Instructional policy and classroom performance: The mathematics reform in California

被引:219
作者
Cohen, DK [1 ]
Hill, HC [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Michigan, Dept Polit Sci, Ann Arbor, MI 48109 USA
来源
TEACHERS COLLEGE RECORD | 2000年 / 102卷 / 02期
关键词
D O I
10.1111/0161-4681.00057
中图分类号
G40 [教育学];
学科分类号
040101 ; 120403 ;
摘要
Educational reformers increasingly seek to manipulate policies regarding assessment, curriculum, and professional development in order to improve instruction. They assume that manipulating these elements of instructional policy will change teachers' practice, which will then improve student performance. We formalize these ideas into a rudimentary model of the relations among instructional policy teaching, and learning. We propose that successful instructional policies are themselves instructional in nature: because teachers figure as a key connection between policy and practice, their opportunities to learn about and from policy are a crucial influence both on their practice and, at least indirectly, on student achievement. Using data from a 1994 survey of California elementary school teachers and 1994 student California Learning Assessment System (CLAS) scores, we examine the influence of assessment, curriculum, bear out the usefulness of the model: under circumstances that we identify, policy can affect practice and both can affect student performance.
引用
收藏
页码:294 / 343
页数:50
相关论文
共 39 条
[1]  
[Anonymous], 1988, IMPROVING INDICATORS
[2]  
[Anonymous], 1984, IMPLEMENTATION
[3]  
[Anonymous], ANN M AM ED RES ASS
[4]  
[Anonymous], ED EVALUATION POLICY
[5]  
BALL DL, 1993, TEACHING UNDERSTANDI, P13
[6]  
BARR R, 1983, HOW SCH WORK
[7]  
Berliner D.C., 1979, RES TEACHING, P120
[8]  
Berman P., 1978, FEDERAL PROGRAMS SUP
[9]   STATISTICAL-METHODS FOR COMPARING REGRESSION-COEFFICIENTS BETWEEN MODELS [J].
CLOGG, CC ;
PETKOVA, E ;
HARITOU, A .
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF SOCIOLOGY, 1995, 100 (05) :1261-1293
[10]   POLICY AND PRACTICE - THE RELATIONS BETWEEN GOVERNANCE AND INSTRUCTION [J].
COHEN, DK ;
SPILLANE, JP .
REVIEW OF RESEARCH IN EDUCATION, 1992, 18 :3-49