Darrell W. Moore
School systems throughout the United States are obligated to meet requirements established by federal law and benchmarks established by state governments in student achievement. Therefore, understanding how children learn and the impact of learning environments may be factors in obtaining annual yearly progress (AYP) and improving student achievement. This study contributes to current research identifying teacher perceptions of learning practices and organizational structures needed to improve student achievement in upper elementary grades in public schools. The purpose of this study was to identify if associations exist between classroom organizational structures and student achievement (CRT/TCAP) scores. Quantitative data were used to distinguish grade organization in relation to student achievement using standardized test data. Demographic data were collected from 67 returned surveys representing six school systems in Northeast Tennessee.
The statistical analysis revealed no significant differences in fourth and fifth grade student achievement scores in language arts, science, and social studies between students in self-contained and departmentalized classrooms. Although fourth grade students revealed no differences in math, fifth grade students had significant differences in
achievement math scores between those students in self-contained and departmentalized classrooms favoring departmentalized classrooms. Further analysis revealed no differences in student achievement scores for fourth and fifth grade students between teachers who favor and those who do not favor departmentalized or self-contained classrooms. The recommendations from this study include the use of a similar study to incorporate more school systems with a larger sample of teachers.
An Analysis of the Relationship Between Teacher Variables and Student Achievement Scores in Hamblen County, Tennessee
The purpose of this study was to determine if a relationship exists between teacher variables and the Tennessee Comprehensive Assessment Program (TCAP) student annual scores in reading and mathematics for students in grades 3 through 8 in Hamblen County, Tennessee. The teacher variables included number of days absent, Praxis II Principles of Learning and Teaching (PLT) scores, and years of experience. The population of the study was limited to 3rd- through 8thgrade reading and mathematics teachers employed by the Hamblen County school district during the 2006-2007 school year. Raw scores from the 2006-2007 TCAP criterion-referenced assessment were used as the testing variable. A Pearson correlation coefficient was used to analyze teacher absenteeism. Praxis II PLT scores were grouped as above or below median scores and analyzed with an independent samples t test. Years of experience was defined by the state department of education as vested years of experience and grouped using an analysis of
variance. Based on analysis of the findings, the relationship between teachers’ days absent, Praxis II PLT scores, and years of experience and TCAP achievement annual scores in reading and mathematics for students in grades 3 through 8 in Hamblen County, Tennessee were not statistically significant.
variance. Based on analysis of the findings, the relationship between teachers’ days absent, Praxis II PLT scores, and years of experience and TCAP achievement annual scores in reading and mathematics for students in grades 3 through 8 in Hamblen County, Tennessee were not statistically significant.
Student Attitudes to Learning
Without exception, recent key documents in educational policy, planning and evaluation in Victoria refer to student attitudes to learning as important. For example (Kosky 2003; Fullarton 2002; James, Leger et al. 2001; Bradshaw, Clemans, Donovan and Macrae 2001; Kirby 2000; Connors 2000). Similarly, a review of school web sites reveals that student attitudes to their schooling remain a predominant focus of secondary school charters and
mission statements across Victoria1. Often, both school charters and policy documents refer to their commitment to the “major stakeholders” of education in their consultation processes. However, it is alarmingly rare for students to be centrally involved, if at all, in these discussions (some notable exceptions exist, for example; (James, Leger et al. 2001; Australian Centre for Equity through Education 2001) and (Cormack and Cumming 1996). While the reports themselves fail to recognise the absence of student contribution as a weakness, this study concurs with existing research, e.g.(Gitlin 1990) that this fundamentally undermines their validity and usefulness. Apparently, student learning is a paramount concern for educational research. Why then does it not follow that students can and should play an important and valid role in contributing to the understanding of learning processes? Arguably, this conception of students as passive, inactive or at best re-active agents of the educational process creates
one of the most fundamental barriers to real educational change. Student attitudes are considered for their quantitative value for academic theorising but not as substantive contributions to theoretical development in themselves. A growing acceptance of the validity of practitioner research, and the usefulness of self-reflection as a basis for inquiry can and should be extended to students. Moreover, the discussion that takes place in schools and the community more broadly regarding student attitudes to learning is often conducted in isolation from the complex socio-political factors that contextualise the approach of students, see for example (Cuttance 2001; Ainley, Batten, Collins and Withers 1998).
mission statements across Victoria1. Often, both school charters and policy documents refer to their commitment to the “major stakeholders” of education in their consultation processes. However, it is alarmingly rare for students to be centrally involved, if at all, in these discussions (some notable exceptions exist, for example; (James, Leger et al. 2001; Australian Centre for Equity through Education 2001) and (Cormack and Cumming 1996). While the reports themselves fail to recognise the absence of student contribution as a weakness, this study concurs with existing research, e.g.(Gitlin 1990) that this fundamentally undermines their validity and usefulness. Apparently, student learning is a paramount concern for educational research. Why then does it not follow that students can and should play an important and valid role in contributing to the understanding of learning processes? Arguably, this conception of students as passive, inactive or at best re-active agents of the educational process creates
one of the most fundamental barriers to real educational change. Student attitudes are considered for their quantitative value for academic theorising but not as substantive contributions to theoretical development in themselves. A growing acceptance of the validity of practitioner research, and the usefulness of self-reflection as a basis for inquiry can and should be extended to students. Moreover, the discussion that takes place in schools and the community more broadly regarding student attitudes to learning is often conducted in isolation from the complex socio-political factors that contextualise the approach of students, see for example (Cuttance 2001; Ainley, Batten, Collins and Withers 1998).
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
