Sunday, March 5, 2017
Monday, December 26, 2016
Sunday, July 22, 2007
Power and Leadership
School administration is achieved through talk: talk in meetings, talk in random hallway encounters, talk on the telephone, talk to the media, and talk on the grapevine. As Corson (1995) puts it: “All kinds of power are directed, through language”(p.3).
Power permeates the education system; and although some actors are more powerful than others, all have power. School administrators have two types of powers: economic dominance and legal authority. These types of powers are built into the system for administrators. Wise school leaders build their power by working to add to what the system provides them. Many administrators work to establish their component authority, which can be done in several ways. Some people obtain a doctorate for this purpose; another approach is to stay up-to-date in professional reading and work actively in one or more professional organizations. Administrators can also establish their competent authority by clearly pointing out the educational reasons for the decisions they make.
Learning how to make a convincing presentation at a meeting or polishing writing skills in order to be able to draft effective news release can enhance a school leader’s power.
In addition, the zest to gain more knowledge about the community and its population will also enhance power.
Reference
Corson D. (1995). Discursive power in educational organizations: an introduction. Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press.
Power permeates the education system; and although some actors are more powerful than others, all have power. School administrators have two types of powers: economic dominance and legal authority. These types of powers are built into the system for administrators. Wise school leaders build their power by working to add to what the system provides them. Many administrators work to establish their component authority, which can be done in several ways. Some people obtain a doctorate for this purpose; another approach is to stay up-to-date in professional reading and work actively in one or more professional organizations. Administrators can also establish their competent authority by clearly pointing out the educational reasons for the decisions they make.
Learning how to make a convincing presentation at a meeting or polishing writing skills in order to be able to draft effective news release can enhance a school leader’s power.
In addition, the zest to gain more knowledge about the community and its population will also enhance power.
Reference
Corson D. (1995). Discursive power in educational organizations: an introduction. Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press.
Future Role of Technological Literacy in Education
In the article, Toward a vision of the Future Role of Technology in Literacy Education, Labbo exposes how technological innovations play a role in Literacy Education. This article began by introducing the definition of literacy, exploring learning theories and classroom communicative technologies. Finally it provided an explanation of the future development of computer literacy.
This article clarifies that in an era when computer-related communicative literacy abilities are proliferating through all aspects of life in American society and throughout the global market place, it is crucial to explore a vision of the role computer-related literacy should play in defining children’s literacy development in the near future. There is an implication that predominant learning theories are important to consider because they provide insights about underlying instructional frameworks that allows us to understand the nature of literacy instruction. The writer notes that curriculum guides should be guided by the most current and widely-adopted learning theories and if one of the goals of literacy education is to better all students to function as literate beings in society, it is crucial to weigh how well the use of communication technologies present in the class coincides with the use of these tools in the larger society.
In her article, Labbo also portrays how many teachers view their content instructional role as that of a facilitator and guide who provide children with the support and practice that allows them to socially construct knowledge about conventional literacy. The teachers mediate children’s cognitive processing, opportunities, and learned literacy-related skills and strategies through the whole direct instruction, small group instruction, and individual conferences. Labbo makes a point of reference that according to Leu and Kinzer, educators of the 1990s were faced with the enormous task of preparing students to be literate in a future that was unclear and prepare them for a level of computer-related literacy that many educators themselves had not yet grasped.
The conclusion and implications made by this study propose that the paradigm shifts need to occur from an understanding of literacy as totally print-based to literacy as both print and digitally based. It is also implied that curriculum writers may attempt to superimpose a new scheme on an older, traditional developmental scope and sequence. The article clearly concludes that problem with such organizational frameworks is a lack of a research base or an experimental base to support it. Whether we are ready for the paradigm shift about literacy education that is sure to occur, or the societal forces for integrating digital literacy into the local workplace. Popular culture, and global marketplace are up on us. It is up to us to figure out how to best prepare for the inevitable changes that are sweeping the informational internet across our nation.
References
Labbo, L. D. (in press b). What will classroom and schools look like in the next millennium? Reading Research Quarterly.
Labbo, L.D., & Reinking, D. (in press). Negotiating the Multiple Realities of Technology in Literacy Research and Instruction. Reading Research Quarterly.
This article clarifies that in an era when computer-related communicative literacy abilities are proliferating through all aspects of life in American society and throughout the global market place, it is crucial to explore a vision of the role computer-related literacy should play in defining children’s literacy development in the near future. There is an implication that predominant learning theories are important to consider because they provide insights about underlying instructional frameworks that allows us to understand the nature of literacy instruction. The writer notes that curriculum guides should be guided by the most current and widely-adopted learning theories and if one of the goals of literacy education is to better all students to function as literate beings in society, it is crucial to weigh how well the use of communication technologies present in the class coincides with the use of these tools in the larger society.
In her article, Labbo also portrays how many teachers view their content instructional role as that of a facilitator and guide who provide children with the support and practice that allows them to socially construct knowledge about conventional literacy. The teachers mediate children’s cognitive processing, opportunities, and learned literacy-related skills and strategies through the whole direct instruction, small group instruction, and individual conferences. Labbo makes a point of reference that according to Leu and Kinzer, educators of the 1990s were faced with the enormous task of preparing students to be literate in a future that was unclear and prepare them for a level of computer-related literacy that many educators themselves had not yet grasped.
The conclusion and implications made by this study propose that the paradigm shifts need to occur from an understanding of literacy as totally print-based to literacy as both print and digitally based. It is also implied that curriculum writers may attempt to superimpose a new scheme on an older, traditional developmental scope and sequence. The article clearly concludes that problem with such organizational frameworks is a lack of a research base or an experimental base to support it. Whether we are ready for the paradigm shift about literacy education that is sure to occur, or the societal forces for integrating digital literacy into the local workplace. Popular culture, and global marketplace are up on us. It is up to us to figure out how to best prepare for the inevitable changes that are sweeping the informational internet across our nation.
References
Labbo, L. D. (in press b). What will classroom and schools look like in the next millennium? Reading Research Quarterly.
Labbo, L.D., & Reinking, D. (in press). Negotiating the Multiple Realities of Technology in Literacy Research and Instruction. Reading Research Quarterly.
Distance Learning and Digital Library
Distance Learning and the Digital Library
In the article titled, Distance Learning and the Digital Library: Transforming the Library into an Information Center, Roberta Derlin attempts to show a vision of the transformation of the library from a respiratory of printed material to a digital library serving as a complete information center. This article portrays how emphasis is being placed on distance education since the future information centers will be distant learner-centered. Technology has the power of transforming libraries into the digital library of the future. According to Derlin, distance learning continues to proliferate and expand educational opportunities. The article implies that through technology, distance learning enhances opportunities for interaction, cooperative learning, and the formation of communities of learners rather than relying on traditional face-to-face lecture. Without technology the search skills of the librarian or student access is limited by factors influencing the magnitude of the collection. Derlin clearly depicts how representative surveys on library usage suggest that library patrons which also include distant learners, are interested in technology and the use of computers as means to pursue knowledge. The article shows that as access to more information through electronic means continues to increase, the public’s interest in technology as a means to master is being realized. It states that the traditional reliance on print media is being gradually eroded and the learning environment is becoming more and more technologically diverse and complex. It is suggested that the goals and aspirations must be supported through expanded and technological sophisticated services that will not only identify information sources, but also develop them. The article claims that just as the Internet and World Wide Web have eliminated the physical distance between many traditional respiratory libraries, in-home computers can eliminate the physical distance between the individual and the information’s resident location. Derling points out that the technological environment is getting ever more user friendly. The introduction of sound and pictures magnifies the educational experience and supports the varied learning styles of individual learners.. The development of electronic learning modules provide a basis for the information centers of the future. The article makes the implication that the challenge presently faced by distant learners pursuing knowledge is not how to access some or enough information, but how effective it is to use and manage existing technologies for distant learning. The Internet will continue to provide an unparalleled state of world-wide connectivity among diverse people and access to it will increasingly and extend to people in their homes, vehicles, post offices, information centers, malls, offices and educational centers. This article also concludes that individuals will increasingly be able to self-publish their views on the Internet, more broadly than ever before and far more accessible to others than traditional printed media. The future library as information center will have an expanded role in providing educational activities, services, material and opportunities for human interaction. The library will also provide technology for human interaction. Future libraries will continue to incorporate existing and improved technologies in new and creative ways.
Reference
Derlin, Roberta l.; Distance Learning and the Digital Library: Transforming the Library into an Information Center. (1996): US Department of Education Resource Information Center.
In the article titled, Distance Learning and the Digital Library: Transforming the Library into an Information Center, Roberta Derlin attempts to show a vision of the transformation of the library from a respiratory of printed material to a digital library serving as a complete information center. This article portrays how emphasis is being placed on distance education since the future information centers will be distant learner-centered. Technology has the power of transforming libraries into the digital library of the future. According to Derlin, distance learning continues to proliferate and expand educational opportunities. The article implies that through technology, distance learning enhances opportunities for interaction, cooperative learning, and the formation of communities of learners rather than relying on traditional face-to-face lecture. Without technology the search skills of the librarian or student access is limited by factors influencing the magnitude of the collection. Derlin clearly depicts how representative surveys on library usage suggest that library patrons which also include distant learners, are interested in technology and the use of computers as means to pursue knowledge. The article shows that as access to more information through electronic means continues to increase, the public’s interest in technology as a means to master is being realized. It states that the traditional reliance on print media is being gradually eroded and the learning environment is becoming more and more technologically diverse and complex. It is suggested that the goals and aspirations must be supported through expanded and technological sophisticated services that will not only identify information sources, but also develop them. The article claims that just as the Internet and World Wide Web have eliminated the physical distance between many traditional respiratory libraries, in-home computers can eliminate the physical distance between the individual and the information’s resident location. Derling points out that the technological environment is getting ever more user friendly. The introduction of sound and pictures magnifies the educational experience and supports the varied learning styles of individual learners.. The development of electronic learning modules provide a basis for the information centers of the future. The article makes the implication that the challenge presently faced by distant learners pursuing knowledge is not how to access some or enough information, but how effective it is to use and manage existing technologies for distant learning. The Internet will continue to provide an unparalleled state of world-wide connectivity among diverse people and access to it will increasingly and extend to people in their homes, vehicles, post offices, information centers, malls, offices and educational centers. This article also concludes that individuals will increasingly be able to self-publish their views on the Internet, more broadly than ever before and far more accessible to others than traditional printed media. The future library as information center will have an expanded role in providing educational activities, services, material and opportunities for human interaction. The library will also provide technology for human interaction. Future libraries will continue to incorporate existing and improved technologies in new and creative ways.
Reference
Derlin, Roberta l.; Distance Learning and the Digital Library: Transforming the Library into an Information Center. (1996): US Department of Education Resource Information Center.
Power and Policy
Powers do affect the education system and the power that shape them. Much of that power is wielded by individual employees of the system, acting in their capacity as government officials. Their power ultimately rests on their institution and the policies and traditions behind it, not on their personal characteristics. As the twenty-first century begins, the legitimacy of all authority is weakened, educators have to learn to use other types of powers, and understanding the power relationship in their policy environment becomes more important than ever. Developing an understanding of power is therefore crucial for education leaders.
Implementation is the stage of the policy process in which a policy formally adopted by a government body is put into practice. The major actors in the implementation arena are the implementers. These include government officials who have the legal authority to see that a new policy is put into effect. Successful implementation depends upon developing and maintaining both the will and the capacity of the intermediaries. The individuals and agencies that must cooperate in order to implement a policy must have reasons for doing so, therefore they must be willing. Implementation is an important part of the work of all school leaders and one that they often dread. Today no excuse exists for failure; a good knowledge base, combined with thought and planning, will lead to success in this difficult endeavor.
Power raise ethical issues, power tends to corrupt and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Power is seductive, even addictive tonic, and anyone who takes it, ostensibly for a limited time and for a limited purpose, invariably finds it easier and easier to justify retaining and exercising it beyond these limits. Educators have been notably susceptible to this temptation. Power is to be exercised consciously, with awareness of its corrupting potential and one’s own susceptibility. School leaders should consider power a useful but potentially dangerous tool, similar to an automobile. Leaders must exercise power while consciously thinking about what they are doing.
School Failure-This is a striking issue in schools today. Educators should not dwell on the failure itself but examine the policies that precipitate the failure. Therefore it would be advantageous to reassess the implementation of policies in a school. Student failure is usually as a result of poor leadership. Factors such as inconsistency, poor judgment, consequences for inappropriate behavior, lack of professional development for teachers, will result in a failing school. Policy therefore plays a vital role in the culture or tone of schools.
References
Almond, G. A., (1990). A discipline divided: Schools and sects in political science.
Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Corson D. (1995). Discursive power in educational organizations: an introduction.
Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press.
Dunlap & Goldman, (1991). Rethinking power in schools. Educational Administration
Quarterly, 27, 5-29.
Lindblom, C. E., (1968). The policy making process. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice
Hall.
Mann, M., (1992) The source of social power. Vol. 1. Cambridge, England: Cambridge
University Press.
Muth, R.,(1984). Toward an integrative theory of power and educational organizations.
Educational Administration Quarterly, 20, 25-42.
Implementation is the stage of the policy process in which a policy formally adopted by a government body is put into practice. The major actors in the implementation arena are the implementers. These include government officials who have the legal authority to see that a new policy is put into effect. Successful implementation depends upon developing and maintaining both the will and the capacity of the intermediaries. The individuals and agencies that must cooperate in order to implement a policy must have reasons for doing so, therefore they must be willing. Implementation is an important part of the work of all school leaders and one that they often dread. Today no excuse exists for failure; a good knowledge base, combined with thought and planning, will lead to success in this difficult endeavor.
Power raise ethical issues, power tends to corrupt and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Power is seductive, even addictive tonic, and anyone who takes it, ostensibly for a limited time and for a limited purpose, invariably finds it easier and easier to justify retaining and exercising it beyond these limits. Educators have been notably susceptible to this temptation. Power is to be exercised consciously, with awareness of its corrupting potential and one’s own susceptibility. School leaders should consider power a useful but potentially dangerous tool, similar to an automobile. Leaders must exercise power while consciously thinking about what they are doing.
School Failure-This is a striking issue in schools today. Educators should not dwell on the failure itself but examine the policies that precipitate the failure. Therefore it would be advantageous to reassess the implementation of policies in a school. Student failure is usually as a result of poor leadership. Factors such as inconsistency, poor judgment, consequences for inappropriate behavior, lack of professional development for teachers, will result in a failing school. Policy therefore plays a vital role in the culture or tone of schools.
References
Almond, G. A., (1990). A discipline divided: Schools and sects in political science.
Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Corson D. (1995). Discursive power in educational organizations: an introduction.
Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press.
Dunlap & Goldman, (1991). Rethinking power in schools. Educational Administration
Quarterly, 27, 5-29.
Lindblom, C. E., (1968). The policy making process. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice
Hall.
Mann, M., (1992) The source of social power. Vol. 1. Cambridge, England: Cambridge
University Press.
Muth, R.,(1984). Toward an integrative theory of power and educational organizations.
Educational Administration Quarterly, 20, 25-42.
Educational Neglet in Low Performing Schools
One should walk around a low-performing school and then travel to a school in a well-financed suburban school district. The differences will be starkly apparent. In the low-performing school, one is likely to find crumbling, out-of-date facilities; minimal use of technology; and many teachers with emergency credentials or teaching outside their area of expertise. In the suburban school, one is likely to find modern, well-maintained facilities, the latest technologies, up-to-date textbooks and certified teachers with ample experience. The students of these low-performing schools deserve better. Many of these schools and their communities have already begun that process and would benefit greatly from the federal government making them and their students a much higher priority. They have learned that the basics can make a difference in their schools. That means more instructional time, aligned standards, parental involvement, more resources and training, instructional leadership and other steps designed to place the student first.
The question of whether money makes a difference in providing public education for students has plagued our nation for over 30 years. This issue first surfaced in the 1960’s, when an influential federal report discussed the topic of whether money made a difference in improving public schools for poor and minority students. The debate continues 30 years later, and the question of how funds can be effectively utilized to provide all students with a quality and equitable education remains unanswered. The American debate over the effect of money on education is tremendously complex. Educators continue to wonder about the impact that money has on education, and essentially on student achievement. Evidently, it is common to find that low-income schools do not perform as well as schools in wealthy neighborhoods. It is clear that educating students entails the expenditure of funds. The debate stands at how much of the actual funds should be expended on education and where should the money go.
The uses of educational resources vary a great deal from state to state. Per-pupil expenditure and teacher salary range from very low, to double or triple the amount depending on the state. As a whole it would be difficult to assess in reliable numbers the ideal cost of educating a student in the United States.
The amount of funds spent on education has a direct impact on:
Class size
Student/teacher ratio
Pre-school programs
Academic intervention programs
Teacher training
The mentioned components are crucial to student academic success. Money is directly related to the overall nature of education; moreover the success of the educational system depends on the funds invested into it.
In schools of different socio economic backgrounds, the most prominent characteristics are differences in student scores on state exams. Students that are enrolled in schools of high economic background tend to perform better on state examinations. The quality of education is not equitable in wealthy schools as compared to low-income schools. Odden & Piccus (2003) conclude that while lower-economic districts still tend to have below-average spending levels, they do so because they also have below-average tax rates. Consequently, low-income families can’t afford quality education for their children. Jeremy Finn (1998) concludes that smaller classes have an advantage over larger classes. Evidence suggests that smaller classes have a higher chance of student success especially in the early grades. In his article, Gerald Bracey describes the use of data from the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) and the U.S. Department of Education; his comparison concluded “for the elementary level, increased expenditures on administration and instruction served principally to lower pupil/teacher ratios, which directly influenced achievement. “(Bracey p2).
Instructors in low performing schools will attest that their place of instruction is lacking in the resources that successful schools receive, such as the technology and materials that assist in differentiating instruction. In the comparison and contrast of the quality of education afforded to students in affluent schools and the quality of education students receive in poor communities, the wealthier schools receive a higher apportionment of funds for schools because the residents pay higher school taxes. The final product of these educational institutions clearly denotes a degree of academic success for schools that receive more money. The differences in schools and outcomes are grounded on the amount of money that is invested in these schools. “No matter how many elected school officials declare that “poverty is not an excuse” for poor school performance, the fact remains that children in poverty do not achieve well in school.”(Bracey p2). Studies conclude that the schools that receive the least amount of funds perform poorly. Odden and Piccus (2003) clarify that revenues for public schools are almost $400 billion, and consume 3.9 percent of the country’s gross domestic product and 4.5 percent of all personal income. Moreover, the research shows that revenues for public schools grew consistently during the twentieth century, so that by the end of the twentieth century and the beginning of the twenty-first century an average of $6, 855 was expended on each public school student. Unfortunately, those dollars were distributed unequally across states, districts, schools and students.
The effects of the unequal distribution of funds, impacts school budget in low-income neighborhoods. William Hartman denotes that during the planning stage of the budgeting process, the district plans programs and services offered to students such as:
· Educational program standards,
· Support and central office activities,
· Resources to be utilized,
· Process paid for the resources,
· The total cost of the educational programs
This is all within the constraints of available funding (p8).
The most current research findings indicate that increased investments in public education can produce substantial benefits in student achievement, particularly among low-income students. Because low-income students lag in academic achievement, and many poor school districts continue to receive funding levels below those of wealthier districts, high-poverty school districts represent both the greatest need for education funding and the greatest opportunity to improve student outcomes. Recent analyses of the cost of closing the achievement gap in these schools indicate that while many states are providing some funding in pursuit of these goals, few, if any, are providing enough money to fully compensate for the educational barriers associated with poverty.
To ensure that no child is left behind, America must make the challenge of fixing the Nation's low-performing schools its top priority. Located primarily in low-income rural and urban communities, these schools suffer from inadequate resources and substandard outcomes for students. They are particularly burdened by the fact that Title I of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, the primary vehicle for closing the achievement gap between lower-income and other students, is funded at just one-third of its full level. Low-performing schools need immediate and dramatic assistance to lift them up to the high-performance institutions every school should be.
The good news is that this process is occurring in many previously low-performing schools. But the federal government, in partnership with states and school districts, must take the lead in making it universal.
Reference
Bracey, G. (1997). Money Matters: No It Doesn’t, Yes It Does. Phi Delta Kappa (v) 78
i7 p 162+
Finn, J.D. (1998). Class size and students at risk: What is known? What is next?
National Institution of the Education of at Risk Students. Office of Educational Research and improvement. (OERI) U. S. Department of Education. Washington DC
Hartman W. T. (2003). School district budgeting. Lanham, MD Association of School
Business Officials/Scarecrow Press (Rowman & Littlefield).
Odden, A. & Picus, L. (2003). School finance: A policy perspective (3rd ed.). New York:
McGraw-Hill.
The question of whether money makes a difference in providing public education for students has plagued our nation for over 30 years. This issue first surfaced in the 1960’s, when an influential federal report discussed the topic of whether money made a difference in improving public schools for poor and minority students. The debate continues 30 years later, and the question of how funds can be effectively utilized to provide all students with a quality and equitable education remains unanswered. The American debate over the effect of money on education is tremendously complex. Educators continue to wonder about the impact that money has on education, and essentially on student achievement. Evidently, it is common to find that low-income schools do not perform as well as schools in wealthy neighborhoods. It is clear that educating students entails the expenditure of funds. The debate stands at how much of the actual funds should be expended on education and where should the money go.
The uses of educational resources vary a great deal from state to state. Per-pupil expenditure and teacher salary range from very low, to double or triple the amount depending on the state. As a whole it would be difficult to assess in reliable numbers the ideal cost of educating a student in the United States.
The amount of funds spent on education has a direct impact on:
Class size
Student/teacher ratio
Pre-school programs
Academic intervention programs
Teacher training
The mentioned components are crucial to student academic success. Money is directly related to the overall nature of education; moreover the success of the educational system depends on the funds invested into it.
In schools of different socio economic backgrounds, the most prominent characteristics are differences in student scores on state exams. Students that are enrolled in schools of high economic background tend to perform better on state examinations. The quality of education is not equitable in wealthy schools as compared to low-income schools. Odden & Piccus (2003) conclude that while lower-economic districts still tend to have below-average spending levels, they do so because they also have below-average tax rates. Consequently, low-income families can’t afford quality education for their children. Jeremy Finn (1998) concludes that smaller classes have an advantage over larger classes. Evidence suggests that smaller classes have a higher chance of student success especially in the early grades. In his article, Gerald Bracey describes the use of data from the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) and the U.S. Department of Education; his comparison concluded “for the elementary level, increased expenditures on administration and instruction served principally to lower pupil/teacher ratios, which directly influenced achievement. “(Bracey p2).
Instructors in low performing schools will attest that their place of instruction is lacking in the resources that successful schools receive, such as the technology and materials that assist in differentiating instruction. In the comparison and contrast of the quality of education afforded to students in affluent schools and the quality of education students receive in poor communities, the wealthier schools receive a higher apportionment of funds for schools because the residents pay higher school taxes. The final product of these educational institutions clearly denotes a degree of academic success for schools that receive more money. The differences in schools and outcomes are grounded on the amount of money that is invested in these schools. “No matter how many elected school officials declare that “poverty is not an excuse” for poor school performance, the fact remains that children in poverty do not achieve well in school.”(Bracey p2). Studies conclude that the schools that receive the least amount of funds perform poorly. Odden and Piccus (2003) clarify that revenues for public schools are almost $400 billion, and consume 3.9 percent of the country’s gross domestic product and 4.5 percent of all personal income. Moreover, the research shows that revenues for public schools grew consistently during the twentieth century, so that by the end of the twentieth century and the beginning of the twenty-first century an average of $6, 855 was expended on each public school student. Unfortunately, those dollars were distributed unequally across states, districts, schools and students.
The effects of the unequal distribution of funds, impacts school budget in low-income neighborhoods. William Hartman denotes that during the planning stage of the budgeting process, the district plans programs and services offered to students such as:
· Educational program standards,
· Support and central office activities,
· Resources to be utilized,
· Process paid for the resources,
· The total cost of the educational programs
This is all within the constraints of available funding (p8).
The most current research findings indicate that increased investments in public education can produce substantial benefits in student achievement, particularly among low-income students. Because low-income students lag in academic achievement, and many poor school districts continue to receive funding levels below those of wealthier districts, high-poverty school districts represent both the greatest need for education funding and the greatest opportunity to improve student outcomes. Recent analyses of the cost of closing the achievement gap in these schools indicate that while many states are providing some funding in pursuit of these goals, few, if any, are providing enough money to fully compensate for the educational barriers associated with poverty.
To ensure that no child is left behind, America must make the challenge of fixing the Nation's low-performing schools its top priority. Located primarily in low-income rural and urban communities, these schools suffer from inadequate resources and substandard outcomes for students. They are particularly burdened by the fact that Title I of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, the primary vehicle for closing the achievement gap between lower-income and other students, is funded at just one-third of its full level. Low-performing schools need immediate and dramatic assistance to lift them up to the high-performance institutions every school should be.
The good news is that this process is occurring in many previously low-performing schools. But the federal government, in partnership with states and school districts, must take the lead in making it universal.
Reference
Bracey, G. (1997). Money Matters: No It Doesn’t, Yes It Does. Phi Delta Kappa (v) 78
i7 p 162+
Finn, J.D. (1998). Class size and students at risk: What is known? What is next?
National Institution of the Education of at Risk Students. Office of Educational Research and improvement. (OERI) U. S. Department of Education. Washington DC
Hartman W. T. (2003). School district budgeting. Lanham, MD Association of School
Business Officials/Scarecrow Press (Rowman & Littlefield).
Odden, A. & Picus, L. (2003). School finance: A policy perspective (3rd ed.). New York:
McGraw-Hill.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)