Identifying low-performance public schools

Studies in Educational Evaluation

Volumn 26, Issue 3, 2000, Pages 259-287

  Ammar, Salwa ^a   Bifulco, Robert ^b   Duncombe, William ^b   Wright, Ronald ^a  

^a LE MOYNE COLLEGE   (United States)

^b SYRACUSE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0034392054     PISSN: 0191491X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S0191-491X(00)00019-5     Document Type: Article

References (17)

1. Advisory Council to the New York State Board of Regents Subcommittee on Low Performing Schools. (1994). Perform of Perish: Recommendations of the Advisory Council to the New York State Board of Regents Subcommittee on Low Performing Schools. Albany, NY: New York State Board of Regents.
2. Ammar, S., & Wright, R. 1997. Fuzzy logic: A case study in performance measurement, In B. Ayyub and M Gupta (Eds.), Uncertainty Analysis in Engineering and Sciences: Fuzzy Logic, Statistics, and Neural Network Approach (pp. 233-245) Boston: Kluwer.
3. Bezdek, J.C. (1993). Fuzzy models - What are they, and why? IEEE Transactions on Fuzzy Systems, 1, 1-5.
4. Clotfelter, C., & Ladd, H. (1996). Recognizing and rewarding success in public schools. In H.F. Ladd (Eds.), Holding Schools Accountable: Performance-based Reform in Education (pp. 23-63). Washington, DC: The Brookings Institution.
5. Darling-Hammond, L. (1991). Accountability mechanisms in big city school systems. ERIC/CUE Digest, No. 71.
6. Dubois, D., & Prade, H. (1988). Possibility Theory. New York: Plenum Press.
7. Durkin, J. (1994). Expert Systems: Design and Development. New York: Macmillan.
8. Jerald, C. (2000). The state of the states. Education Week, 19, 62-74.
9. Jerald, C., & Boser, U. (1999). Taking stock. Education Week, 18, 81-105.
10. King, R., & Mathers, J. (1997). Improving schools through performance-based accountability and financial rewards. Journal of Education Finance, 23, 147-176.
11. Meyer, R.H. (1996). Value-added indicators of school performance. In E. Hanushek & D. Jorgenson (Eds.), Improving America's Schools: The Role of Incentives (pp. 197-223). Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
12. Saade, J.J. (1995). A unifying approach to defuzzification and comparison of outputs of fuzzy controllers. IEEE Transactions on Fuzzy Systems, 4, 227-237.
13. Sanders, W.L., & Horn, S.P. (1995). Educational assessment reassessed: The usefulness of standardized and alternative measures of student achievement as indicators of the assessment of educational outcomes. Educational Policy Analysis Archives, 3.
14. Schumaker, R.E., & Brookshire, W.K. (1992). Defining quality indicators for secondary schools. Educational Research Quarterly, 15, 5-10.
15. Treadwell, W. (1995). Fuzzy set theory movement in the social sciences. Public Administration Review. 55, 91-97.
16. Webster, W., Mendro, R.L., & Almaguer, T.O. (1994). Effectiveness indices: A "value added" approach to measuring school effect. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 20, 113-145.
17. White, K. (1998). State adds to list of N.Y.C.'s low-performing schools. Education Week, November 25.