Your search found 12644 results.

Descriptors:
Talent; Gifted; Identification; Intervention; Small Group Instruction; Gender Differences; Academic Ability; Instructional Program Divisions; Talent Development; Acceleration (Education); Language Arts; Mathematics Education; Science Education; Student Attitudes; Individualized Instruction; Mathematics Instruction

Abstract:
Established in the early 1970s, the talent search model has garnered strong theoretical and programming support for addressing the academic needs of highly able students. The two main components of the talent search model are discovery (identification) and development (programming) of academic talent. Discovery of academically talented elementary and middle school students occurs via the process of above-level testing, usually offered through university-based centers. The essence of talent search program intervention is acceleration, which has robust research support as the most effective intervention for high-ability students. Whereas talent search identification and programming are university based, talent search participants receive nearly all of their instruction in K-12 settings, where academic acceleration is less likely to be implemented. In this investigation, a large sample of talent search participants (n = 5,844) were asked questions designed to measure the various ways in which the students study mathematics, science, and language arts (writing and reading) in the K-12 setting. More than two thirds of the study sample reported that they were taught in the regular classroom, learning the same material, at the same level and pace as nongifted peers. The type of curriculum differentiation or program delivery model (e.g., small-group instruction) reported by the students varied according to subject area, with the greatest percentage of reports of differentiated delivery in mathematics. Main effects were found for gender, grade, and ability. Implications for school-based accelerative interventions are presented. (Contains 5 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

Descriptors:
Communities of Practice; Knowledge Management; Electronic Learning; Pretests Posttests; Job Training; Motor Vehicles; Individualized Instruction; Pacing; Essay Tests; Surveys; Instructional Effectiveness

Abstract:
The increased accessibility of technology and Internet connections has enabled organizations to provide their workforces with the opportunity to engage in distributed education. "Harnessing this innovation calls for organizational and technological infrastructures that support the interplay of knowledge and knowing" (Cook & Brown, 1999, p. 381). This article explores the evidence of knowledge convergence in online knowledge-based communities of practice (CoPs). Learning outcomes assessed declarative knowledge, convergence, and knowledge application. A comparison group (self-paced design) was used to draw conclusions about the differential effects of knowledge-building strategies on these learning outcomes. The results show there was a difference in pretest and posttest scores and positive evidence of knowledge convergence. The findings pointed to higher posttest scores and higher level of convergence in the online CoP strategy. (Contains 6 tables and 7 figures.) 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

Descriptors:
Academically Gifted; Reading Achievement; Reading Instruction; Elementary School Students; Reading Comprehension; Reading Fluency; Magnet Schools; Scores; Talent; Oral Reading; Reading Tests; Individualized Instruction; Teaching Methods

Abstract:
This research examined the range of reading fluency and comprehension scores of 1,149 students in five diverse elementary schools, including a gifted and talented magnet school. Results revealed a range in reading comprehension across all schools of 9.2 grade levels in Grade 3, 11.3 in Grade 4, and 11.6 in Grade 5. A similar wide range of oral reading fluency scores was found across all elementary schools, as students scored from below the 10th percentile to above the 90th percentile. These results demonstrate the wide range of reading achievement in diverse populations of students, including gifted students, and the need for teachers to differentiate both reading content and instruction to enable all students to make continuous progress in reading. (Contains 5 tables and 2 figures.) 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

Descriptors:
Disabilities; Individualized Instruction; Response to Intervention; Benchmarking; Reading Instruction; Reading Programs; Screening Tests; Curriculum Based Assessment; Progress Monitoring; Models; Program Effectiveness; Outcomes of Education; Program Implementation; Program Descriptions; Elementary Schools; Time Factors (Learning); Teacher Surveys; Special Education; Program Design; Accessibility (for Disabled)

Abstract:
This article describes how a purposeful sample of 62 elementary schools from 17 states implemented a Response to Intervention (RtI) framework for reading. School informants answered surveys and were interviewed about differentiated instruction in Tier 1, screening/benchmarking, where Tier 2 interventions were located, typical group size and the minutes/day of intervention in Tiers 2 and 3 groups, and how students with individualized educational programs (IEPs) in reading were served in the school's RtI model. Schools reported using differentiated instruction in Tier 1, favored curriculum-based measures for screening/benchmarking and progress monitoring, reported more intensive interventions and more progress monitoring in Tier 3, and used a wide variety of models for serving students with IEPs within the schools' RtI models. (Contains 3 tables and 5 figures.) 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

Descriptors:
Individualized Instruction; Private Schools; Grade 11; Mathematics Instruction; Secondary School Mathematics; Mathematical Concepts; Mathematical Aptitude; Equations (Mathematics); Mathematics Teachers; Instructional Materials; Teaching Methods; Peer Teaching

Abstract:
Teachers of mathematics recognize the difficulty of reaching every student when the range of student abilities puts a considerable strain on the classroom discussion and time. In a response to the problem, students are grouped so that those with greater mathematical aptitude help those who have difficulties. While this approach is to be appreciated, it tends to mean that the more able students have less opportunity to explore further their own initiatives in mathematics, while those who have more difficulties find themselves on the receiving end with little opportunity to be in the role of enriching the mathematics experience for everyone, including themselves. A "multiple-centres" approach is designed to overcome these problems. In this variation of differentiated instruction, all students get the chance to engage the material from a vantage point and at a level they find interesting and challenging as a consequence of their selecting extensions of the teacher's initial focus problem. This article will present some findings of 11th year (roughly Fifth Form) average mathematics students at a US Independent School in transforming the standard quadratic equation to represent fountain parabolic trajectories, which was the teacher's focus problem, along with some multiple-centre investigations they chose. A further set of opportunities with commentaries providing additional centres for student inquiry are included. 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

Descriptors:
Higher Education; Homework; Video Technology; Computer Software; Textbooks; Electronic Publishing; Electronic Learning; Courseware; Individualized Instruction; College Faculty; Surveys; Publishing Industry; Online Courses

Abstract:
Textbook publishers argue that their newest digital products should not even be called "textbooks." They are really software programs built to deliver a mix of text, videos, and homework assignments. But delivering them is just the beginning. No old-school textbook was able to be customized for each student in the classroom. The books never graded the homework. And while they contain sample exam questions, they could not administer the test themselves. One publisher calls its products "personalized learning experiences," another "courseware," and one insists on using its own brand name, "MindTap." For now, this new product could be called "the object formerly known as the textbook." Major publishers have spent hundreds of millions of dollars in the past few years buying up software companies and building new digital divisions, betting that the future will bring an expanded role for publishers in higher education. So far publishers produce only a limited number of titles in these born-digital formats, and the number of professors assigning them is relatively small. Only about 2 percent of textbooks sold at college bookstores are fully digital titles, according to a survey of 940 bookstores run by Follett Higher Education Group. But if these new kinds of textbooks catch on, they raise questions about how much control publishers have over curriculum and the teaching process, as online education expands. 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

Descriptors:
Reading Instruction; Small Group Instruction; Individualized Instruction; Teaching Methods; Readability; Books; Reading Skills; Reading Fluency; Oral Language; Misconceptions; Student Evaluation; Reading Achievement

Abstract:
The authors examine the growth and impact of guided reading, small group teaching for differentiated instruction in reading that was stimulated by their early publications. Many changes in literacy education have been observed as a result--almost as if educators had a "romance" with guided reading and leveled books. While changes have been positive, the "reality" is that there is much more work to be done to bring guided reading to its full potential for helping children become effective and joyful users of literacy. The authors call for a deeper understanding of the reading process and of the text characteristics of leveled books. They discuss misconceptions regarding fluency and describe the strategic use of assessment and the role of facilitative talk. Regarding guided reading instruction, we are at the end of the beginning and need to forge new understandings for the future. (Contains 11 figures.) 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

Descriptors:
Individualized Instruction; Teacher Effectiveness; Response to Intervention; Classroom Techniques; Decision Making; Teaching Methods; Elementary School Teachers; Grade 1; Grouping (Instructional Purposes); Reader Text Relationship; Instructional Materials; Literacy Education; Grade 4

Abstract:
This article addresses approaches to differentiating instruction to meet the needs of students whose literacy needs, interests, and strengths vary widely. This article was designed to support classroom teachers who understand the importance of differentiating instruction, but are unsure of how best to design and implement differentiation within the parameters of the classroom. The article begins by defining differentiated instruction and discussing its importance, including the role of differentiation with respect to diversity and with respect to Response to Intervention (RTI). The remainder of the article describes in detail two examples of differentiated instruction in classroom contexts. Each example is followed by a discussion of the research and decision-making underlying the teacher's approach to differentiation. The article concludes with common characteristics of effective differentiation. (Contains 4 figures.) 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

Descriptors:
Morphemes; Syntax; Phonology; Reading Comprehension; Phonemes; English (Second Language); Hispanic Americans; Individualized Instruction; Literacy Education; Teaching Methods; Developmental Disabilities; Child Development; Infants; Elementary School Students

Abstract:
When one effectively employs the strategies of exploratory-learning, wait-time, intervention, guided reading, meaning, and phonological-morphological-syntactical awareness-for infants and on up-to 3rd grade students-all-in a Montessori-like-learning-literacy-setting replete with semantical interactions with phonology, syllabology, morphology, and then-eventually short phrases and then-syntax by age-three-then we know we have done our academic=social work (see Jaramillo, J.; Fromkin & Rodman 1983, et. al). In closing, when all these infant to eighth grade students demonstrate reading comprehension of phonemes, morphemes, phrases, and syntax-then we all have progressed via the effective application of the aforementioned strategies. 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 (135K)

Descriptors:
Mathematics Achievement; State Standards; Algebra; Geometry; Secondary School Mathematics; Evidence; Outcome Measures; Individualized Instruction; Intelligent Tutoring Systems; Program Evaluation; Instructional Effectiveness

Abstract:
"Carnegie Learning Curricula and Cognitive Tutor"[R], published by Carnegie Learning, is a secondary math curricula that offers textbooks and interactive software to provide individualized, self-paced instruction based on student needs. The program includes pre-Algebra, Algebra I, Algebra II, and Geometry, as well as a three-course series that integrates numeric, algebraic, geometric, and statistical content. The developer indicates that the program is aligned with most state standards and the standards set by the National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. The program can be customized to meet other state-specific standards. The What Works Clearinghouse (WWC) identified 27 studies that investigated the effects of "Carnegie Learning Curricula and Cognitive Tutor"[R] on math performance for high school students. The WWC reviewed 11 of those studies against group design evidence standards. Three studies (Cabalo, Jaciw, & Vu, 2007; Campuzano, Dynarski, Agodini, & Rall, 2009; & Pane, McCaffrey, Slaughter, Steele, & Ikemoto, 2010) are randomized controlled trials that meet WWC evidence standards without reservations, and three studies (Shneyderman, 2001; Smith, 2001; & Wolfson, Koedinger, Ritter, & McGuire, 2008) are randomized controlled trials or quasi-experimental designs that meet WWC evidence standards with reservations. These six studies are summarized in this report. Five studies do not meet WWC evidence standards. The remaining 16 studies do not meet WWC eligibility screens for review in this topic area. Appended are: (1) Research details for Cabalo et al., 2007, Campuzano et al., 2009, Pane et al., 2010, and Shneyderman, 2001; (2) Outcome measures for each domain; (3) Findings included in the rating for the mathematics achievement domain; and (4) Summary of supplemental findings for the mathematics achievement domain. A glossary of terms is included. (Contains 7 tables, 4 additional sources and 7 endnotes.) 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 (752K)