Sentences with phrase «measuring school progress»

Because some states are experimenting with value - added approaches to measuring school progress, it's important that federal accountability standards allow for this type of innovation.

However, if teachers are to be evaluated on the basis of student tests, they must insist on individually administered examinations that measure the school progress (as opposed to home learning) of each child in the class.

Not exact matches

«We find the gaps between the stated procedures for MFP estimation [a measure of productivity commonly interpreted as technical progress] used by Statistics Canada and the BLS are substantial,» Michael Harper concluded in an open, written response (pdf) he co-authored with Alice Nakamura, another renowned expert on productivity, and Lu Zhang, both from the University of Alberta School of Business.

Over the course of three sessions we explored ways in which school nutrition professionals are managing stakeholder engagement, how they are using assessment tools to measure progress and set new goals, and breakfast program best practices vis - à - vis operations, marketing, menuing, staff training, and equipment.

It is promoted as a voluntary best practice standard and has been used by a majority of school divisions as benchmarks for measuring progress of local wellness policies.

«The NASUWT has always stressed that progress measures are, in general, a more effective and equitable indicator of the contribution schools make to the achievement of pupils than those focused on assessment.

Charter school leader Deborah Kenny's op - ed in today's The New York Times argues against the move by many states toward teacher evaluations based on multiple measures, including both student progress on achievement tests and the reviews of principals.

«Welsh Liberal Democrats are committed to the introduction of an individual pupil monitoring programme to measure all pupils» progress, allowing schools to target efforts at those students who are not meeting their potential».

Annual assessments will still be required, and the state will establish «long - term goals» to measure student progress in an effort to bring up low - performing schools.

The phaseout of the MSP program would be a blow to university researchers, who use NSF funding to link up with educators from local school districts to train teachers, improve curriculum, and devise better ways to measure student progress in math and science.

The study's most disturbing finding, the authors say, is that neither boys nor girls get many tough math questions on state tests now required to measure a school district's progress under the 2002 federal No Child Left Behind law.

True progress is read from a tape measure or by the pants that you've kept from high school that fit again.

Growth measures go a long way toward correcting for that by examining the progress students make while enrolled at a given school.

The new law encourages states to use multiple measures to evaluate student and school progress.

During the debate over the federal «annual yearly progress» standard, many of the proposals that would have included other indicators as measures of a school's annual yearly progress were simply thinly disguised attempts to eradicate any rigor from the system.

A continuous improvement approach, like that adopted in California, would track progress on all of the measures in the dashboard, using scale scores to better measure growth and progress for all students, so that schools can continually assess and fine - tune their efforts.

By many measures, children's academic outcomes have improved — particularly in the charter schools that this movement created — but the consensus is that progress has either not been fast enough or that it's not even legit.

The best schools measured using Progress 8 are associated with a much lower premium of 8.3 per cent or # 18,200.

My own view is that these kinds of measures are fine, but unless we can make progress in affecting the home environments of today's children, any progress will be modest at best, and the job of the schools will only become more difficult.

It was this mistake that caused «Adequate Yearly Progress» (AYP) to become a fundamentally deceptive metric for measuring school performance.

St Matthias School was recognised for its rapid progress after being placed into special measures following a poor Ofsted inspection two years ago.

This is important because it will tie measured increases in student progress on non-tested outcomes to actual behaviors that are of interest to school officials and policy makers.

As advocated by the 22 - member panel chaired by former Gov. Lamar Alexander of Tennessee, both bills would expand the Congressionallymandated National Assessment of Educational Progress to provide state - by - state data, measure learning in more core subjects, include out - of - school 17 - year - olds, and provide a larger sampling of private - school students.

Despite their importance, neither of these sets of skills is routinely measured in school settings, hindering progress in understanding how they interact to support student success and how educators can best support their development.

Arne Duncan, the new U.S. secretary of education, got this right in Chicago when he made «student connection» one of four outcomes that need to be measured in his school improvement plan efforts alongside student outcomes, academic progress, and school characteristics.

«However as children progress through school, these important measures are not tracked at a national level, and are measured in inconsistent ways, if at all, in the states and territories.»

These teachers could be empowered to shape their schools, by taking part in choosing the curricula they use in their classrooms and the formative assessments they use to measure student progress, for example.

Official figures published by the Department for Education (DfE) have revealed that over 800 schools are set to be labelled as «coasting» under provisional Progress 8 measures.

Hobby's controversial proposal, published on the NAHT blog, follows recent government intentions to places a stronger focus on progress as a measure of schools, and the introductions of the new Progress 8 measure at GCSE and baseline tests at the beginning of a child's formal edprogress as a measure of schools, and the introductions of the new Progress 8 measure at GCSE and baseline tests at the beginning of a child's formal edProgress 8 measure at GCSE and baseline tests at the beginning of a child's formal education.

The idea is that if school leaders institute explicit educational expectations for young people, they can periodically measure student progress, diagnose where shortcomings lie, and prescribe appropriate practices.

This vacuum stems not only from the difficulty of the endeavor but also from a persistent national clash between an obsession to train students solely for high scores on multiple - choice tests and an angry disenchantment with measuring progress of public schools, educators, or education schools.

Looking across our analyses, we see that under IMPACT, DCPS has dramatically improved the quality of teaching in its schools — likely contributing to its status as the fastest - improving large urban school system in the United States as measured by the National Assessment of Educational Progress.

Adequate yearly progress (AYP) is the measure by which schools, districts, and states are held accountable for student performance under Title I of the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 (NCLB), the current version of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act.

On top of the 60 per cent pass rate for GCSEs, Morgan explained the new «Progress 8» accountability measure for secondary school's, which is designed to show a child's progress from primary to secondary edProgress 8» accountability measure for secondary school's, which is designed to show a child's progress from primary to secondary edprogress from primary to secondary education.

Next year will see the introduction of «Progress 8», a new method of measuring school performance that aims to better assess the progress pupils make between Key Stage 2 and the end of their time at secondaryProgress 8», a new method of measuring school performance that aims to better assess the progress pupils make between Key Stage 2 and the end of their time at secondaryprogress pupils make between Key Stage 2 and the end of their time at secondary school.

Hear how this primary and secondary school have faced the removal of levels challenge and their victories so far, including the incorporation of the key elements of a good assessment system and translating these into the classroom, setting appropriate targets, tracking and effectively measuring pupil progress post levels, and demonstrating progress for Ofsted governors.

In March 1996, the nation's governors met in Palisades, N.Y., and called for an «external, independent, nongovernmental effort» to measure and report on each state's annual progress in raising student achievement and improving the public schools.

Schools became assembly lines, with children progressing from one grade to the next based on time spent in a classroom, the simplest way for adults to measure progress.

Similarly, because growth measures may do a poor job of capturing the progress of high - achieving students, some states may want the weights assigned to achievement and growth to vary based on the level at which a school's students are achieving.

And based on student - growth measures, schools getting these huge sums of money are progressing at about the same rate as other schools in the state.

The Sunshine State had instituted school voucher programs, increased the number of charter schools, and devised a sophisticated accountability system that evaluates schools on the basis of their progress as measured by the Florida Comprehensive Assessment Test (FCAT).

The strategies of that era — including high academic standards for all students, measuring academic progress, improving teaching, and introducing school choice to a monopoly system — found reinforcement in federal law with the passage of the No Child Left Behind Act in 2001.

The index combines indicators related to family background, wealth, education levels, and employment with schooling measures, including kindergarten enrollment and selected National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) test scores.

The new version of the law, he said, will need to ensure effective teachers and principals for underperforming schools, expand learning time, and devise an accountability system that measures individual student progress and uses data to inform instruction and teacher evaluation.

Any well - designed measuring stick should provide that kind of basic information, especially if it purports to identify schools that are or are not making Adequate Yearly Progress.

Yes, not all that long ago AFT advocated for an ESEA that «judges school effectiveness — the only valid and fair basis for accountability — by measuring the progress that schools achieve with the same students over time.»

Schools should be permitted to use multiple, locally created assessments instead of «one shot» tests to measure student progress for accountability purposes, according to a report released last week by a panel of experts convened by the Forum on Educational Accountability, a group that includes some of the most vocal critics of the 5 - year - old No Child Left Behind Act.

That's why we need an education agenda that strategically recruits, retains, and rewards the most effective teachers and principals; that builds incredibly high standards; that develops rigorous and useful assessments to measure progress against those standards; that builds data systems that allow teachers, principals, students, and parents to quickly and conveniently access those data for everyday use; and that focuses on dramatic intervention within our country's lowest - performing schools.

Schools can not do that unless they adhere to state - of - the - art methods for classifying students; it's not about measuring their progress in school but about deciding whether they have a disability and, if so, what the educational consequences of that determination are.

In previous research using the 2003 principal survey data (see «When Principals Rate Teachers,» research, Spring 2006), we found that principals in the district are usually able to identify the most and least effective teachers in their schools, as measured by their students» academic progress.