Search

Literature in the United States provides many examples of no difference in student achievement when measured against the mode of test administration i.e., paper–pencil and online versions of the test. However, most of these researches centre on ‘regular’ students who do not require differential teaching methods or different evaluation processes and techniques. This research provides evidence that students who have learning disabilities, like their counterparts in the regular educational programme, do not lag behind in computer adaptation and use. The study, using differential item functioning analysis with an ‘external’ variable and an analysis of covariance, shows that items and tests can be created to have no practical differences in the mode of administration for this special group of students, and as such, is in keeping with the trend for using online testing with its many advantages (cost savings, flexibility in administration, etc.) in lieu of the paper and pencil version of the test. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

Background/Context: Since the 1970s, researchers have attempted to link observational measures of instructional process to student achievement (and occasionally to other outcomes of schooling). This paper reviews extensively both historical and contemporary research to identify what is known about effective teaching. Purpose/Objective: Good, after reviewing what is known about effective teaching, attempts to apply this to current descriptions of effective teaching and its application value for practice. Good notes that much of the "new" research on effective teaching has simply replicated what has been known since the 1980s. Although this is not unimportant (since it shows that older findings still pertain to contemporary classrooms), it is unfortunate that research has not moved beyond the relationship between general teacher behavior (those that cut across subject areas) and student achievement (as measured by standardized tests). How this information can be applied and the difficulty in using this information is examined in the paper. Research Design: The paper is a historical analysis and reviews research on teaching from the 1960s to today. Conclusion: This paper has stressed that our data base on effective teaching is limited--still it has some implications for practice. Even though the knowledge base is limited, there is no clear knowledge that teachers-in-training learn and have the opportunity to practice and use. It would seem that teacher education programs would want to assure that their graduates, in addition to possessing appropriate knowledge, would also have clear conceptual understanding and skills related to active teaching, proactive management, communication of appropriate expectations for learning, and the ability to plan and enact instruction that balances procedural and conceptual knowledge. Future research on the use of this knowledge base and its effects in teacher education programs would be informative. If done correctly, research on teaching can improve instruction. However, the research must be applied carefully if it is to have useful effects. And, as noted often in this paper, research must consider outcomes of schooling other than achievement such as creativity, adaptability, and problem finding. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

CBAL (Cognitively Based Assessment of, for, and as Learning) is a research initiative intended to create a model for an innovative K-12 assessment system that documents what students have achieved (of learning); helps identify how to plan instruction (for learning); and is considered by students and teachers to be a worthwhile educational experience in and of itself (as learning). Because CBAL intends to not only measure student achievement but also facilitate it, CBAL, like any similar assessment program, requires a theory of action. This paper describes the notion of theory of action, offers a preliminary version of such a theory for CBAL, and outlines a provisional research program for evaluating that theory. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]