How can the inspection process enhance improvement in special schools?

Abstract

The new system for the inspection of special schools was introduced in England in September 1994, using common criteria as those used for mainstream schools. One of the main purposes of inspection stated by the Office for Standards in Education (OFSTED) is school improvement. This paper presents the perceptions of headteachers of the inspection process arising from the first inspections carried out during September‐December 1994. The evidence base used on these inspections is also considered. These data are used to suggest that school improvement can be enhanced by the inspection process under certain conditions. A preliminary exploration of these conditions is provided in the paper. Implications for the school inspection process, school self‐review and future research questions are identified.     

Students as ‘catalysts’ in the classroom: the impact of co‐teaching between science student teachers and primary classroom teachers on children's enjoyment and learning of science

This study is an investigation of the impact of collaborative teaching by student‐teachers and classroom teachers on children’s enjoyment and learning of science. The paper describes findings from a project in which undergraduate science specialist student‐teachers were placed in primary schools where they ‘co‐taught’ investigative science and technology with primary teachers. Almost six months after the student placement, a survey of children’s attitudes to school science revealed that these children enjoyed science lessons more and showed fewer gender or age differences in their attitudes to science than children who had not been involved in the project. The authors discuss how this model of collaborative planning, teaching and evaluation can both enhance teacher education and improve children’s experience of science.     

Issues in identifying gifted students: How Renzulli's model stacks up

Traditional approaches to the identification of gifted and talented students are the subject of increasing scrutiny and criticism. Several problems, limitations and issues have been noted in the literature, and as a result, new conceptualizations and procedures have been advanced. Renzulli's Revolving Door Identification Model (RDIM) is one such model which has been widely adopted. This article first gives a brief summary of the model and investigates the reasons for its popularity. It then addresses some of the more serious criticisms that have been levelled against the model. Finally, it reviews what the authors feel are the more legitimate concerns about the model as they assess its validity and utility for identifying and serving gifted students.     

IDEALS AND METHODS OF RELIGIOUS EDUCATION FOR THE COMING WORLD ORDER∗

This article brings to bear on our understanding of learning many insights from the field of psychology

     

Learning to write in the street

In Mexico City there is a system of public scribes who function as written language brokers, composing letters, filling out forms, drawing up contracts, designing invitations or producing any other kind of written product that a client might require. The main question to be addressed in this paper is how the scribes learned their trade, and how they acquired the literacy practices and knowledge they need to make a living writing for others. The scribes' views about what they needed to learn and how they went about learning it is of interest to researchers and practitioners alike. Of particular relevance is the relationship they establish between the specific context in which they write and the use of ''local knowledge'' (as defined by Geertz) while writing. Their commentary on what they learned to do at school, what they learned to do in order to meet the demands of their clients, and how they must meet those demands is of particular interest at a time when educators are broadening their views about literacy, how it is learned, and how it is accomplished.     

The Earlier the Better? Individual Participant Data and Traditional Meta-analysis of Age Effects of Parenting Interventions

Strong arguments have been made for early intervention for child problems, stating that early is more effective than later, as the brain is more malleable, and costs are lower. However, there is scant evidence from trials to support this hypothesis, which we therefore tested in two well-powered, state-of-the-art meta-analyses with complementary strengths: (a) Individual participant data (IPD) meta-analysis of European trials of Incredible Years parenting intervention (k = 13, n = 1696; age = 2–11); (b) Larger, trial-level robust variance estimation meta-analysis of a wider range of parenting programs (k = 156, n = 13,378, M_age = 2–10) for reducing disruptive behavior. Both analyses found no evidence that intervention earlier in childhood was more effective; programs targeted at a narrower age range were no more effective than general ones.