|
Federal Legislation and State Standards for Accountability in Assessment Education: Evaluating Policy Implementation in Teacher Preparation Programs
|
| Presenter(s):
|
| Aarti Bellara, University of South Florida, abellara@usf.edu
|
| Christopher Deluca, University of South Florida, cdeluca@usf.edu
|
| Abstract:
Since the onset of the accountability movement in education, states have significantly increased their use of large-scale standardized assessments as measures of student achievement, teacher effectiveness, and instruments of public policy (Mazzeo, 2001; McMillan, 2008). Moreover, under current federal legistalation (NCLB) there has been a growing emphasis on teachers' use of classroom assessment information to guide instruction and individualize student programming. Despite the current emphasis on assessment, little research has been conducted that examines the alignment between national and state policies and teacher preparation in assessment. The purpose of this paper is to evaluate the alignment between preparatory assessment education courses and current assessment policies including National Council for Accreditation of Teacher Education and Florida Department of Education teacher education accreditation standards.
|
|
Federal Policy and Program Educational Evaluations: A Review of Evaluation for Multiple Federal Agencies
|
| Presenter(s):
|
| Julie Gloudemans, University of South Florida, julie.gloudemans@gmail.com
|
| Abstract:
This paper reviews 87 publically-accessible federal educational evaluations that were conducted during a 3 year period (from 2007 to 2010). These evaluations span four different federal agencies: Office of Management and Budget; Policy and Program Studies Services within the Office of Planning, Evaluation and Policy Development; Evaluation, Inspection, and Management Services within the Office of Inspector General; and the General Accountability Office. The research was limited to only publically accessible evaluations and did not include federally-funded local evaluations. The paper determined that there were some overall similarities (e.g. most evaluations were focused outcomes and specified evaluation questions). However, there were differences between departments (e.g. Policy and Program Studies Services used third party contractors to conduct evaluation that largely used secondary data and sophisticated statistical techniques).
|
| |