Identifying and monitoring students' learning needs with technology

Transforming Data Into Knowledge: Applications of Data-based Decision Making To Improve Instructional Practice: A Special Issue of the journal of Education for Students Placed at Risk

Volumn , Issue , 2024, Pages 309-332

  Chen, Eva ^a   Heritage, Margaret ^a   Lee, John ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 85203613629     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: None     Document Type: Chapter

References (52)

1. American Educational Research Association. (2000, July). High-stakes testing inpreK-12 education. Retrieved April 25, 2005, from http://www.aera.net/policyandprograms/?id=378
2. American Educational Research Association, American Psychological Association, and National Council on Measurement in Education. (1999). Standards for educational and psychological testing. Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association.
3. Anderson, B., & Posti, B. (2001, April). Using large data sets as a basis for school improvement. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Seattle, WA.
4. Baker, E. L. (2001). Testing and assessment: A progress report. Educational Assessment, 7(1), 1-12.
5. Baker, E. L. (2003). From usable to useful assessment knowledge: A design problem (CSE Tech. Rep. No. 612). Los Angeles: University of California, National Center for Research on Evaluation, Standards, and Student Testing.
6. Baker, E. L., Linn, R. L., Herman, J. L., & Koretz, D. (2002, Winter). Standards for educational accountability systems (CRESST Policy Brief No. 5). Los Angeles: University of California, National Center for Research on Evaluation, Standards, and Student Testing.
7. Bernhardt, V. (2004). Data analysis for continuous school improvement. Larchmont, NY: Eye on Education.
8. Berrueta-Clement, J. R., Schweinhart, L. J., Barnett, W. S., Epstein, A. S., & Weikart, D. P. (1984). Changed lives: The effects of the Perry Preschool Program on youths through age 19. Ypsilanti, MI: The High/Scope Press.
9. Black, P., Harrison, C., Lee, C., & Wiliam, D. (2001, April). Theory and practice in the development of formative assessment. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Seattle, WA.
10. Black, P., Harrison, C., Lee, C., Marshall, B., & Wiliam, D. (2003). Assessment for learning: Putting it into practice. New York: Open University Press.
11. Black, P., & Michel, A. (Eds.). (1996). Learning from pupil assessment: International comparisons. Monographs of the Center for the Study of Evaluation, University of California, 72.
12. Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (1998a). Assessment and classroom learning. Assessment in Education, 5(1), 7-74.
13. Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (1998b). Inside the black box: Raising standards through classroom assessment. Phi Delta Kappan, 80, 139-148.
14. Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (2004). The formative purpose: Assessment must first promote learning. In M. Wilson (Ed.), Towards coherence between classroom assessment and accountability (p. 22). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
15. Bryant, D. M., & Maxwell, K. (1997). The effectiveness of early intervention for disadvantaged children. In M. J. Guralnick (Ed.), The effectiveness of early intervention (pp. 23-46). Baltimore: Brookes.
16. Campbell, F. A., & Ramey, C. T. (1995). Cognitive and school outcomes for high-risk African American students in middle adolescence: Positive effects of early intervention. American Educational Research Journal, 32, 743-772.
17. Choppin, J. (2002, April). Data use in practice: Examples from the school level. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans, LA. Retrieved April 22, 2002, from http://www.wcer.wisc.edu/mps/AERA2002/data_use_in_practice.htm
18. Cizek, G. J. (2000). Pockets of resistance in the assessment revolution. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practices, 79(2), 16-33.
19. Coffey, C., Sato, M., & Schneider, B. (2001, April). Classroom assessment up close-and personal. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Seattle, WA.
20. Cromey, A. (2000). Using student assessment data: What can we learn from schools? Policy Issues, 6. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED452593)
21. Darling-Hammond, L. (1990). Teacher professionalism: Why and how. In A. Lieberman (Ed.), Schools as collaborative cultures: Creating the future now (pp. 25-50). Bristol, PA: Falmer.
22. Dewey, J. (1897). My pedagogic creed. The School Journal, 54(3), 77-80. Retrieved December 7, 2004, from http://www.infed.org/archives/e-texts/e-dew-pc.htm
23. Garber, H. L. (1988). The Milwaukee Project: Prevention of mental retardation in children at risk. Washington, DC: American Association on Mental Retardation.
24. Glaser, R., & Baxter, G. P. (1999, September). Assessing active knowledge. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Center for Research on Evaluation, Standards, and Student Testing, University of California, Los Angeles.
25. Hall, G. E., & Hord, S. M. (2001). Implementing change: Patterns, principles, and potholes. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
26. Herman, J., & Gribbons, B., (2001). Lessons learned in using data to support school inquiry and continuous improvement: Final report to the Stuart Foundation (CSE Tech. Rep. No. 535). Los Angeles: University of California, National Center for Research on Evaluation, Standards, and Student Testing.
27. Herman, J. L. (2002). Instructional effects in elementary schools (CSE Tech. Rep. No. 577). Los Angeles: University of California, National Center for Research on Evaluation, Standards, and Student Testing.
28. Holcomb, E. L. (1999). Getting excited about data: How to combine people, passion, and proof. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.
29. Jester, R. E., & Guinagh, B. J. (1983). The Gordon Parent Education Infant and Toddler Program. In Consortium for Longitudinal Studies (Ed.), As the twig is bent... Lasting effects of preschool programs (pp. 103-132). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
30. Johnson, D. L., & Walker, T. (1991). A follow-up evaluation of the Houston Parent-Child Development Center: School performance. Journal of Early Intervention, 15, 226-236.
31. Joyce, B., & Showers, B. (1995). Student achievement through staff development: Fundamentals of school renewal (2nd ed.). White Plains, NY: Longman.
32. Khanna, R., Trousdale, D., Penuel, W. R., & Kell, J. (1999, April). Supporting data use among administrators: Results from a data planning model. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Montreal, Quebec, Canada.
33. Biruse, S., & Louis, K. S. (1995). Developing professional community in new and restructuring schools. In K. S. Louis, S. Kruse & Associates (Eds.), Professionalism and community: Perspectives on reforming urban schools (pp. 187-207). Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press
34. Lally, J. R., Mangione, P. L., & Honig, A. S. (1988). The Syracuse University Family Development Research Program: Long-range impact on an early intervention with low-income children and their families. In I. E. Sigel (Series Ed.) & D. R. Powell (Vol. Ed.), Annual advances in applied developmental psychology: Vol. 3. Parent education as early childhood intervention: Emerging directions in theory, research, and practice (pp. 79-104). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
35. Louis, K. S., Kruse, S., & Associates. (1995). Professionalism and community: Perspectives on reforming urban schools. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.
36. Louis, K. S., & Marks, H. (1998). Does professional community affect the classroom? Teachers' work and student work in restructuring schools. American Journal of Education, 106, 532-575.
37. Lyon, G. R. (2002, June). Learning disabilities & early intervention strategies: How to reform the special education referral & identification process. Statement before the House Committee on Education and the Workforce Subcommittee on Education Reform. Retrieved December 2, 2003, from U.S. Department of Health & Human Services Web site: http://www.hhs.gov/asl/testify/ t020606a.html
38. Marks, H., & Louis, K. S. (1999). Teacher empowerment and the capacity for organizational learning. Education Administration Quarterly, 35, 751-781.
39. National Research Council. [Pellegrino, J. W., Chudowsky, N., Glaser, R., (Eds.)]. (2001). Knowing what students know: The science and design of educational assessment. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
40. Newmann, E M., & Wehlage, G. G. (1995). Successful school restructuring: A report to the public and educators. Madison: University of Wisconsin, Wisconsin Center for Education Research, Center on Organization and Restructuring of Schools.
41. Rubenstein, M. C., & Wodatch, J. K. (2000). Stepping up to the challenge: Case studies of educational improvement in Title I secondary schools. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, Office of the Undersecretary, Planning, and Evaluation Service, Elementary and Secondary Education Division.
42. Shepard, L. (2000). The role of classroom assessment in teaching and learning (CSE Tech. Rep. No. 517). Los Angeles: University of California, National Center for Research on Evaluation, Standards, and Student Testing.
43. Shepard, L. A. (2004). Curricular coherence in assessment design. In M. Wilson (Ed.), Towards coherence between classroom assessment and accountability: Part II (pp. 239-249). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
44. Smithson, J. L., & Porter, A. C. (2004). From policy to practice: The evolution of one approach to describing and using curriculum data. In M. Wilson (Ed.), Towards coherence between classroom assessment and accountability: Part II (pp. 105-131). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
45. Spillane, J. R, & Louis, K. S. (2002). School improvement processes and practices: Professional learning for building instructional capacity. In J. Murphy (Ed.), The educational leadership challenge: Redefining leadership for the 21st century (pp. 83-104). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
46. Stiggins, R. J. (2002). Assessment crisis: The absence of assessment for learning. Phi Delta Kappan, 83, 758-765. Retrieved August 25, 2004, from http://www.pdkintl.org/kappan/k0206sti.htm
47. Thom, C. A. (2001). Knowledge management for educational information systems: What is the state of the field? Education Policy Analysis Archives, 9(41). Retrieved August 25, 2004, from http://epaa.asu.edu/epaa/v9n47/
48. Tighe, E., Wang, A., & Foley, E. (2002). An analysis of the effect of Children Achieving on student achievement in Philadelphia elementary schools. Philadelphia: Consortium for Policy Research in Education.
49. U.S. Department of Education. (2001). Twenty-third annual report to Congress on the implementation of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act. Washington, DC: Author.
50. Ward, M. (1998, April). A systems approach to middle school evaluation: Guilford County Schools 'formative approach. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Diego, CA.
51. Wayman, J. C., Stringfield, S., & Yakimowski, M. (2004). Software enabling school improvement through analysis of student data (Rep. No. 67). Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University, Center for Research on the Education of Students Placed At Risk.
52. Wise, S. L., Lukin, L. E., & Roos, L. L. (1991). Teacher beliefs about training in testing and measurement. Journal of Teacher Education, 42(1), 37-42.