U.S. Education Today And Tomorrow Assignment

You’ve scratched the surface. Add Institution focused, not student success focused, lack of focus on mission vision, Ignorance and apathy towards advancing student success outcomes, cancerous culture of entitlement, cult like culture to fit in and not rock the boat, can’t see the forest from the trees, resistance to deep learning and student success research, inability to change, principal test has no correlation to principal job success; K-12 masters requirement has no correlation to student success outcomes, one size fits all teaching does not provide deep 21st century skills in students, Teacher PD does not improve teacher performance, widget effect, Dunning–Kruger effect, lack of moral fiber to improve rather than cut corners, erroneously defend a flawed system & cheat, resistance to accountability, no accountability, tenure, collective bargaining having no direct correlation to advancing student success outcomes, offering traditional once size fits all products as educationally innovative (MOOCS), talking about innovative methodologies, but doing nothing, implementing technology without pedagogy, doing the wrong things and saying you are progressing and the list goes on. These are systemic flaws that force talented motivated well meaning individuals to gravitate to the lowest common denominator perpetuating student success mediocrity. Even sadder is that traditional educators believe in and erroneously defend a system that is so severely flawed. Traditional educators have lost all credibility with the public and are losing credibility with their students

  • Alexander, K.L., & McDill, E.L. (1976). Selection and allocation within schools: Some causes and consequences of curriculum placement. American Sociological Review, 41, pp.963–980.

  • Ashton, P., & Crocker, L. (1986). Does teacher certification make a difference? Florida Journal of Teacher Education, 38(3), pp.73–83.

  • Ashton, P., & Crocker, L. (1987, May–June). Systematic study of planned variations: The essential focus of teacher education reform. Journal of Teacher Education, 38, pp.2–8.

  • Baron, J.B. (1999). Exploring high and improving reading achievement in Connecticut. Washington, DC: National Educational Goals Panel.

  • Barr, R., & Dreeben, R. (1983). How schools work. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

  • Barton, Paul E. & Coley, R.J. (1996). Captive students: Education and training in America's prisons. Princeton, N.J.: Educational Testing Service.

  • Bents, M., & Bents, R.B. (1990). Perceptions of good teaching among novice, advanced beginner and expert teachers. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Boston.

  • Berne, R. (1995). Educational input and outcome inequities in New York State. In R. Berne, editor; and L.O.Picus, editor. (eds.), Outcome Equity in Education, pp.191–223. ThousandOaks, CA.: Corwin Press.

  • Bledsoe, J.C., Cox, J.V., & Burnham, R. (1967). Comparison between selected characteristics and performance of provisionally and professionally certified beginning teachers in Georgia. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare.

  • California Commission on the Teaching Profession (1985). Who will teach our children? Sacramento: California Commission on the Teaching Profession.

  • California State Department of Education (1984). California high school curriculum study: Path through high school. Sacramento: California State Department of Education.

  • Carter, K., & Doyle, W. (1987). Teachers' knowledge structures and comprehension processes. In J.Calderhead, editor. (Ed.), Exploring Teacher Thinking, pp.147–160. London: Cassell.

  • Cohen, D., et al. (1990). Case Studies of Curriculum Implementation, Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 12(3).

  • College Board (1985). Equality and excellence: The educational status of black Americans. New York: College Entrance Examination Board.

  • Commission on Chapter 1 (1992). High performance schools: No exceptions, no excuses. Washington, D.C.: Author.

  • Cooper, E. & Sherk, J. (1989). Addressing urban school reform: Issues and alliances. Journal of Negro Education, 58(3), pp.315–331.

  • Copley, P.O. (1974). A study of the effect of professional education courses on beginning teachers. Springfield, MO: Southwest Missouri State University. ERIC Document No. ED 098–147.

  • Darling-Hammond, L. (1990. a). Teacher quality and equality. In J.Goodlad, editor; , & P.Keating, editor. (Eds.), Access to Knowledge: An Agenda for Our Nation's Schools, pp.237–258. NY: College Entrance Examination Board.

  • Darling-Hammond, L. (1990. b). Instructional policy into practice: “The power of the bottom over the top.”Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 12(3), pp.233–242.

  • Darling-Hammond, L. (1992). Teaching and knowledge: Policy issues posed by alternate certification for teachers. Peabody Journal of Education, 67(3), pp.123–154.

  • Darling-Hammond, L. (1997). The right to learn: A blueprint for creating schools that work. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

  • Darling-Hammond, L. & Snyder, J. (1992). Traditions of curriculum inquiry: The scientific tradition. In P.W.Jackson, editor. (Ed.), Handbook of Research on Curriculum. New York: Macmillan.

  • Davis, D.G. (1986). A pilot study to assess equity in selected curricular offerings acrossthree diverse schools in a large urban school district. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco.

  • Doyle, W. (1986). Content representation in teachers' definitions of academic work. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 18, pp.365–379.

  • Dreeben, R. (1987, Winter). Closing the divide: What teachers and administrators can do to help black students reach their reading potential, American Educator, 11(4), pp.28–35.

  • Dreeben, R. & Barr, R. (1987). Class composition and the design of instruction. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Education Research Association, Washington, D.C.

  • Dreeben, R. & Gamoran, A. (1986). Race, instruction, and learning. American Sociological Review, 51(5), pp.660–669.

  • Druva, C.A., & Anderson, R.D. (1983). Science teacher characteristics by teacher behavior and by student outcome: A meta-analysis of research. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 20(5), pp.467–479.

  • Ebmeier, H., Twombly, S., & Teeter, D. (1990). The comparability and adequacy of financial support for schools of education. Journal of Teacher Education, 42(3): pp.226–235.

  • Eckstrom, R., & Villegas, A.M. (1991). Ability grouping in middle grade mathematics: Process and consequences. Research in Middle Level Education, 15(1), pp.1–20.

  • Educational Testing Service (1991). The state of inequality. Princeton, NJ: ETS.

  • Evertson, C., Hawley, W., & Zlotnick, M. (1985). Making a difference in educational quality through teacher education. Journal of Teacher Education, 36(3), pp.2–12.

  • Ferguson, R.F. (1991, Summer). Paying for public education: New evidence on how and why money matters. Harvard Journal on Legislation 28(2), pp.465–498.

  • Ferguson, R.F. & Ladd, H.F. How and why money matters: An analysis of Alabama schools.

  • Finley, M.K. (1984). Teachers and tracking in a comprehensive high school. Sociology of Education, 57, pp.233–243.

  • Gamoran, A. (1990). The consequences of track-related instructional differences for student achievement. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Boston.

  • Gamoran, A. (1992). Access to excellence: Assignment to honors English classes in the transition from middle to high school. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 14(3), pp.185–204.

  • Gamoran, A., & Berends, M. (1987). The effects of stratification in secondary schools: Synthesis of survey and ethnographic research. Review of Educational Research, 57, pp.415–436.

  • Gamoran, A., & Mare, R. (1989). Secondary school tracking and eduational inequality: Compensation, reinforcement or neutrality?American Journal of Sociology, 94, pp.1146–1183.

  • Gemignani, Robert J. (1994, October). Juvenile correctional education: A time for change. Update on research. Juvenile Justice Bulletin. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention.

  • Glaser, R. (1981). The future of testing: A research agenda for cognitive psychology and psychometrics. American Psychologist, 39(9), pp.923–936.

  • Glaser, R. (1990). Testing and assessment: O temporal O mores! Pittsburgh, PA: University of Pittsburgh, Learning Research and Development Center.

  • Gomez, D.L., & Grobe, R.P. (1990). Three years of alternative certification in Dallas: Where are we? Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Boston.

  • Good, T.L., & Brophy, J. (1987). Looking in Classrooms. New York: Harper and Row.

  • Grant, C.A. (1989, June). Urban teachers: Their new colleagues and curriculum. Phi Delta Kappan, 70(10), pp.764–770.

  • Greenberg, J.D. (1983). The case for teacher education: Open and shut. Journal of Teacher Education, 34(4), pp.2–5.

  • Greenwald, R., Hedges, L.V., and Laine, R.D. (1996). The effect of school resources on student achievement, Review of Educational Research, 66: pp.361–396.

  • Grissmer, D.W. & Kirby, S.N. (1987). Teacher attrition: The uphill climb to staff the nation's schools. Santa Monica: Rand Corporation.

  • Grossman, P.L. (1989). Learning to teach without teacher education. Teachers College Record, 91(2), pp.191–208.

  • Grossman, P.L. (1990). The making of a teacher: Teacher knowledge and teacher education. New York: Teachers College Press.

  • Haney, W. (1999). Supplementary report on Texas Assessment of Academic Skills Exit Test (TAAS–X). Boston: Center for the Study of Testing, Evaluation, and Educational Policy.

  • Hansen, J.B. (1988). The relationship of skills and classroom climate of trained and untrained teachers of gifted students. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Purdue University.

  • Hawk, P., Coble, C.R., & Swanson, M. (1985). Certification: It does matter, Journal of Teacher Education, 36(3): pp.23–15.

  • Hoffer, T.B. (1992). Middle school ability grouping and student achievement in science and mathematics. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 14(3), pp.205–227.

  • Jones, L.V. (1984). White-black achievement differences: The narrowing gap. American Psychologist, 39, pp.1207–1213.

  • Jones, L.V., Burton, N.W., & Davenport, E.C. (1984). Monitoring the achievement of black students. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 15, pp.154–164.

  • Kaufman, J.E., & Rosenbaum, J.E. (1992). Education and employment of low-income black youth in white suburbs. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 14(3), pp.229–240.

  • Kozol, J. (1991). Savage inequalities. New York: Crown.

  • Kulik, C.C., & Kulik, J.A. (1982). Effects of ability grouping on secondary school students: A meta-analysis of evaluation findings. American Education Research Journal, 19, pp.415–428.

  • Lee, V., & Bryk, A. (1988). Curriculum tracking as mediating the social distribution of high school achievement. Sociology of Education, 61, pp.78–94.

  • MacPhail-Wilcox, B. & King, R.A. (1986). Resource allocation studies: Implications forschool improvement and school finance research. Journal of Education Finance, 11, pp.416–432.

  • Matthews, W. (1984). Influences on the learning and participation of minorities in mathematics. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 15, pp.84–95.

  • McKnight, C.C., Crosswhite, J.A., Dossey, J.A., Kifer, E., Swafford, S.O., Travers, K.J., & Cooney, T.J. (1987). The underachieving curriculum: Assessing U.S. school mathematics from an international perspective. Champaign, IL: Stipes Publishing.

  • Miller, J.G. (1997, June). African American males in the criminal justice system. Phi Delta Kappan, pp. K1–K12.

  • Moore, D., & Davenport, S. (1988). The new improved sorting machine. Madison, WI: National Center on Effective Secondary Schools.

  • Moore, E.G. & Smith, A.W. (1985). Mathematics aptitude: Effects of coursework, household language, and ethnic differences. Urban Education, 20, pp.273–294.

  • Murnane, R.J. & Phillips, B.R. (1981, Fall). Learning by doing, vintage, and selection: Three pieces of the puzzle relating teaching experience and teaching performance. Economics of Education Review, 1(4), pp.453–465.

  • Murnane, R.J., Singer, J.D., Willett, J.B., Kemple, J.J., & Olsen, R.J. (1991). Who will teach? Policies that matter. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

  • National Assessment of Educational Progress ( 1994). NAEP Trial State Assessment. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Education.

  • National Center for Education Statistics ( 1985). The condition of education, 1985. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Education.

  • National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) (1994). Digest of education statistics, 1994. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Education.

  • National Center for Education Statistics ( 1995). The condition of education, 1995. Washington, D.C: U.S. Department of Education.

  • National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) (1996). Schools and staffing in the United States: A statistical profile, 1993–94. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Education.

  • National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) ( 1997. a). America's teachers: Profile of a profession, 1993–94. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Education.

  • National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) (1997. b). Characteristics of stayers, movers, and leavers: Results from the Teacher Followup Survey, 1994–95. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Education.

  • National Commission on Teaching and America's Future (NCTAF) (1996). What matters most: Teaching for America's future. New York: Author.

  • National Commission on Teaching and America's Future (NCTAF) (1997). Unpublished tabulations from the 1993–94 Schools and Staffing Surveys.

  • National Council on Education Standards and Testing (NCEST). (1992). Raising standards for American education. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office.

  • Oakes, J. (1985). Keeping track. New Haven: Yale University Press.

  • Oakes, J. (1990). Multiplying inequalities: The effects of race, social class, and tracking on opportunities to learn mathematics and science. Santa Monica: The RAND Corporation.

  • Oakes, J. (1992, May). Can tracking research inform practice? Technical, normative, and political considerations. Educational Researcher, 21(4), pp.12–21.

  • Oakes, J. (June 1986). “Tracking in secondary schools: A contextual perspective.” Educational Psychologist, 22:pp.129–154.

  • Paterson Institute (1996). African American data book. Arlington, VA: Paterson Institute.

  • Peikes, V.A. ( 1967–1968 ). Junior high schools science teacher preparation, teaching behavior, and student achievement. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 6(4): pp. 121–126.

  • Pelavin, S.H. & Kane, M. (1990). Changing the odds: Factors increasing access to college. New York: College Entrance Examination Board.

  • Peterson, P. (1989). Remediation is no remedy. Educational Leadership, 46(60); pp.24–25.

  • Rock, D.A., Hilton, T.L., Pollack, J., Ekstrom, R.B., & Goertz, M.E. (1985). A study of excellence in high school education: Educational policies, school quality, and student outcomes. Washington, D.C.: National Center for Education Statistics.

  • Rosenbaum, J. (1976). Making inequality: The hidden curriculum of high school tracking. New York: Wiley.

  • Rottenberg, C.J. & Berliner, D.C. (1990). Expert and novice teachers' conceptions of common classroom activities. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association.

  • Sanders, W.L. & Rivers, J.C. Cumulative and Residual Effects of Teachers on Future Student Academic Achievement. Knoxville: University of Tennessee, 1996.

  • Schofield, J.W. (1991). School desegregation and intergroup relations. In G.Grant, editor. (Ed.), Review of Research in Education, 17, pp.335–409. Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association.

  • Shields, P.M., Esch, C., Humphrey, D.C., Young, V.M., Gaston, M., & Hunt, H. (1999). The status of the teaching profession: Research findings and policy recommendations. A report to the Teaching and California's Future Task Force. Santa Cruz, CA: The Center for the Future of Teaching and Learning.

  • Skipper, C.E. and Quantz, R. 1987). Changes in educational attudies of education and arts and science students during four years of college. Journal of Teacher Education, May–June: pp.39–44.

  • Slavin, R.E. (1990). Achievement effects of ability grouping in secondary schools: A best evidence synthesis. Review of Educational Research, 60(3), pp.471–500.

  • Strauss, R.P. & Sawyer, E.A. (1986). Some new evidence on teacher and student competencies. Economics of Education Review, 5(1): pp.41–48.

  • Strickland, D. (1985). Early childhood development and reading instruction. In C.Brooks, editor. (Ed.), Tapping potential: English and language arts for the black learner. National Council of Teachers of English.

  • Sutton, R.E. (1991). Equity and computers in the schools: A decade of research. Review of Educational Research, 61(4), pp.475–503.

  • Talbert, J.E. (1990). Teacher tracking: Exacerbating inequalities in the high school. Stanford, CA: Center for Research on the Context of Secondary Teaching, Stanford University.

  • Taylor, W.L., & Piche, D.M. (1991). A report on shortchanging children: The impact of fiscal inequity on the education of students at risk. Prepared for the Committee onEducation and Labor, U.S. House of Representatives. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.

  • Trimble, K., & Sinclair, R.L. (1986). Ability grouping and differing conditions for learning: An analysis of content and instruction in ability-grouped classes. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco.

  • U.S. Department of Commerce (1996). Statistical abstract of the United States: 1996., 116th edition. Washington, DC: Bureau of the Census.

  • Useem, E.L. (1990, Fall). You're good, but you're not good enough: Tracking students out of advanced mathematics. American Educator, 14(3), pp. 24–27, 43–46.

  • Usiskin, Z. (1987). Why elementary algebra can, should, and must be an eighth grade course for average students. Mathematics Teacher, 80, pp.428–438.

  • Wheelock, A. (1992). Crossing the tracks. New York: The New Press.

  • William T. Grant Foundation, Commission on Work, Family and Citizenship (1988). The forgotten half: Non-college youth in America. Washington, D.C.: Author.

  • Wilson, S. (1990). A conflict of interests: Constraints that affect teaching and change. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 12(3), pp.309–326.

  • Wilson, S.M., Darling-Hammond, L, & Berry, B. (2000). Teaching policy: Connecticut's long term efforts to improve teaching and learning. Seattle: Center for the Study of Teaching and Policy, University of Washington.

  • Winkler, J.D., Shavelson, R.J., Stasz, C., Robyn, A., & Feibel, W. (1984). How effective teachers use microcomputers for instruction. Santa Monica, CA: The RAND Corporation.

  • Wise, A.E., & Darling-Hammond, L. (1987). Licensing teachers: Design for a teaching profession. Santa Monica, CA: RAND Corporation.

  • Wise, A.E., Darling-Hammond, L., & Berry, B. (1987). Effective teacher selection: From recruitment to retention. Santa Monica, CA: The RAND Corporation.

  • 0 thoughts on “U.S. Education Today And Tomorrow Assignment

    Leave a Reply

    Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *