Return-Path: <nifl-aalpd@literacy.nifl.gov> Received: from literacy (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by literacy.nifl.gov (8.10.2/8.10.2) with SMTP id i2JIWpI01730; Fri, 19 Mar 2004 13:32:51 -0500 (EST) Date: Fri, 19 Mar 2004 13:32:51 -0500 (EST) Message-Id: <001701c40db4$a25c2a40$0b00a8c0@DDQPYT21> Errors-To: listowner@literacy.nifl.gov Reply-To: nifl-aalpd@literacy.nifl.gov Originator: nifl-aalpd@literacy.nifl.gov Sender: nifl-aalpd@literacy.nifl.gov Precedence: bulk From: "Art LaChance" <arthur@ellijay.com> To: Multiple recipients of list <nifl-aalpd@literacy.nifl.gov> Subject: [NIFL-AALPD:1174] RE: Evaluating education research X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1158 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; Status: O Content-Length: 2351 Lines: 61 I think I understand the implications of the ECS summary. They used Dept of Ed funds to look at research on Dept of Ed processes and couldn't find anything that needed change. Out of over 500 research papers on the subjects, they conviently found slightly over 90 that supported the entity as is. So obviously the fact that the national public ed system is only truly effective for approximately 20% of the population (those who actually reach a 12th grade education in reading math and language) is a direct result of personal choice on the part of the student and/or family, and the 'research' supports it. Makes sense to me. not. Art LaChance Gilmer Learning Center Ellijay, GA 706-276-1110 ----- Original Message ----- From: "Eileen Eckert" <eileeneckert@hotmail.com> To: "Multiple recipients of list" <nifl-aalpd@literacy.nifl.gov> Sent: Thursday, March 18, 2004 7:34 PM Subject: [NIFL-AALPD:1173] RE: Evaluating education research > I was interested to see that on each question of what the research says > about teacher preparation, the results were either inconclusive or provided > "limited support" for the teacher preparation strategy. I'm sure others drew > different conclusions, but I saw this as more evidence of why to put money > directly into serving students instead of into indirect and bureaucratic > efforts such as teacher certification that are assumed (but not > demonstrated) to improve teacher effectiveness. I know there are thoughtful, > meaningful teacher certification projects out there, but they are few and > far between. > > Now we'll see how many virtual rotten tomatoes get thrown at me for writing > such heresy! > > Eileen > > > From: jataylor <jataylor@utk.edu> > Reply-To: nifl-aalpd@nifl.gov > To: Multiple recipients of list <nifl-aalpd@literacy.nifl.gov> > Subject: [NIFL-AALPD:1170] Evaluating education research > Date: Mon, 15 Mar 2004 10:48:19 -0500 (EST) > > Hello Everyone, > I thought some of you may find the following resources of interest. Below > is > a cross post from NIFL-4EFF, courtesy of Meta Potts. If you visit: > http://www.ecs.org/html/educationIssues/Research/primer/foreword.asp > mid page you will find another link to the following ECS report: "Eight > Questions on Teacher Preparation: What Does the Research Say?" > > Jackie > **************************************
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Thu Dec 23 2004 - 09:45:43 EST