Rich School, Poor School 6
By: 4 0 16 [, ] | [, ] |
Contributor(s): 5 6 [] |
Language: Unknown language code Summary language: Unknown language code Original language: Unknown language code Series: ; Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development, 1997;copyright December 1997/Janaury 199846Edition: Description: Content type: text Media type: unmediated Carrier type: volumeISBN: ISSN: 2Other title: 6 []Uniform titles: | | Subject(s): -- 2 -- 0 -- -- | -- 2 -- 0 -- 6 -- | 2 0 -- | -- -- 20 -- | | -- -- School -- -- -- | -- -- -- 20 -- --Genre/Form: -- 2 -- Additional physical formats: DDC classification: | LOC classification: | | 2Other classification:| Item type | Current location | Home library | Collection | Call number | Status | Date due | Barcode | Item holds |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Book | PLM | PLM Periodicals Section | Periodicals | L11.Ed83el.1998 (Browse shelf) | Available | PER 277R |
ABSTRACT : Most large urban districts have a flagship school at one end of the performance spectrum-a highly rated school with an affluent student body-and a bottom-of-the-barrel school at the other end-a low ranking school in a low-income area. The flaw in these rankings, Goycochea argues, is that they are based on final outcomes rather than student growth. Thus she calls for a value-added approach to student assessment, where the key measure of instructional excellence is how far students have come academically. This approach should benefit students at both types of schools. Goycochea tells the story of a poor school that makes a concentrated effort to improve its students' writing. Students do improve greatly, but when compared to rich schools, the scores still lag behind. If one looks only at numbers, the school may look like a failure. But the students and teachers know otherwise! 56
5
5
There are no comments for this item.