| Nama Pengarang | : | Elizabeth Fennema et al, Charlotte H. Scott, Elizabeth Fennema et al, Elizabeth Fennema, Thomas P. Carpenter, Noddings, Nel, Judith Threadgill Sowder, Hyde, Janet Shibley, Sara Jaffee, Steve Rhine |
| Nama Majalah/Jurnal | : | Educational Researcher |
| Volume / Nomor Edisi | : | - |
| Nomor Halaman | : | 6-11 |
| Abstraksi Narasi | : | - |
| Nama Pengarang | : | - |
| Nama Majalah/Jurnal | : | Educational Researcher |
| Volume / Nomor Edisi | : | - |
| Nomor Halaman | : | 2 |
| Abstraksi Narasi | : | - |
| Nama Pengarang | : | - |
| Nama Majalah/Jurnal | : | Educational Researcher |
| Volume / Nomor Edisi | : | - |
| Nomor Halaman | : | 12-21 |
| Abstraksi Narasi | : | Standards-based reform across subject areas has an overarching goal of achieving high academic standards for all students. Although much is known about what constitutes high academic standards, little attention has been given to the attainment of educational equity for all students. In this article, we propose the notion of instructional congruence as a way of making academic content accessible, meaningful, and relevant for diverse learners. Although our discussion considers students from non-English-language backgrounds (NELB) in science education, comparable approachers can be applied to other diverse student groups and other subject areas. We discuss an agenda for research, practice, and policy in promoting high standards for all students across subject areas. |
| Nama Pengarang | : | - |
| Nama Majalah/Jurnal | : | Educational Researcher |
| Volume / Nomor Edisi | : | - |
| Nomor Halaman | : | 22-25 |
| Abstraksi Narasi | : | - |
| Nama Pengarang | : | Levin, Henry M. , Wolf, Richard M., Lee, Okhee, Sandra H. Fradd, Robert Donmoyer |
| Nama Majalah/Jurnal | : | Educational Researcher |
| Volume / Nomor Edisi | : | - |
| Nomor Halaman | : | 4-10 |
| Abstraksi Narasi | : | One of the most prominent arguments for U.S. educational reform, generally, and for the establishment of student performance standards, specifically, has been the assertion that they will create a world-class workforce. Behind this expectation is the assumption that there is strong and demonstrable evidence that higher and better educational standards and student performance are keys to higher workplace productivity. But a review of available evidence suggests only a weak relationship between test scores and economic productivity and virtually no evidence on the predictive validity of the newer performance standards. This article suggests that the educational standards movement has relied on the economic rationale largely because of its persuasiveness in stimulating educational reform rather than any compelling evidence on the links between specific educational standards and economic performance. |
| Nama Pengarang | : | - |
| Nama Majalah/Jurnal | : | Educational Researcher |
| Volume / Nomor Edisi | : | - |
| Nomor Halaman | : | 4-10 |
| Abstraksi Narasi | : | - |
| Nama Pengarang | : | - |
| Nama Majalah/Jurnal | : | Educational Researcher |
| Volume / Nomor Edisi | : | - |
| Nomor Halaman | : | 22-30 |
| Abstraksi Narasi | : | - |
| Nama Pengarang | : | Sternberg, Robert J., David M. Fetterman, Penelope L. Peterson |
| Nama Majalah/Jurnal | : | Educational Researcher |
| Volume / Nomor Edisi | : | - |
| Nomor Halaman | : | 11-20 |
| Abstraksi Narasi | : | The goal of this article is to provide a link between the literatures on human abilities and on expertise. The main argument of this article is that human abilities are forms of developing expertise. In a sense, then, tests of abilities are no different from conventional tests of achievement, teacher-made tests administered in school, or assessments of job performance. Although tests of abilities are used as predictors of these other kinds of performance, the temporal priority of their administration should not be confused with some kind of psychological priority. Abilities, as they are measured by these tests, are as much forms of developing expertise as are any other forms of developing expertise measured in what-ever way. There is no qualitative distinction among the various kinds of measures. The article presents a model that implies a shift away from educational practice grounded in traditional ability achievement relationships and toward practice grounded in the development of knowledge-based expertise in all children. |
| Nama Pengarang | : | - |
| Nama Majalah/Jurnal | : | Educational Researcher |
| Volume / Nomor Edisi | : | - |
| Nomor Halaman | : | 26-33 |
| Abstraksi Narasi | : | Although there are many innovations that affect the field of educational inquiry, it appears that postmodernism provides educational researchers with the most destabilizing and profound set of challenges. The overall purpose of this commentary is to describe and to critique the recent changes in educational inquiry by outlining the themes and the implications associated with the current interest in postmodernism. Specifically, three types of changes are examined. A discussion of methodological patterns focuses on the heightened interest in narrative inquiry. A discussion of summative content examines the manner in which those working within a postmodern framework attempt to draw conclusions from the complex style of writing that is characteristic of postmodernism. Consideration of disciplinary foundations examines the recent shift of interest toward humanities-based researh. For each of these changes, I consider implications related to how educational researchers communicate with the larger educational community. Additionally, I examine the way current changes in educational inquiry may affect the publication process that regulates the discourse of educational research. Finally, I provide a few recommendations for how we might develop inititaives for the academic preparation of educational researchers, given some of the changes introduced here. |
| Nama Pengarang | : | - |
| Nama Majalah/Jurnal | : | Educational Researcher |
| Volume / Nomor Edisi | : | - |
| Nomor Halaman | : | 4-13 |
| Abstraksi Narasi | : | This article is a sequel to the conversation on learning initiated by the editors of Educational Researcher in volume 25, number 4. The author`s first aim is to elicit the metaphors for learning that guide our work as learners, teachers, and researchers. Two such metaphors are identified: the acquisition metaphor and the participation metaphor. Subsequently, their entailments are discussed and evaluated. Although some of the implications are deemed desirable and others are regarded as harmful, the article neither speaks against a particular metaphor nor tries to make a case for the other. Rather, these interpretations and applications of the metaphors undergo critical evaluation. In the end, the question of theoretical unification of the research on learning is addressed, wherein the purpose is to show how too great a devotion to one particular metaphor can lead to theoretical distortions and to undesirable. |
Unduh Dokumen Berkas PDF Utama