Taking plurality, multiplicity, and community into account in establishing standards
An argument is presented for a common core of basics for all students. In addition, national standards are considered within the contexts of a pluralistic society and societal goals. Costs and benefits of adopting national standards are examined in light of the experiences of other countries with centralized educational policies.
This paper explores from an organizational theory point of view issues related to standards for entry into teaching, differential staffing models, and school management. The focus is on the central issue of control versus autonomy in the organizational structure of schools.
The author questions whether the tension between what is "liberal" and what is "useful" is one of the oldest problems in education.
Study compared subject requirements for college admission with those for ongoing study in the corresponding subjects reflected in the college liberal arts program''; author concludes that colleges have arbitrarily determined high school curriculum, and urges reform.
This article discusses the necessity for upgrading the quality of teacher preparation.
To obtain an accurate picture of education in this country, the U.S. Commissioner of Education, suggests we use all available technology and work systematically. The outcome, he feels, would be new methods, materials, and techniques, and new ways to motivate young people and define objectives.
With the decline of public confidence in our schools has come a plethora of devastating critiques. Serious discussion of alternatives such as voucher plans, free schools, and de-schooling has grown enormously. A decade of promise in which billions of dollars were expended for education has born limited fruit for Americans. Too many schools have failed, not only to assist children in their learning of basic skills, but also to provide a vision of a humane and sensitive life.
Instead of acquiring basic skills, an appreciation of learning, and developing citizens who can evaluate and communicate with their environment, the author feels accountability is promoting the technocratic value system.
The author discusses teachers' and school board opinions of being evaluated and their initial hostile reaction to the process. At the termination of the evaluation, most teachers and boards come to realize its value.
The practices and technologies of educating can be described in terms of models for solving curricular and instructional problems. These models constitute the technology of education and from them training programs for teachers, curriculum-makers and materials-procedures can be selected.
A criticism of the Tyler approach to learning which states that one must set up goals and rigidly work toward them. The author feels setting objectives restricts the curriculum; predetermined behavior should be the only acceptable kind; ends should arise from teaching activity.
The research design commonly used by educational researchers is not inappropriate for evaluative research. But narrow or rigid adherence to traditional experimental design can lead to inadequate curricular evaluation.
In its very nature, the term curriculum carries a variety of connotations, such as coherence, sequence, and articulation, for a course of any kind has a beginning, a middle, and an end. But interest in these values long antedates the term itself, going back to at least the time of Sophists and perhaps even earlier.
Two fairly speculative models presented in this paper illustrate some less restrictive techniques of economic model-building. The first model is the micro-economic type. It suggests that if a school district wishes to maximize student learning, there may exist an optimal teacher salary-level it should pay, given the student ability to learn, the distribution of abilities in the population of teachers currently "in-the-market," and certain other conditions of supply and demand. The second model is macro-socioeconomic, and suggests possible relationships among higher education curriculum, economic and technological change, and social change.
Criteria for teacher accreditation are discussed.
Our technological society demands new legislation to restrain people and groups from causing injury to others.
The author states that we need to evaluate most carefully our assumptions about when to introduce particular topics and how concepts and information can be most effectively presented. We have only arrived at the beginning of understanding, and our approach to reforming the secondary school curriculum must become more scientific.
The author suggests that the most successful Educational Opportunity Programs are not those that are remedial in concept but those that concentrate on developing individual self-understanding and self-expression and relate content of subject matter to the realities of life.
A major effort by a well-known university to improve the reading skills of its students is described.
The author sketches here the story of a Philadelphia experiment in which workshops were organized for teaching the parents of Head Start pupils how to teach their children to learn.
The author is concerned about the fundamental irrelevance of the high school curriculum for young people needing to know how to make sense of the real world, how to find their way through its labyrinths, how to effect controls. Acknowledging the value of traditional studies for those who are interested, he proposes a series of elective courses aimed at relating the school to out-of-school interests.
Although National Assessment is now well under way, seemingly all opposition has melted, and the bandwagon effect of getting "on board" is evident, it may, nonetheless, still be appropriate for the uncommitted to consider the contributions this project may make to educational evaluation and its shortcomings.
The American Council on Education in its role as a spokesman for higher education is discussed.
School-library standards are only a section of the larger field, educational
standards, and are part and parcel of the whole question of standardization.
Any discussion of standards for school libraries should begin
with a brief consideration of the two kinds of standards, quantitative
and qualitative, and the recently devised substitute for standards, the
evaluative criteria. Historically and practically, quantitative standards
prepare the way for qualitative ones, and both precede the application of
Acceptance by state education departments of some responsibility for providing leadership service has been an outstanding trend in recent state school administration. This study seeks to explore and describe this trend, and to analyze and evaluate certain state department programs which reflect somewhat different interpretations of the leadership function.
Our commentary focuses on the issue of academic integrity and plagiarism for English language learners in U.S. universities. Sensitized by our own experiences of having recently participated in a hearing on plagiarism in a second language learning (L2) context at a local college, we examined existing definitions on academic integrity and plagiarism in U.S. universities. Our thinking is guided by language scholars who argued that the prevalent views of scholarship in U.S. universities and higher institutions in other western societies are inherently ethnocentric. While universities throughout the country are enthusiastically recruiting students from around the world, as part of the nationwide trend toward globalization, we believe U.S. universities need to develop an academic culture that encourages critical examination of our own beliefs and perspectives about what we need to do to help international students in U.S. universities understand authorship, ownership, and scholarship. Otherwise, our attempts at globalization will suffer. We hope our commentary contributes to the building of a culture of critical examination of the heretofore taken-for-granted beliefs and perspectives on teaching, especially in contexts of L2 teaching and learning.
The Common Core State Standards are poised to guide U.S. educational practice and assessment for the coming years. This commentary examines the framing of the argument for the new standards by the constructors of the CCSS and how the alignment of resources during the implementation phase is tightly ensconced within the organizations who drafted the standards.