Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t7fkt Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-24T09:30:47.222Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Improving teaching and learning: A thermos bottle keeps things hot and cold, but how does it know?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  26 February 2016

Jim Ysseldyke
Jim Ysseldyke*
Affiliation:
National Center on Educational Outcomes, University of Minnesota
*
Address for: Jim Ysseldyke, National Center on Educational Outcomes, 350 Elliot Hall, University of Minnesota, 75 East River Road, Minneapolis, MN55455 USA.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The topic we are addressing in this session is improving teaching and learning. We are talking about improving teaching and learning. I assume our focus is on improving teaching and learning for those students who are resistant to instruction and for whom we need to intensify our instructional efforts. These students are present in all of our classrooms. There are three things that are necessary in order to improve teaching and learning. We must know:

• Where we are going (goals)

• How best to achieve the goals (effective strategies and tactics)

• Whether we have achieved the goals (accountability)

Type
Research Article
Information
Australasian Journal of Special Education , Volume 22 , Issue 3 , 1999 , pp. 133 - 147
Copyright
Copyright © The Australian Association of Special Education 1999

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Advantage Learning Systems (1999). Accelerated Math.Google Scholar
Algozzine, B., & Ysseldyke, J. (1992). Strategies and tactics for effective instruction. Longmont, CO: Sopris West.Google Scholar
Algozzine, B., Ysseldyke, J., & Elliott, J. (1998). Strategies and tactics for effective instruction. Second Edition. Longmont, CO: Sopris West.Google Scholar
Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (1998). Inside the black box: Raising standards through classroom assessment. Phi Delta Kappan, 80, 139–150.Google Scholar
Center, Y., & Freeman, L. (1996). The use of a structured literacy program to facilitate the inclusion of marginal and special education students into regular classes. ERIC Clearinghouse: ERIC Document No. ED405673.Google Scholar
Center, Y., & Freeman, L. (1997). A trial evaluation of SWELL (Schoolwide Early Language and Literacy): A whole class early literacy program for at-risk and disadvantaged children. International Journal of Disability, Development, and Education, 44 (1), 21–39.Google Scholar
Clay, M. (1990). Reading recovery in the United States: Its successes and challenges. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Boston, MA.Google Scholar
Cormack, M., & Winter, P. (1997). Reflections and recommendations: Effective funding for children and students with disabilities -toward a new practice. Adelaide, South Australia: Minesterial Advisory Committee -Students with Disabilities.Google Scholar
Common and agreed national goals for schooling in Australia (1997). National Report on Schooling in Australia.Google Scholar
Deschamp, P. (1995). Case studies of the implementation of the First Steps Project in twelve schools. ERIC Clearinghouse: ERIC Document No. ED419425.Google Scholar
Elliott, J., Algozzine, B., & Ysseldyke, J. (1999). Tlmesavers for Educators. Longmont, CO: Sopris West.Google Scholar
Greenwood, C., & Delquadri, J. (1995). Class wide peer tutoring and the prevention of school failure. Preventing School Failure 39 (4), 21–25.Google Scholar
Greenwood, C., Finney, R., Terry, B., Arreaga-Mayer, C., Carta, J., Delquadri, J., Walker, D., Innocenti, M., Lignugaris-Kraft, J., Harper, G.F., & Clifton, R. (1993). Monitoring, improving, and maintaining quality implementation of the classwide peer tutoring program using behavioral and computer technology. Education and Treatment of Children, 16(1), 19–47 Google Scholar
Greenwood, C., Terry, B., Arreaga-Mayer, C., & Finney, R. (1992). The classwide peer tutoring program: Implementation factors moderating students’ achievement. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 25, 101–116.Google Scholar
Johnson, D., & Johnson, R. (1995) Learning together and alone. Boston: Houghton-Mifflin.Google Scholar
McGrath, C. (1996). Violence in schools: Principals’ perspectives. In Wright, J. (Ed.), SET: Research Information for Teachers. pp. 10–14. Melbourne: ACER.Google Scholar
Slavin, R., Madden, N. Karweit, N. Dolan, L., & Wasik, B. (1992). Success for All: A relentless approach to prevention and early intervention in elementary schools. Arlington, VA: Educational Research Service.Google Scholar
Slavin, R., Stevens, R., & Madden, N. (1988). Accommodating student diversity in reading and writing instruction: A cooperative learning approach. Remedial and Special Education, 9, 60–66.Google Scholar
Topping, K., & Ehly, S. (1998). Peer-assisted learning. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vanderwood, M., Ysseldyke, J., & Thurlow, M. (1993). Consensus building: A process for selecting educational outcomes and indicators (Outcomes and Indicators No. 2). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota, National Center on Educational Outcomes.Google Scholar
Ysseldyke, J., & Christenson, S. (1996). The instructional environment system-II. Longmont, CO: Sopris West.Google Scholar