|
|
Pub Date: |
2013-01-00 |
Pub Type(s): |
Reports - Evaluative |
Peer Reviewed: |
|
|
|
|
Descriptors:
Family Programs; Financial Support; Integrated Services; Low Income Groups; Middle Schools; Program Effectiveness; Coordination; Organizational Communication; Educational Environment; Cultural Differences; Age Differences; Privacy; Barriers; Parent Attitudes; Interviews; Case Studies
Abstract:
A commonly held belief is that children whose families are struggling with poverty--and the housing, health, safety, and other concerns that often go with it--cannot focus on learning unless their nonacademic needs are met. This belief is supported by research showing that the children of poor parents who receive income supplements and other supports tend to do better in school. Consequently, in order to successfully educate low-income children, schools might benefit from finding ways to partner with other organizations in order to improve the well-being of their students' families. However, in practice, schools and their community partners often face significant challenges in accomplishing this objective. This issue brief uses data from Chapin Hall's evaluation of the Elev8 Full-Service Schools Initiative as a case study to reflect on the potential challenges and benefits of offering economic support services to families at schools. The findings suggest that a small group of parents who used the services felt that they helped improve their family's financial well-being. In addition, staff members of the various Elev8 partner organizations reported that a major success was the ability of the economic supports staff to make individual connections to families. However, a number of factors made reaching larger numbers of parents a significant challenge. These included difficulties coordinating school and economic support efforts, as well as parents' concerns about sharing their private information within the school setting. Based on these findings, the authors present recommendations for future efforts to integrate economic support services into schools. These strategies include hiring long-term staff members to build trusting relationships with parents, offering economic support services in conjunction with a broader array of services, ensuring clear lines of communication between partner organizations, and taking steps to ensure parents' privacy. (Contains 9 footnotes.)
Note:The following two links
are not-applicable for text-based browsers or screen-reading software.
Show
Hide
Full Abstract
Related Items: Show Related Items
Full-Text Availability Options:
More Info:
Help |
Tutorial
Help Finding Full Text
|
Publisher's website
|
Author(s): |
Zipp, John F. |
Source: |
Teaching Sociology, v40 n4 p301-311 Oct 2012 |
|
Pub Date: |
2012-10-00 |
Pub Type(s): |
Journal Articles; Opinion Papers; Reports - Descriptive |
Peer Reviewed: |
Yes |
|
|
|
Descriptors:
Sociology; College Instruction; Introductory Courses; College Students; Textbooks; General Education; Educational Objectives; Outcomes of Education; Coordination
Abstract:
In this article, I ask for whom is our teaching developed? Although we typically think that it is developed for our students, there appears to be a considerable gap between how our curriculum, especially Introductory Sociology is organized, and what we know about current college students. Drawing on data on enrollment in sociology and overall in colleges and universities along with recent scholarly portraits of college students by Nathan (2005), Clydesdale (2007), and Arum and Roska (2011), I offer the following argument: (1) Our "students" are primarily those who take Introductory Sociology, and this class, indeed, is our public face for most nonacademics; (2) given where U.S. college students matriculate, all too often, Introductory Sociology is likely being taught by someone not as well connected as we might like to our main professional organization; (3) comprehensive textbooks dominate the Introductory Sociology market and contain more information that can reasonably be covered in one semester; (4) college students are "practical credentialists" who spend relatively little time outside of the classroom on their studies; and (5) whether or not we as sociologists agree on what needs to be covered in Introductory Sociology and other courses, we have derived these understandings among ourselves, paying little attention to what skills and knowledge our students want and/or need. If Introductory Sociology really is our "public face", we clearly need to spend a considerable amount of time in making sure that this is how we want to be seen. (Contains 3 tables and 12 notes.)
Note:The following two links
are not-applicable for text-based browsers or screen-reading software.
Show
Hide
Full Abstract
Related Items: Show Related Items
Full-Text Availability Options:
More Info:
Help |
Tutorial
Help Finding Full Text
|
More Info:
Help
Find in a Library
|
Publisher's website
|
|
|
Pub Date: |
2012-07-00 |
Pub Type(s): |
Reports - Evaluative; Tests/Questionnaires |
Peer Reviewed: |
|
|
|
|
Descriptors:
Evaluation Utilization; Institutional Evaluation; Evaluation Methods; Stakeholders; Educational Planning; Self Evaluation (Groups); Technical Institutes; Governance; Community Colleges; Administrative Organization; Organizational Effectiveness; Case Studies; Improvement Programs; Coordination; Statewide Planning; Governing Boards; Educational Policy; Educational Finance; Public Agencies; Systems Approach; Strategic Planning; Politics of Education; Educational Environment; Policy Formation; Institutional Mission; Economic Factors; Questionnaires; Agency Role
Abstract:
Public organizations charged with coordinating higher education institutions face a complex set of tasks. Whether coordinating institutions within one sector or across sectors, such organizations play vital roles in promoting a state's capacity for policy leadership to meet the growing need for an educated citizenry. National experts have emphasized that effective policy capacity requires coordinating entities that can articulate mission and goals, devise strategies for meeting them, and use resources, including relationships with state leaders, to influence policy. The authors' case study subject, the Washington State Board for Community and Technical Colleges, was selected because of its track record of focusing a diverse constituency on a valuable public mission and using its resources strategically to facilitate large-scale policy changes aimed at making progress toward the mission. Its effectiveness rests in large part on its continual attention to relationships in order to mediate and balance the needs of various state and local parties. For states interested in improving existing coordinating organizations or designing new ones, the authors suggest that an assessment of the current context can illuminate possibilities for improvement. Multiple factors interact to create forward momentum and can be leveraged in myriad ways. Thus, the self assessment questions are designed so states can more clearly understand the factors at play in their own situations and more strategically evaluate short-term and long-term opportunities. The self-assessment questions fall into three categories: the state political and economic context, the design of the coordinating body itself, and the organization and leadership strategies used by the coordinating body. These factors are generalized from the Washington experience. They do not reflect an exhaustive review of the research or experiences of other states. [For the main report, "On Balance: Lessons in Effective Coordination from the Washington State Board for Community and Technical Colleges--An Organizational Perspective," see ED534114.]
Note:The following two links
are not-applicable for text-based browsers or screen-reading software.
Show
Hide
Full Abstract
Related Items: Show Related Items
Full-Text Availability Options:
ERIC
Full Text (171K)
|
Author(s): |
Young, Mitchell |
Source: |
European Educational Research Journal, v11 n4 p570-585 2012 |
|
Pub Date: |
2012-00-00 |
Pub Type(s): |
Journal Articles; Reports - Research |
Peer Reviewed: |
Yes |
|
|
|
Descriptors:
Foreign Countries; Research; Public Policy; Coordination; Governance; International Cooperation; International Programs; Economic Progress
Abstract:
Adopting the conception of the university as a primary driver of innovation and economic growth has brought increased pressure for the European Union (EU) to actively steer university-based research policy, despite its being outside of the EU's direct jurisdiction. While the open method of coordination (OMC) was developed for such situations, the complex nature of universities and research policy has meant that such steering does not stop with the OMC and occurs on multiple levels using a variety of governance tools. By mapping out the ways in which the EU uses legal, financial and informational instruments to coordinate policy and build institutions, the article attempts to understand the role and objective of the EU in this policy area in relation to national and other global actors. It suggests that despite strong globalising trends, the EU does more than to echo and promote these trends at the national and sub-national levels, but also attempts to structure the research environment in a complex heterogeneous way.
Note:The following two links
are not-applicable for text-based browsers or screen-reading software.
Show
Hide
Full Abstract
Related Items: Show Related Items
Full-Text Availability Options:
More Info:
Help |
Tutorial
Help Finding Full Text
|
More Info:
Help
Find in a Library
|
Publisher's website
|
|
|
Pub Date: |
2012-05-00 |
Pub Type(s): |
Journal Articles; Reports - Research |
Peer Reviewed: |
Yes |
|
|
|
Descriptors:
School Safety; Child Health; Partnerships in Education; Federal Programs; Program Effectiveness; Program Implementation; Correlation; Schools; Participation; Coordination; Poverty; Models; Comprehensive Programs; Child Development; Substance Abuse; Prevention
Abstract:
A three-level growth-curve model was applied to estimate perceived impact growth trajectories, using multi-year data from project and school surveys on outcome and program implementation collected from 59 sites and approximately 1165 participating schools in the Safe Schools and Healthy Students Initiative. Primary interest is to determine whether and how project-level and school-level correlates affect schools' perceptions of the Initiative's effectiveness over time when the effects of the pre-grant environmental conditions, grant operations, and near-term outcomes are considered. Coordination and service integration, comprehensive programs and activities for early childhood development, and change in school involvement were found to be significant predictors of school-perceived overall impact when the effect of poverty was considered. Partnership functioning, perceived importance of school resources, and school involvement were found to be significant predictors of school-perceived impact on substance use prevention when the effect of poverty was considered. (Contains 3 tables and 1 figure.)
Note:The following two links
are not-applicable for text-based browsers or screen-reading software.
Show
Hide
Full Abstract
Related Items: Show Related Items
Full-Text Availability Options:
More Info:
Help |
Tutorial
Help Finding Full Text
|
More Info:
Help
Find in a Library
|
Publisher's website
|
Author(s): |
Englehart, Joshua M. |
Source: |
Clearing House: A Journal of Educational Strategies, Issues and Ideas, v85 n2 p70-73 2012 |
|
Pub Date: |
2012-00-00 |
Pub Type(s): |
Journal Articles; Reports - Descriptive |
Peer Reviewed: |
Yes |
|
|
|
Descriptors:
Classroom Techniques; Coordination; Teaching Methods; Teaching Experience; Teacher Attitudes; Misconceptions; Classroom Environment; Teacher Student Relationship; Theory Practice Relationship; Beliefs; Teaching Styles; Family School Relationship; Teacher Responsibility
Abstract:
Teachers' classroom management practices are rooted in assumptions based on their experiences and perceptions. At times, these assumptions are only partially informed, and serve to limit action and perceived responsibility. In this article, five common "half-truths" that guide classroom management are discussed. For each, the basic premise is identified, along with the important relevant details, which are often overlooked. It is suggested that a more complete picture of each of these assumptions may reveal many management situations to be much more dynamic, with more options for action available.
Note:The following two links
are not-applicable for text-based browsers or screen-reading software.
Show
Hide
Full Abstract
Related Items: Show Related Items
Full-Text Availability Options:
More Info:
Help |
Tutorial
Help Finding Full Text
|
More Info:
Help
Find in a Library
|
Publisher's website
|
|