| Nama Pengarang | : | - |
| Nama Majalah/Jurnal | : | Educational Researcher |
| Volume / Nomor Edisi | : | - |
| Nomor Halaman | : | 19-22 |
| Abstraksi Narasi | : | The authors argue not only that high-stakes primary grade testing increases the pressure on low-achieving schools to improve their test performance but that these assessment mandates also increase the chances that low-scoring children will be retained in grade or classified as handicapped. Placement practices such as handicapped classification, flunking, and "developmental" classes remove lowachieving children from the assessment stream and, in the authors` view, constitute not just pollution of assessment data, but outright contamination of the reported results. The authors regard decisions to classify or fail low-achieving children as egregiously unethical if such decisions are motivated by pressure to increase the school`s publicly reported test performance, and they suggest that current high-stakes testing programs be modified to eliminate any incentives to engage in such placement. |
| Nama Pengarang | : | - |
| Nama Majalah/Jurnal | : | Educational Researcher |
| Volume / Nomor Edisi | : | - |
| Nomor Halaman | : | 4 |
| Abstraksi Narasi | : | - |
| Nama Pengarang | : | Robert Donmoyer, Robert E. Floden, McGill-Franzen, Anne, Richard L. Allington, Carl F. Kaestle, Maxine Greene, Kathy Carter |
| Nama Majalah/Jurnal | : | Educational Researcher |
| Volume / Nomor Edisi | : | - |
| Nomor Halaman | : | 38 |
| Abstraksi Narasi | : | - |
| Nama Pengarang | : | - |
| Nama Majalah/Jurnal | : | Educational Researcher |
| Volume / Nomor Edisi | : | - |
| Nomor Halaman | : | 10-18 |
| Abstraksi Narasi | : | This article continues the discussion begun in my 1989 Educational Researcher essay on the problems posed by the unpredictability and indeterminism of human behavior for educational research and responds to criticisms of these arguments offered by Lehrer, Serlin, and Amundson (1990). In the course of this discussion, a theory presented which provides an explicit, working model of how individuals are able to produce repeatable outcomes via variable means. It is argued that the traditional "scientific" method of educational research, which attempts to find relationships between "independent" and "dependent" variables over groups of individuals, is in principle incapable of providing valid explanations of the how and why of purposeful human behavior. |
| Nama Pengarang | : | - |
| Nama Majalah/Jurnal | : | Educational Researcher |
| Volume / Nomor Edisi | : | - |
| Nomor Halaman | : | 25-27 |
| Abstraksi Narasi | : | - |
| Nama Pengarang | : | - |
| Nama Majalah/Jurnal | : | Educational Researcher |
| Volume / Nomor Edisi | : | - |
| Nomor Halaman | : | 19-24 |
| Abstraksi Narasi | : | Gary Cziko`s 1992 Educational Researcher article is in large part a revision and extension of the attack on mainstream educational research he began in this journal in 1989, to which we published a rebuttal in 1990. Cziko appears to find our 1990 criticisms of little value, but nevertheless abandons most of his earlier bases for criticism. He presents new reasoning to support his old conclusions that mainstream research stem is futile. We will argue that his new reasoning is no sounder than his old, and that his conclusions that mainstream research stem from misunderstandings and misrepresentations of statistical method, philosophy of science, and other topics, including the opinions of the present authors. Powers`s (1973) perceptual control theory may well contribute to educational research, but the need for it does not stem from any of the shortcomings alleged by Cziko. |
| Nama Pengarang | : | - |
| Nama Majalah/Jurnal | : | Educational Researcher |
| Volume / Nomor Edisi | : | - |
| Nomor Halaman | : | 28-31 |
| Abstraksi Narasi | : | - |
| Nama Pengarang | : | Robert E. Floden, Margret Buchmann, Gerald E. Sroufe, Lehrer, Richard, Ronald C. Serlin, Ron Amundson, Gary A. Cziko, Gary A. Cziko |
| Nama Majalah/Jurnal | : | Educational Researcher |
| Volume / Nomor Edisi | : | - |
| Nomor Halaman | : | 4-9 |
| Abstraksi Narasi | : | When working against fragmentation in education, we must not confuse coherence with consistency. While consistency implies logical relations and the absence of contradictions, coherence allows for many kinds of connectedness, including associations of ideas and feelings, intimations of resemblace, conflicts and tensions, and imaginative leaps. Coherence--but not consistency--is hospitable to change and imagination, while true to the many facets of concepts and experiences. Educational coherence is found where students and teachers can discover and establish relations among various areas of sensibility, knowledge, and skill, yet where loose ends remain, inviting a reweaving of beliefs and ties to the unknown. |
| Nama Pengarang | : | - |
| Nama Majalah/Jurnal | : | Educational Researcher |
| Volume / Nomor Edisi | : | - |
| Nomor Halaman | : | 5-14 |
| Abstraksi Narasi | : | - |
| Nama Pengarang | : | - |
| Nama Majalah/Jurnal | : | Educational Researcher |
| Volume / Nomor Edisi | : | - |
| Nomor Halaman | : | 25-26 |
| Abstraksi Narasi | : | This column is the fourth in a series presenting the advice of veteran educational researchers aimed at their junior colleagues. Each invited contributor will be asked to offer one or more career-relevant guidelines for beginning educational researchers, developers, and/or evaluators. The column`s function is to serve as a repository for the experience-based insights of our field`s senior members--insights that, if not shared, must be redicovered. |
Unduh Dokumen Berkas PDF Utama