amount of money?;References MassPartners for Public Schools (2005, June 1). Facing reality: What happens when good schools Are labeled "failures?". In NCLB's AYP requirements (1/7). Retrieved April 12, 2009, FromMassPartners:http://www.resultsforamerica.org/calendar/files/exec_summaryAYP.pgf
机译:本文是一项研究,目的是确定使用3-Tier Reading Model(三层阅读模型)的K--3年级学生在阅读方面会获得最大的收获,即“阅读优先”或“海湾州读书计划”。这项研究的结果旨在提供有关最佳实践在提高学生阅读成绩方面的信息。在美国,教育改革仍然是各个层面的热门话题。随着数十亿联邦,州和地方美元的支出,关于问责制的持续讨论一直在进行。自NCLB成立以来,2014年是所有学生都需要精通全州数学和阅读标准化考试的一年,这仍然是一个危险的时期。每个州都设置自己的定义和对什么水平的确定,然后通过适当的年度进度(AYP)进行衡量。这项AYP评估将逐步确定每所学校的进度,直到2014年达到100%。2004年,马萨诸塞州所有学校的48%未能通过AYP。预计到2014年,马萨诸塞州90%的学校将无法达到其APY义务(公立学校MassPartners,2005年)。随着追求AYP的追求,仍在寻找最佳实践在提高学生成绩方面的最佳方法。包括对阅读分数的定量分析,对教师和管理者对每个计划的有效性的看法的定性分析以及对两个计划的财务成本效益比较。定量研究设计包括比较两个小学K--3年级学生的DIBELS和GRADE结果,每个学生使用不同的阅读程序。学校A使用霍顿·米夫林阅读系列作为他们的核心阅读课程,而学校B使用Scott Foresman Reading Street。除了将每所学校的总得分进行比较之外,还将对许多子组进行比较。这些群体将包括低收入学生(获得免费午餐和减价午餐的学生),英语能力有限的学生和特殊教育学生。将使用均值比较来确定哪个计划产生最佳结果。为了确定每种方法的优缺点,将使用问卷调查表从参与实施这两个计划的老师和管理人员那里获取此信息。在预算紧张和如何满足所有学生需求的艰难决定时期,必须在两个计划之间检查成本效益。这两个程序中哪一个将提供最大的收益?那会增加多少成本?哪个计划可以用最少的钱获得最佳结果?;参考《公立学校的MassPartners》(2005年6月1日)。面对现实:好的学校被标记为“失败”时会发生什么?在NCLB的AYP要求中(1/7)。于2009年4月12日从FromMassPartners检索:http://www.resultsforamerica.org/calendar/files/exec_summaryAYP.pgf

著录项

  • 作者

    Di Leo, Marlene A.;

  • 作者单位

    University of Massachusetts Amherst.;

  • 授予单位 University of Massachusetts Amherst.;
  • 学科 Education Leadership.;Education Elementary.;Education Reading.
  • 学位 Ed.D.
  • 年度 2011
  • 页码 145 p.
  • 总页数 145
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种 eng
  • 中图分类
  • 关键词

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号