对中小学择校问题的再思考

对于中小学择校现象应当重新予以认识。择校是指人们对就读学校的选择,在当前具有合理性和必然性。目前择校主要有以分择校、以权择校和以钱择校等三种形式。合理的择校应当以学生的素质为依据,同时视学校的具体情况确定招收择校生的数量及收费标准。择校既具有积极的意义,也有一定的负面影响。解决择校问题要从政府、社会和学校等多方面着手。     

Classing schools

School prospectuses and promotional videos appeal to parents by presenting idealised images of the education a school provides. These educational idealisations visually realise the form of discipline a school is expected to provide, depending on the social habitus of the parents. This paper presents a content analysis of the images used in 33 sets of marketing materials from a maximally diverse sample of schools from the state of Victoria. These images are interpreted using the lenses of Bernstein's control and Bourdieu's habitus and cultural capital. The promotional images are found to vary systematically in terms of content and form depending on the perceived social class of the students which the schools attract.     

构建江西省大中小学德育体系的基本思路——“江西省大中小学德育体系整体规划研究”报告

教育部在2005年颁布了《关于整体规划大中小学德体系的意见》（以下简称《意见》）,《意见》对于加强和改进大学生思想政治教育和中小学生思想道德教育工作,构建具有时代性、把握规律性、增强实效性的大中小学德育体系具有普遍的指导意义。《意见》是针对构建全国性的大中小学德育体系而颁布的,这就决定了它只能忽略差异性而寻求共同性与统一性。这种普遍、共同的、统一的德育体系对地方德育体系和校本德育体系的构建具有宏观指导作用,但它不能取代地方性德育体系。     

职业中学试办综合高中的理性思考

主要分析了目前高校扩招、普高升温、中等职业教育出现了暂时的滑坡现象后,职业学校为了扭转这种局面,增强办学活力,试办或举办综合高中的动因、存在的主要问题及几点建议。     

British grammar schools

Many English novels have talked ＇about grammar schools. But not all grammar schools are private ones. Public authorities run most of them. According to the arrangement of the grammar school system, children begin their education at the age of five. They first enter infants＇ schools and study for two years. These pupils then move to the second stage and study four years more. These six years combine to make the primary school stage. At the end of the stage pupils are eleven and they take public examinations called the ＂eleven plus＂ which are given by the examining boards. Those who get high marks in the ＂eleven plus＂ can enter grammar schools while those who fail to do well have to enter other kinds of schools called secondary modem schools.     

Computers in schools

He has been responsible for OECD publications in this area and has written many articles in this and other educational fields.     

Learning from schools

Many of the problems faced by those concernedto improve learning, teaching, assessment andcurriculum have also troubled the compulsoryeducation sector. This paper argues that thehigher education sector can learn from theextensive archive of international researchabout schooling. This is illustrated by briefcommentaries on five facets of school-centredresearch: subject departments; schooleffectiveness and school improvement; teachers'thinking and planning; assessment; andprofessional learning. It is claimed thatresearch into schooling can illuminate thinkingabout quality and curriculum in highereducation and that it can inspire better changepractices.     

Leading Innovation and Change: knowledge creation by schools for schools

This article explores the process and practice of knowledge creation within development and research (D and R) networks. It focuses upon D and R networks in England that are currently engaged in collaboration and innovation. Early evaluative evidence suggests that D and R school networks offer 'spaces' for collaborative working, mutual sharing and active dissemination of knowledge. The evidence also suggests that D and R networks are beginning to positively impact upon instructional practices and learning. The article concludes that these networks have the potential to provide an important infrastructure for co-construction and knowledge creation by schools for schools.     

Progressivism,schools and schools of education: An American romance

This paper tells a story about progressivism, schools and schools of education in twentieth‐century America. Depending on one's position in the politics of education, this story can assume the form of a tragedy or a romance, or perhaps even a comedy. The heart of the tale is the struggle for control of American education in the early twentieth century between two factions of the movement for progressive education. The administrative progressives won this struggle, and they reconstructed the organization and curriculum of American schools in a form that has lasted to the present day. Meanwhile the other group, the pedagogical progressives, who failed miserably in shaping what we do in schools, did at least succeed in shaping how we talk about schools. Professors in schools of education were caught in the middle of this dispute, and they ended up in an awkwardly compromised position. Their hands were busy—preparing teachers to work within the confines of the educational system established by the administrative progressives, and carrying out research to make this system work more efficiently. But their hearts were with the pedagogues. So they became the high priests of pedagogical progressivism, keeping this faith alive within the halls of the education school, and teaching the words of its credo to new generations of educators. Why is it that American education professors have such a longstanding, deeply rooted and widely shared rhetorical commitment to the progressive vision? The answer can be found in the convergence between the history of the education school and the history of the child‐centered strand of progressivism during the early twentieth century. Historical circumstances drew them together so strongly that they became inseparable. As a result, progressivism became the ideology of the education professor. Education schools have their own legend about how this happened, which is a stirring tale about a marriage made in heaven, between an ideal that would save education and a stalwart champion that would fight the forces of traditionalism to make this ideal a reality. As is the case with most legends, there is some truth in this account. But here a different story is told. In this story, the union between pedagogical progressivism and the education school is not the result of mutual attraction but of something more enduring: mutual need. It was not a marriage of the strong but a wedding of the weak. Both were losers in their respective arenas: child‐centered progressivism lost out in the struggle for control of American schools, and the education school lost out in the struggle for respect in American higher education. They needed each other, with one looking for a safe haven and the other looking for a righteous mission. As a result, education schools came to have a rhetorical commitment to progressivism that is so wide that, within these institutions, it is largely beyond challenge. At the same time, however, this progressive vision never came to dominate the practice of teaching and learning in schools—or even to reach deeply into the practice of teacher educators and researchers within education schools themselves.     

Transtheoretical-based bullying prevention effectiveness trials in middle schools and high schools

Background Bullying threatens the physical and mental well-being of students across a broad range of schools. Tailored interventions based on the Transtheoretical model and delivered over the Internet were designed to reduce participation in each of three roles related to bullying (bully, victim and passive bystander).

Methods Effectiveness trials were completed in 12 middle schools and 13 high schools in the USA. A diverse sample of 1237 middle (6th–8th grade, with 45.1% in the 7th grade; ages 11–14) and 1215 high school (9th–11th grade, with 41.6% in the 9th grade; ages 14–17) students were available for analyses.

Results Analyses showed significant treatment effects for both intervention groups when compared to control for both the middle and high school programs.

Conclusions Given the relative ease of dissemination, these programs could be applied as stand-alone practices or as part of more intensive interventions.