Student Concerns and Standards Too

Middle School Journal

Volumn 28, Issue 4, 1997, Pages 44-49

  Vars, Gordon F ^a  

^a KENT STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 79958008035     PISSN: None     EISSN: 23276223     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/00940771.1997.11494464     Document Type: Article

References (20)

1. American Federation of Teachers. (1996). A system of high standards: What we mean and why we need it. American Educator, 20(1), 22–27.
2. Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. (1996). Communicating student learning (1996 Yearbook). Alexandria, VA: Author.
3. Baumeister, R. E., (1996). Should schools try to boost self-esteem? American Educator, 20(2), 14–19, 43.
4. Beane, J. A., (1993). A middle school curriculum: From rhetoric to reality (2nd ed.). Columbus, OH: National Middle School Association.
5. Brewer, W. R., & Kallick, B., (1996). Technology's promise for reporting student learning. In Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development, Communicating student learning (pp. 178–187). Alexandria, VA: Author.
6. Brodhagen, B. L., (1995). The situation made us special. In M. W., Apple & J. A., Beane (Eds.), Democratic schools (pp. 83–100). Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
7. Giles, H. H., (1941). Teacher-pupil planning. New York: Harper.
8. Guskey, T. R., (1996). Reporting on student learning: Lessons from the past—prescriptions for the future. In Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development, Communicating student learning (pp. 13–24). Alexandria, VA: Author.
9. Hicks, B. G., (1995). Integrative units as middle level curriculum: An evaluative case study. (Doctoral Dissertation, University of Maine). Dissertation Abstracts International, 56(10), A3826
10. Kohn, A., (1993). Punished by rewards: The trouble with gold stars, incentive plans, A's, praise, and other bribes. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
11. Lake, J., & Kafka, K., (1996). Reporting methods in grades K-8. In Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development, Communicating student learning (pp. 114–115). Alexandria, VA: Author.
12. Lustig, K., (1996). Portfolio assessment: A handbook for middle level teachers. Columbus, OH: National Middle School Association.
13. Miel, A., & Associates. (1952). Cooperative procedures in learning. New York: Bureau of Publications, Teachers College, Columbia University.
14. National Middle school Association. (1995). This we believe: Developmentally responsive middle level schools. Columbus, OH: Author.
15. Pate, P. E., Homestead, E. R., & McGinnis, K. L., (1997). Making integrated curriculum work: Teachers, students and the quest for coherent curriculum. New York: Teachers College Press.
16. Popper, S. H., (1967). The American middle school: An organizational analysis. Waltham, MA: Blaisdell.
17. Van Til, W., Vars, G. F., & Lounsbury, J. H., (1961), Modern education for the junior high school years. Indianapolis, IN: Bobbs-Merrill.
18. Vars, G. F., (1992). Humanizing student evaluation and reporting. In J. L., Irvin (Ed.). Transforming middle level education (pp. 336–365). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
19. Wiggins, G., (1996). Honesty and fairness: Toward better grading and reporting. In Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development, Communicating student learning (pp. 141–177). Alexandria, VA: Author.
20. Willis, S., (1996). On the cutting edge of assessment: Testing what students can do with knowledge. Education Update (ASCD), 38(4), 1, 4–7.