中国留学生在美国的师生互动压力：以美国某大学为例

本文从师生互动的维度解析了中国留学生在美国大学中的学业压力因素.四种因素构成了中国学生和美国教授互动的主要压力因素:语言功力不足、缺少对学业的自治和自主引领、言语表达的被动性、交流模式的非直接性.中国学生的压力是中关两种文化模式和教育模式碰撞合力作用的结果.这为反思中国教育的问题提供了有效切入点.本文从英语语言教育和转变人才培养观念两个方面为中国教育提出了相应的建议.并指出中国学生应进行"深层结构性社会文化转化",充分适应美国大学的学术文化,与美国教授形成良性互动,最终减缓跨文化所带来的压力.     

MCLB (Much Curriculum Left Behind): A U.S. Calamity in the Making

The relationships between high-stakes testing, curriculum, and the economic needs of our nation are explored. High-stakes testing has been found to narrow the curriculum by forcing more attention to be paid to reading, mathematics, and test preparation. Less time is available for the arts and humanities and for activities that could promote creativity and critical thinking—skills needed for national success in the 21st century. High-stakes testing may ultimately weaken our nation, not improve it.     

When Dropping Out is Not a Permanent High School Outcome: Student Characteristics,Motivations, and Reenrollment Challenges

The customary perception is that students who drop out vanish from school enrollment rosters for good. This is an incomplete picture of the complex dropout story; dropping out is not necessarily a permanent high school outcome. Following the enrollment and course history of a district cohort of first-time 9th graders, this article documents the cohort's dropout, reenrollment, and graduation outcomes. One-third of dropouts reenrolled in district high schools, and older students and students behind in course credits were less likely to reenroll than other dropouts. Interviews with district administrators, high school principals, and reenrollees examined student motivations for reenrolling and challenges districts face when dropouts reenroll. Dropouts return primarily because of limited employment opportunities and efforts of school leaders to facilitate their return. Yet reenrollment created district challenges related to funding, accountability, and getting students who had dropped out on track to graduate.     

The educational journey of an Amish woman

In the United States, but not only here, the movement to evaluate teachers based on student test scores has received powerful political and parental support. The logic is simple. From one testing occasion to another students should show growth in their knowledge and skill. Similar types of students should show similar patterns of growth. Those students that show more growth than the average must have the better teachers, while those that show less growth than the average must have poorer teachers. If the value added by teachers to students' knowledge and skill, as measured by the students' test score growth is quite large, those teachers can be rewarded. If the value added is quite small, those teachers should be fired and replaced by better teachers. This simple and logical approach to teacher evaluation is, however, impossible to do fairly, reliably, and validly, but is nevertheless increasingly being used throughout the country. Here are my views on what is wrong with value-added models of teacher evaluation.