Group items tagged

Established at Johns Hopkins University in 1996, NNPS invites schools, districts, states, and organizations to join together and use research-based approaches to organize and sustain excellent programs of family and community involvement that will increase student success in school. "Based on more than three decades of research on parental involvement, family engagement, and community partnerships, NNPS's tools, guidelines, and action team approach may be used by all elementary, middle, and high schools to increase involvement and improve student learning and development," explains Dr. Joyce L. Epstein, Founder and Director of NNPS. NNPS also guides district leaders to help their schools develop goal-oriented programs of family involvement and community connections, and to meet NCLB requirements for parent involvement. In addition, NNPS assists state departments of education and organizations to develop policies and take actions that will support districts and schools in strengthening their partnership programs. Researchers and facilitators at the Center on School, Family, and Community Partnerships at Johns Hopkins University work with the members of NNPS to study the nature and results of involvement. NNPS aims to increase knowledge of new concepts and strategies; use research results to develop tools and materials that will improve policy and practice; provide professional development conferences and workshops; share best practices of parental involvement and community connections; and recognize excellent partnership programs at the school, district, organization, and state levels. This website provides NNPS members with updated information, research results, and ideas for action from the NNPS staff and members across the country. The site also informs prospective members about NNPS approaches, benefits, and services.

The mission of SEDL is to solve significant problems facing educational systems and communities to ensure a quality education for all learners. SEDL is committed to long-term, systematic, research- and experience-based solutions derived from research, development, evaluation, information provision, technical assistance, and professional development. SEDL's primary efforts are in five program areas: improving school performance, strengthening teaching and learning in content areas, integrating technology into teaching and learning, involving family and community in student learning, and connecting disability research to practice. Work in these areas concentrates on K-16 education and on underserved students, particularly those living in poverty. SEDL is a private, nonprofit corporation dedicated to fulfilling its mission with clients and other education stakeholders on a national, regional, state, and local basis through diverse and interrelated funding, partnerships, and projects.

"The purpose of this website is to provide anyone interested in improving U.S. schools with valuable information and resources about important issues in education and teaching. The information and resources presented here are the product of ongoing work by an education professor, Jeff Claus, at Ithaca College, in Ithaca, NY and students in one of his courses. "

This Policy Brief looks at how to improve equity in education in three key policy domains: the design of education systems, practices both in and out of school, and resourcing. It proposes ten steps which would help reduce school failure and dropout rates, make society fairer and help avoid the large social costs of marginalised adults with few basic skills.

Despite inroads made toward improving gender equality, children continue to be socially and academically disadvantaged due to gender inequality. This month, a special online edition of Our Children is calling attention to the ways attitudes toward gender may negatively affect girls and boys, and how schools and parents can ensure that all children reach their full potential.

ABSTRACT: The field of gifted education has faced criticism about the underrepresentation of African American, Hispanic/Latino, and American Indian students who are culturally and linguistically diverse (CLD) in its programs. This article proposes that efforts targeting both recruitment and retention barriers are essential to remedying this disparity. Educators' deficit thinking about CLD students underlies both areas (recruitment and retention) and contributes to underrepresentation in significant, meaningful ways. The authors examine factors hindering the recruitment and retention of CLD students in gifted education, attending in particular to definitions and theories, testing, and referral issues, and offer recommendations for improving the representation of CLD students in gifted education. A persistent dilemma at all levels of education is the underrepresentation of African American, American Indian, and Hispanic/Latino students in gifted education and advanced placement (AP) classes. Research on the topic of underrepresentation has tended to focus on African American students, starting with Jenkins's (1936) study, which found that despite high intelligence test scores African American students were not formally identified as gifted. For over 70 years, then, educators have been concerned about the paucity of Black students being identified as gifted. During this timeframe, little progress has been made in reversing underrepresentation. This lack of progress may be due in part to the scant database on gifted students who are culturally and linguistically diverse (CLD). In 1998, Ford reviewed trends in reports on underrepresentation spanning 2 decades and found that African American, Hispanic/Latino American, and American Indian students have always been underrepresented in gifted education, with underrepresentation increasing over the years for African American students. (Unlike African American, Hispanic/Latino, and American Indian students, Asian American

Two major premises are developed in this discussion. One is that many students of color are disproportionately assigned to special education because educators lack knowledge about or appreciation for their cultural values and socialization, and how these a€ ect learning behaviors. The other premise is that the educational quality of students of color in both special and regular education can be improved signi®cantly by using instructional programs and practices that re¯ect their cultural heritages, experiences, and perspectives. Several components of this ``culturally responsive teaching'' are explained, along with some research ®ndings about its e€ ects on student achievement. These include critical cultural consciousness of teachers; culturally pluralistic classroom climates; diverse communities of learners; and multicultural curriculum and instruction. The author concludes that without culturally responsive teaching education can never be the best it should be for students who are not part of the majority and mainstream of schools and society.

Two major premises are developed in this discussion. One is that many students of color are disproportionately assigned to special education because educators lack knowledge about or appreciation for their cultural values and socialization, and how these affect learning behaviors. The other premise is that the educational quality of students of color in both special and regular education can be improved significantly by using instructional programs and practices that reflect their cultural heritages, experiences, and perspectives. Several components of this ``culturally responsive teaching'' are explained, along with some research findings about its effects on student achievement. These include critical cultural consciousness of teachers; culturally pluralistic classroom climates; diverse communities of learners; and multicultural curriculum and instruction. The author concludes that without culturally responsive teaching education can never be the best it should be for students who are not part of the majority and mainstream of schools and society.