“Effective for What; Effective for Whom?” Two Questions SESI Should Not Ignore

Springer International Handbooks of Education

Volumn 17, Issue , 2007, Pages 93-110

  Bogotch, Ira ^a   Mirón, Luis ^a   Biesta, Gert ^a  

^a NONE

Author keywords

Educational Researcher; Educational Theory; Participatory Action Research; School Improvement; School Reform

Indexed keywords

EID: 85178886874     PISSN: 21971951     EISSN: 2197196X     Source Type: Book Series    
DOI: 10.1007/978-1-4020-5747-2_6     Document Type: Chapter

References (53)

1. Bettelheim, B. (1969). The Children of the dream. Macmillan Publishing Co.
2. Biesta, G. J. J. (1994). Education as practical intersubjectivity. Towards a critical-pragmatic understanding of education. Educational Theory, 44(3), 299–317.
3. Biesta, G. J. J. (1995). Pragmatism as a pedagogy of communicative action. In J. Garrison (Ed.), The new scholarship on John Dewey (pp. 105–122). Dordrecht/Boston/London: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
4. Biesta, G. J. J. (1998). Mead, intersubjectivity, and education: The early writings. Studies in Philosophy and Education, 17, 73–99.
5. Biesta, G. J. J. (1999). Redefining the subject, redefining the social, reconsidering education: George Herbert Mead’s course on Philosophy of Education at the University of Chicago. Educational Theory, 49(4), 475–192.
6. Biesta, G. J. J. (2004). Education, accountability and the ethical demand. Can the democratic potential of accountability be regained? Educational Theory, 54(3), 233–250.
7. Biesta, G. J. J. (2005). George Herbert Mead and the theory of schooling. In D. Troehler, & J. Oelkers (Eds.), Pragmatism and education (pp. 117–132). Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.
8. Biesta, G. J. J. (2006). “‘Of all affairs, communication is the most wonderful.’ Education as communicative praxis.” In D. T. Hansen (Ed.), John Dewey and our educational prospect. A critical engagement with Dewey’s democracy and education (pp. 23–37). Albany, NY: SUNY Press.
9. Biesta, G. J. J., & Burbules, N. (2003). Pragmatism and educational research. Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield.
10. Bodilly, S. (1998). Lessons from New American Schools’ scale-up phase: Prospects for bringing designs to multiple schools. Rand: Santa Monica, CA.
11. Bogotch, I. (1997). Private conversations: Listening for leadership in real schools. International Journal of Educational Reform, 6(3), 274–283.
12. Bogotch, I., & Roy, C. (1997). The context of partial truths: An analysis of principal’s discourse. Journal of Educational Administration, 35(3), 234–252.
13. Bogotch, I., & Taylor, D. (1993). Discretionary assessment practices: Professional judgments and principal’s actions. The Urban Review, 25(4), 289–306.
14. Carr, D. (1992). Practical enquiry, values and the problem of educational theory. Oxford Review of Education, 18(3), 241–251.
15. Coe, R., & Fitz-Gibbon, C. T. (1998). School effectiveness research: Criticisms and recommendations. Oxford Review of Education, 24(4), 421–438.
16. Coleman, J. [and others] (1966). Equality of educational opportunity. Washington, U.S. Dept. of Health, Education, and Welfare, Office of Education: The Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Govt. Printing Office.
17. Dahl, R., & Lindblom, C. (1953). Politics, economics and welfare. New York: Harper Torchbooks.
18. de Jong, R., Westerhof, K. J., & Kruiter, J. H. (2004). Empirical evidence of a comprehensive model of school effectiveness: A multilevel study in mathematics in the 1st year of junior general education in the Netherlands. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 15(1), 3–31.
19. Denzin, N. (2003). Performance ethnography: Critical pedagogy and the politics of culture. Thousand Oaks, California: Sage.
20. Edmonds, R. (1979). Effective schools for the urban poor. Educational Leadership, 37, 15–24.
21. Engestrom, Y. (2001). Expansive learning at work: Towards an activity-theoretical reconceptualisation. Journal of Education and Work, 14(1), 133–156.
22. Fine, M. (1994). Distance and other stances. Negotiations of power inside feminist research. In Andrew Gitlin (Ed.), Power and method. New York: Routledge.
23. Fine, M. (2005). Contesting research: Rearticulation and “hick democracy”as political projects of method. In Greg Dimitriadis, Cameron McCarthy, & Lois Weis (Eds.), Ideology, curriculum, and the new sociology of education: Revisiting the work of Michael Apple. New York: Routledge.
24. Fine, M., Tuck, J., & Zeller-Berkman, S. (2006). Methods and ethics at the global local nexus. Paper presented at the second meeting of the International Congress on Qualitative Inquiry. University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign.
25. Fine, M., & Vanderslice, V. (1992). Reflections on qualitative activist research: Politics and methods. In E. Posavac (Ed.), Methodological issues in applied social psychology. New York: Plenum.
26. Finn, Jr., C. (1990). The biggest reform of all. Phi Delta Kappen, 71, 584–92.
27. Finn, Jr., C., & Walberg, H. (Eds.). (1994). Radical educational reforms. Berkeley, CA: McCutchan Publishing Corp.
28. Fullan, M., & Miles, M. (1992). Getting reform right: What works and what doesn't. Phi Delta Kappan, 73(10), 744–752.
29. Gray, J. (2004). School effectiveness and the “other outcomes” of secondary schooling: A reassessment of three decades of British research. Improving Schools, 2, 185–198.
30. Heritage, M., & Yeagley, R. (2005). Data use and school improvement. In J. Herman, & E. Haertel (Eds.), Uses and misuses of data for educational accountability and improvement. The 104th Yearbook of the National Society for the Study of Education, Part 2. (pp. 320–339). Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing.
31. Holly, P. (1986). Soaring like turkeys – the impossible dream? School organization, 6(3), 346–364.
32. Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
33. Luyten, H., Visscher, A., & Witziers, B. (2005). School effectiveness research: From a review of the criticism to recommendations for further development. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 16(3), 249–279.
34. Mirón, L. (2005). Performance and performativity: New directions for ethnography or just another word game? Paper presented to the Bureau of Educational Research. College of Education. University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign, October 2005.
35. Mirón, L. (in press). Multiple racial subjects: Transnational, national, and indigenous peoples: Beyond categorization. In N. Denzin (Ed.), Handbook of critical methodologies. Thousand Oaks, Ca: Sage.
36. Mortimer, P. (2001). Globalization, effectiveness and improvement. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 12(2), 229–250.
37. Mujis, D., Harris, A., Chapman, C., Stoll, L., & Russ, J. (2004). Improving schools in socioeconomically disadvantaged areas – A review of research evidence. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 15(2), 149–175.
38. Reynolds, D., & Teddlie, C. (2001). Reflections on the critics, and beyond them. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 12(1), 99–114.
39. Roman, L., & Apple, M. (1990). Is naturalism a move away from positivism? In Elliot Eisner, & Alan Peshkin (Eds.), Qualitative inquiry in education. New York: Teachers College Press.
40. Rutter, M., & Maugham, B. (2002). School effectiveness findings 1979–2002. Journal of School Psychology, 40(6), 451–475.
41. Silins, H., & Mulford, B. (2004). Schools as learning organisations – effects on teacher leadership and student outcomes. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 15(3–4), 443–466.
42. Taylor, F. (1911/1967). The principles of scientific management. New York: W.W. Norton & Company.
43. Teddlie, C., & Reynolds, D. (2001). Countering the critics: Responses to recent criticisms of school effectiveness research. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 12(1), 41–82.
44. Thompson, J. D. (1967). Organizations in action: Social science bases of administrative theory. New York: McGraw-Hill.
45. Thrupp, M. (2001). Sociological and political concerns about school effectiveness research: Time for a new research agenda. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 12(1), 7–40.
46. Townsend, T. (2001). Satan or savior? An analysis of two decades of school effectiveness research. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 12(1), 115–130.
47. Tyack, D., & Tobin, W. (1994). The “grammar” of schooling: Why has it been so hard to change? American Educational Research Journal, 31, 453–479.
48. Usher, R., & Edwards, R. (1996). Postmodernism and education. London: Routledge.
49. Vanderstraeten, R., & Biesta, G. J. J. (2001). How is education possible? Educational Philosophy and Theory, 33(1), 7–21.
50. Vanderstraeten, R., & Biesta, G. J. J. (2006). How is education possible? A pragmatist account of communication and the social organisation of education. British Journal of Educational Studies, 54(2), 160–174.
51. Walford, G. (2002). Redefining school effectiveness. Westminster Studies in Education, 25(1), 47–58.
52. Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice: Learning, meaning, and identity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
53. Wonycott, A., & Bogotch, I. (1997). Reculturing: Assumptions, beliefs, and values underlying the processes of restructuring. Journal of School Leadership, 7(1), 27–49.