Search

This paper first introduces self-determination theory (SDT) to retention researchers and higher education professionals. Highlighted are the three basic psychological needs, that when met, are theorized to give rise to intrinsic motivation, which is associated with high levels of human performance. These are the needs for autonomy, competence, and relatedness. This theoretical overview is followed by a discussion of how this theory has been applied to understand the role of intrinsic motivation in fostering educational success. An outline of how SDT can be applied to increase college student retention is presented. The second part of the paper applies the understanding of self-determination theory to interpret and better understand the results of a focused literature review of 12 retention research articles. This interpretation suggests that meeting or failing to meet the psychological needs for autonomy, competence, and relatedness proposed by SDT may explain the results of research reviewed. It is theorized that college environments that meet all three psychological needs postulated by SDT will increase student retention beyond what prior approaches have achieved.

This study investigates how the role of the reading specialist (RS) is defined and communicated by principals, and examines to what degree a common understanding of this role exists among teachers, building administrators and reading specialists. The principal's responsibility in defining and communicating role, and the effect these efforts have on job satisfaction and specialists' perceived effectiveness is also studied. Eight elementary schools in the western part of New York State (USA) are studied. Based on interviews with principals and reading specialists and surveys completed by principals, reading specialists, and teachers, the following themes emerge: a) Principal leadership was essential in defining the RS role; b) A clearly defined RS role was associated with greater RS satisfaction and perceptions of effectiveness as well as greater teacher compliance; c) Greater teacher compliance with a school's literacy program did not affect beliefs about the proper role of RSs; d) Lack of a clearly defined role in a school was associated with role conflict and role ambiguity for reading specialists; e) Reading specialists, even without coaching responsibilities, served as a resource to teachers, although no time was allocated in their schedule to do so; f) Reading specialists faced challenges due to increased accountability and assessment demands affected by policy, demographics, and accountability requirements. It is concluded that principals must assume responsibility for defining and communicating the reading specialist role within their schools to strengthen literacy programming.

The implementation of value-added models of teacher evaluation continue to expand in public education, but the effects of using student test scores to evaluate K-12 physical educators necessitates further discussion. Using the five National Standards for K-12 Physical Education from the Society of Health and Physical Educators America (SHAPE), physical educators in New York State were polled about the most important goals of physical education and how value-added models may be affecting physical education practices. Participants were drawn using a proportionate stratified random sample (n=489). Standard 5 was selected as the most important by 36% of physical educators who responded, while standard 3 was chosen as most important by 33% of respondents. Thirty-eight percent of physical educators reported that their performance reviews were based on student growth scores on written tests, 27% reported that their district selected fitness tests, standardized tests in English Language Arts or mathematics were reported being used by 18% of respondents, and performance-based assessments were reported being used by 17% of those completing the survey. The authors concluded that the affective domain (crucial to SHAPE standard 5) appears to be overlooked by policies that use student performance data to determine teacher effectiveness.

While research on high stakes testing continues to expand, little is known about how the use of student test scores to evaluate teachers is affecting physical education (PE). A proportionate, stratified random sample of physical educators in New York State was drawn (n = 489) to survey them about their district's practices and their attitudes about the State's new teacher evaluation policy. Results indicated that 38 percent of respondents reported their district used students' written PE test results for teacher evaluation purposes, while 27 percent indicated that their district used student fitness tests for teacher evaluation purposes. Eighteen percent of respondents reported that their district used state-mandated English Language Arts (ELA) and mathematics test scores in calculating physical educators' effectiveness ranks. While few reported using performance-based measures, 94 percent of respondents indicated these as the preferred means of assessment in PE. Eighty-three percent of respondents predicted that the new teacher evaluation system would not improve PE.

Education "reform" is unfolding at an unprecedented rate, with little public input. The most discussed factor driving this transformation is the nearly $5 billion in discretionary funding provided to the United States Department of Education (USDOE) by the "American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009" (ARRA), known as Race to the Top (RTT). This program uses taxpayer funds to bribe states into compliance with increasingly unpopular USDOE reforms, including the use of test scores to evaluate teachers. Obama's "blueprint" for education, the administration's model for the reauthorization of the "Elementary and Secondary Education Act," likewise includes provisions for increased student testing and the use of student test scores for the evaluation of teachers based on student test scores. This article offers an analysis of these historic changes now taking place by exploring the origin and political significance of test-based teacher evaluation and compensation (TBTEC). The push for TBTEC is connected to broad changes in local and national governing arrangements as they relate to official claims that there is simply not enough money in the public treasury to support public education as in the past. The connection between demands for the radical restructuring of public education in general and TBTEC in particular, and the demand of the wealthy elite to cut spending on public education (and nearly every social program), provides an important starting point for the study of the origins of and political significance of TBTEC systems from a historical, economic, and political vantage point. To this end, the paper asks: What are the origins and political significance of current TBTEC schemes and what does this analysis suggest for effective opposition to current education "reform" efforts? The paper argues that the impetus for TBTEC is the drive of a faction of the super rich to cheapen education, with two distinct aims, especially for those students who are the object of "achievement gap" rhetoric: (1) to reduce the total financial expenditure on public schooling; and (2) to lower the quality of education by converting public schooling into a guaranteed revenue/profit generator for venture capital and other corporate and banking interests.

The author of this article challenges a common assumption made by both critics and defenders of standardized-testing technology (or psychometry), namely that standardized tests "measure" something (culture, ability, etc.). It argues that psychometric practice cannot be classified as a form of measurement and instead is best understood as a marker of social value, an inherently political act. The chapter concludes by suggesting the significance of this argument for debates regarding "standards," "accountability," and educational assessment more generally. (Contains 9 notes.)

Advanced by powerful venture philanthropies, educational technology companies, and the US Department of Education, a growing movement to apply "big data" through "learning analytics" to create "personalized learning" is currently underway in K-12 education in the United States. While scholars have offered various critiques of the corporate school reform agenda, the role of personalized learning technology in the corporatization of public education has not been extensively examined. Through a content analysis of United States Department of Education reports, personalized learning advocacy white papers, and published research monographs, this paper details how big data and adaptive learning systems are functioning to redefine educational policy, teaching, and learning in ways that transfer educational decisions from public school classrooms and teachers to private corporate spaces and authorities. The analysis shows that all three types of documents position education within a reductive set of economic rationalities that emphasize human capital development, the expansion of data-driven instruction and decision-making, and a narrow conception of learning as the acquisition of discrete skills and behavior modification detached from broader social contexts and culturally relevant forms of knowledge and inquiry. The paper concludes by drawing out the contradictions inherent to personalized learning technology and corporatization of schooling. It argues that these contradictions necessitate a broad rethinking of the value and purpose of new educational technology.

This article explores the role of Pell grants in the rise of for-profit colleges and universities (FPCUs) in the United States by examining National Center for Education Statistics data (Pell are financial "needs-based" grants to students to offset cost of tuition; Pell grants are the main source of federal financial support available to FPCUs). Two major findings are discussed: FPCUs have more than double the percentage of enrollment previously reported and receive greater Pell per FTE than not-for-profits (NFPs) or publics. FPCUs spend less on instruction than NFPs while some institutions have more Pell revenue than instructional expenses. Implications for educational inequality and public purposes of higher education are discussed. (Contains 12 tables and 7 endnotes.)

This article contributes to the growing body of research exploring the importance of the social context in shaping the use of educational technologies. It presents the results of a 3 1/2-year instrumental case study examining the power of the social context to shape, in negative ways, the use of technology in one urban elementary school. Three unsuccessful dynamics are identified that serve to block effective instructional uses of computers and these behaviors are related to what Linda McNeil described as "defensive teaching." These unsuccessful interactions, it is argued, represent actors efforts to resolve the dilemma of how to get through the day without confronting the overwhelming instructional tasks teachers and students at the school face. The authors conclude by noting that the use of technology did not strongly shape the interpersonal and political dynamics involved and that similar types of defensive teaching and learning can be found in educational situations without technology.

While research on high stakes testing continues to expand, little is known about how the use of student test scores to evaluate teachers is affecting physical education (PE). A proportionate, stratified random sample of physical educators in New York State was drawn (n=489) to survey them about their district's practices and their attitudes about the State's new teacher evaluation policy. Results indicated that 38 percent of respondents reported their district used students' written PE test results for teacher evaluation purposes, while 27 percent indicated that their district used student fitness tests for teacher evaluation purposes. Eighteen percent of respondents reported that their district used state-mandated English Language Arts (ELA) and mathematics test scores in calculating physical educators' effectiveness ranks. While few reported using performance-based measures, 94 percent of respondents indicated these as the preferred means of assessment in PE. Eighty-three percent of respondents predicted that the new teacher evaluation system would not improve PE. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article explores the role of Pell grants in the rise of for-profit colleges and universities (FPCUs) in the United States by examining National Center for Education Statistics data (Pell are financial "needs-based" grants to students to offset cost of tuition; Pell grants are the main source of federal financial support available to FPCUs). Two major findings are discussed: FPCUs have more than double the percentage of enrollment previously reported and receive greater Pell per FTE than not-for-profits (NFPs) or publics. FPCUs spend less on instruction than NFPs while some institutions have more Pell revenue than instructional expenses. Implications for educational inequality and public purposes of higher education are discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The author of this article challenges a common assumption made by both critics and defenders of standardized-testing technology (or psychometry), namely that standardized tests "measure" something (culture, ability, etc.). It argues that psychometric practice cannot be classified as a form ot' measurement and instead is best understood as a marker of social value, an inherently political act. The chapter concludes by suggesting the significance of this argument for debates regarding "standards," "accountability," and educational assessment more generally. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]