| Nama Pengarang | : | - |
| Nama Majalah/Jurnal | : | Educational Researcher |
| Volume / Nomor Edisi | : | - |
| Nomor Halaman | : | 4-15 |
| Abstraksi Narasi | : | - |
| Nama Pengarang | : | - |
| Nama Majalah/Jurnal | : | Educational Researcher |
| Volume / Nomor Edisi | : | - |
| Nomor Halaman | : | 16-27 |
| Abstraksi Narasi | : | Social science inquiry has increasingly focused on the intricate relations between biography and history. In educational inquiry, this focus has led to an explosion of interest in the personal narative as an articulation of individual and collective experience with the social,political, and cultural worlds of education. This interest in the personal narrative has in turn given prominence to work in oral history as a research startegy. The growing intuitive appeal of personal narratives, however, has led to a certain methodological complacency. What does it mean to collect and analyze personal narratives? How do narrators voice their narratives and narrate their voice? What role do interviewers play in the unfolding of these narratives? What do these questions mean in the context of oral histories, which are narratives where the interviewer-narrator dynamic is also mediated by the nature of memory? This paper examines what the author learned ebout oral histories from the narratives the author could---and could not---collect. |
| Nama Pengarang | : | Robert L. Linn, Antoinette Errante, Patricia A. Alexander |
| Nama Majalah/Jurnal | : | Educational Researcher |
| Volume / Nomor Edisi | : | - |
| Nomor Halaman | : | 4-16 |
| Abstraksi Narasi | : | Use of tests and assessments as key elements in five waves of educational reform during the past 50 year are reviewed. These waves include the role of tests in tracking and selection emphasized in the 1950s, the use of tests for program accountability in the 1960s, minimum competency testing programs of the 1070s, school and district accountability of the 1980s, and the standards-based accountability systems of the 1990s. Questions regarding the impact, validity, and generalizability of reported gains, and the credibility of results in high-stakes accountability uses are discussed. Emphasis is given to three issues regarding currently popular accountability systems. These are (a) the role of content standards for all student, and (b) the dual goals of high performance standards and common standards for all students, and (c) the validity of accountability models. Some suggestions for dealing with the most severe limitations of accountability are provided. |
| Nama Pengarang | : | - |
| Nama Majalah/Jurnal | : | Educational Researcher |
| Volume / Nomor Edisi | : | - |
| Nomor Halaman | : | 4-15 |
| Abstraksi Narasi | : | - |
| Nama Pengarang | : | - |
| Nama Majalah/Jurnal | : | Educational Researcher |
| Volume / Nomor Edisi | : | - |
| Nomor Halaman | : | 17-29 |
| Abstraksi Narasi | : | Our conventional assumptions about school policy and evaluation are that schools are known and stable entities, and that the objectives and purposes of evaluation are relatively straightforward. Drawing initially on a Norwegian evaluation of Norway`s educational system, this essay views the problems of policy studies and evaluation as related to social and cultural changes that produce ambiguity and uncertainty in the practices of education. Further, the object of inquiry in this essay is the structuring of educational knowledge. Central to this examination are the sociology of knowledge and postmodern political theories, asking about the categories, distinctions, and differentiations of schooling that govern problem-solving efforts to improve education. My concern is with a method of inquiry that examines the historical circumstances through which "reason" and "reasonable people" of schooling are constructed. I proceed in this manner to frame the study of policy research and evaluation in a problematic that does not take for granted its knowledge conditions. The focus on the system of knowledge also enables a consideration of the patterns of social inclusion and exclusion produced in school practice. I argue that one of the major difficulties of contemporary policy studies is its nonreflexivity toward the ways in which its system of knowledge change in historical circumstances. This lack of reflexivity about "reason" denies change and obscures the issue of power embedded in school practises. |
| Nama Pengarang | : | - |
| Nama Majalah/Jurnal | : | Educational Researcher |
| Volume / Nomor Edisi | : | - |
| Nomor Halaman | : | 31-34 |
| Abstraksi Narasi | : | In order to prevent misleading conclusions based on spurious observed effects---especially seductively large ones---Robinson and Levin (1997) suggested a two-step approach to the reporting and evaluation of empirical results. According to the two-step model, the evaluation of the magnitude and substantive significance of obtained effects should be conditional upon their statistical significance: Authors should first indicate whether the observed effect is statistically improbable, and only if it is should they then indicate how large or important it is. The purpose of this paper is (a) to show that even though the underlying intention---to prevent unwarranted evaluation of spurious observed effects---is a laudable one, the two-step approach is inappropriate for this purpose, and (b) to reiterate the preferred approach, namely increased sample size and computation of confidence intervals. |
| Nama Pengarang | : | Joel R. Levin, Robinson, Daniel H. , Sorel Cahan, Popkewitz, Thomas S., Ralph T. Putnam, Borko, Hilda |
| Nama Majalah/Jurnal | : | Educational Researcher |
| Volume / Nomor Edisi | : | - |
| Nomor Halaman | : | 34-36 |
| Abstraksi Narasi | : | Support, in the form of both a fable and a framework, is provided for a two-step approach to the estimation and discussion of effect sizes. A distinction is made between single-study syntheses. The concept of "conclusion coherence" (the consistency between statistical and verbal inference) is introduced and illustrated within each investigative context. |
| Nama Pengarang | : | - |
| Nama Majalah/Jurnal | : | Educational Researcher |
| Volume / Nomor Edisi | : | - |
| Nomor Halaman | : | 4-15 |
| Abstraksi Narasi | : | This article, based on Ken Zeichner`s 1988 Division K Vice-Presidential address, traces the development of teacher education research in the U.S. over the last 21 years. Five different segments of the new scholarship in teacher education are discussed together with their contributions to policy and practice in teacher education: survey research, case studies of teacher educations programs, conceptual and historical research, studies of learning to teach, and examinations of the nature and impact of teacher education activities including self-study research. The development of division K in AERA and the role and status of teacher education in research universities are discussed in relation to the development of this field of education research. |
| Nama Pengarang | : | - |
| Nama Majalah/Jurnal | : | Educational Researcher |
| Volume / Nomor Edisi | : | - |
| Nomor Halaman | : | 16-25 |
| Abstraksi Narasi | : | Support for all forms of school choice-public school choice, charter schools, and public-private choice-has been growing in recent years. Arguments in favor of greater choice rest on two propositions: that choice would serve to give more control over educational decisions to parents who in turn would choose good schools for their children, and that competition between schools for students will help reduce inefficiencies in the delivery of education, and, in doing so, improve educational outcomes. This review focuses on quantitative assessments of the impact of choice on educational outcomes. Several questions are examined in detail. First, is there any evidence that the various alternatives to traditional public schools-magnet schools, charter schools, and private schools-are delivering education in a fundamentally different and more efficient fashion? In other words, after accounting for differences in the backgrounds of the students attending these schools, are they better at educating students? Second, what are the equity consequences and demographic implications of enhanced school choice? Third, how might enhanced choice affect support for traditional public schools? |
| Nama Pengarang | : | Brent Kilbourn, Dan D. Goldhaber, Ken Zeichner |
| Nama Majalah/Jurnal | : | Educational Researcher |
| Volume / Nomor Edisi | : | - |
| Nomor Halaman | : | 27-32 |
| Abstraksi Narasi | : | - |
Unduh Dokumen Berkas PDF Utama