Download - Southern University New Orleans

More documents

Recommendations

Info

26Journal of Urban Education: Focus on Enrichment________________________________________________________________________________________________________Carrasquillo, A. L. and Rodríguez, V. (2002). Languageminority students in the mainstream classroom. Clevedon,England: Multilingual Matters, Ltd.Carson, C. (2003). Civil rights chronicle: the African-American struggle for freedom. Lincolnwood, Ill:Legacy Publishing.Christian, D., Howard, E., and Loeb, M. (2000). Bilingualismfor all: two-way immersion education inthe United States. Theory into Practice, 39(4), 258-266.Collier, V. P. and Thomas, W. P. (2005). The beauty ofdual language education. The TABE Journal, 8(1), 1-6.Collier, V.P. and Thomas, W. P. (2004). The astoundingeffectiveness of dual language education for all.NABE Journal of Research and Practice, 2(1), 1-20.Crawford, J. (2000). At war with diversity; U. S. languagepolicy in an age of anxiety.Buffalo, N. Y.; MultilingualMatters, Ltd.Crawford, J. (2007). Hard sell: Why is bilingual educationso unpopular with the American public? In O.Garcia & C. Baker (Eds.) Bilingual Education: An IntroductoryReader. Clevedon, England: MultilingualMatters.Day, J. C. (1996). Population projections of the UnitedStates by age, sex, race, and Hispanic origin: 1995to 2050. In Current population reports populationprojections of the United States by age, race, andHispanic origin by 1995 to 2050 (U. S. Bureau of theCensus, Current Population Reports ed., pp. 25-1130). Washington, DC: U. S. Government PrintingOffice.Domke-Damonte, D. (2001). Language learning and internationalbusiness. SAM Advanced ManagementJournal, 66(1), 35.Funke, L. (1920). The Negro in education. The Journal ofNegro History, 5(1), 1-21.Galveston Independent School District. (2009). Recordsobtained via the Freedom of Information Act. ObtainedApril 6, 2009.Genesee, F. (1987). Learning through two languages:studies of immersion and bilingual Education. Boston,MA; Heinle & Heinle.programs in Texas. Bilingual Research Journal, 28(1),35-54.Lindholm-Leary, K. (2004/2005). The rich promise oftwo-way immersion. Educational Leadership, 62(4),56-59.Lindholm-Leary, K. (2000). Biliteracy for a global society:An idea book on dual language education. Washington,DC: National Clearinghouse for Bilingual Education.Linholm-Leary, K. (2001). Dual language education. Clevedon,England: Multilingual Matters.Lyon, J. (1996). Becoming bilingual: language acquisitionin a bilingual community. Clevedon, England: MultilingualMatters.National Virtual Translation Center. (2007). Languages ofthe world. Retrieved October 19, 2008 fromhttp://www.nvtc.gov/lotw/months/november/worldlanguages.htm.Nicoladis, Taylor, Lambert, & Cazabon. (1998). Whattwo-way bilingual programmes reveal about thecontroversy surrounding race and intelligence. InternationalJournal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism,1(2), 134-148.Shin, H. B., with Bruno, R. (2003). Language use andEnglish-speaking ability: 2000. In Census 2000 briefsand special reports (U. S. Bureau of the Census, Census2000 Brief, pp.1-11.). Washington, DC: U. S.Government Printing Office.Torres-Guzman. (2007). Dual language programs: Keyfeatures and results. In O. Garcia & C. Baker (Eds.),Bilingual education: An introductory reader (pp. 56-58). Clevedon, England: Multilingual Matters.Vance, C. W. (2004, Fall). Preparing a prosperous future:promoting culture and business through bilingualeducation. Bilingual Research Journal, 28(3), 463-483.White, A. O. (1969). The Black movement against JimCrow education in Buffalo, New York, 1800-1900.Phylon 30(4), 375-393.World population trends. (2008.) Retrieved April 10,2008 from the International Data Base athttp://www.census.gov/ipc/www/idb/worldpopinfo.html.Hetherington, E. M., Parke, R., Gauvain, M., & Locke, V.(2006). Child psychology: a Contemporary viewpoint.(6th ed.). Boston: McGraw-Hill.Lara-Alecio, R., Galloway, M., Rodriguez, L., & Gomez,L. (2004, Spring). Two way immersion bilingual
OVERCOMING EDUCATIONAL THRALLDOMS ANDGROWING QSTELL - QUALITY STUDENTING,TEACHING AND LEARNING TO LEARN.Lucian A. Szlizewski, 4 Ph.D.Western Carolina UniversityAbstract: This discourse focuses on improving the qualityof studenting, teaching and learning to learn (QSTeLL).QSTeLL - are qualities of mind and student logic thatmust be allowed to grow in each student (Studenting)and be present in any learning environment, especially indifficult and/or disadvantaged contexts. This discoursealso argues that both historical and contemporary approachesfor improvement are unlikely to succeed whenthese approaches are insufficiently differentiated to fitcontextualities that are too specific for easy replication ortransference. This discourse speaks to possible alternativepedagogy for classroom improvement and forwardsthe position that the classroom is the prime base for anyimprovement in social justice in schools, education, studentcitizenship, and social justice in society. This discourseargues against the traditional and dominant tendencyof imposing standardized solutions when an inclassroom differentiated approach is much more ideallysuited to QSTeLL.Astudent’s perspective of the world of schoolingcan be seen in the multiplicity of contentiouslearning expectations. Supposedly, studentsare prepared for the temporal aspect of livingbased on an industrial pedagogy intended to shapetheir character through the practice of appropriateness,conformity, conduct, and propriety. Society thenexpects these same students to challenge the statusquo they were socialized into by fitting in and beingdifferent while also thinking critically.Schooling and education pedagogies do reflect society.Formal educational opportunities, for many studentsin the dominant industrialized model, are contentiouslearning pedagogies. The effect has often been barrenof high quality for the majority of the studenting,teaching and learning to learn processes. With theLucian A. Szlizewski is Assistant Professor in the department ofEducational Leadership and Foundations at Western Carolina University.Dr. Szlizewski has also served as Teacher - 5 th and 6 thgraded self-contained classroom teacher for 9 years at an inner cityschool; school principal, and later as a public school superintendentMadison, Ohio.improved quality of studenting – students usingknowledge and skills to evaluate, synthesize, and producenew or expanded knowledge - teaching andlearning to learn are essential if opportunities are to bedeveloped that will enhance each learner’s private logicand reduce many of the unpleasant anticipations sohighly visible is so many classrooms, e.g., boring lectureswith note taking and mindless worksheets.Classrooms with low cognitive and low quality pedagogy,bereft of rudimentary social justice, preventmany of these students, who have been systemicallydisenfranchised and become disaffected, from findingfew, if any, opportunities for success. Every schoolhousehas an abundance of classrooms that are segmentedand nascent traditional factory productionlines which further adds to the social injustice extantin our society and cultural surround.The contemporary concern for the education of lowerclasswhites and minority groups in American societyemerges primarily from the practice of identification,classification, and labeling of such students as slow orinferior (Brookover, Gigliotti, Henderson, Nile, &Schneider, 1974, p. 162).Education history, predating much of Dewey’s (1899,1916 and 1919) work, shows a perpetual interest ingenerating and sustaining improvements in all classroomswhere, from time to time, there is an increasedsocial urgency for ways to raise QSTeLL, especiallythose located in areas of below average socioeconomicstatus. The greater reality may be that it onlylooks, based on school Mean Proficient Scores, as ifmany of these schools are failing. When looking atValue Added data for different schools there appearsto be equivelent rates of growth for low poverty andhigh poverty schools (Raudenbush, 2004: 20), but thatthe lower the socio-economic status of the studentpopulation, the lower the entry level of achievement.Unfortunately, if you want schools to look like theyare failing you need only use the school’s Mean ProficiencyScores to show any unsuspecting viewer thatschool A did so much better than school B. The nextassumption leap is then posited that school A must bea better school and school B must be a poor or failingschool. Unfortunately, it isn’t that clear cut as testscores are simple measures of dubious value and theytell us nothing about QSTeLL inputs.Most testing done in most states and through NCLBrequirements, legislation fraught with social injusticepractices, for Title I schools is a test to determine theschool’s Mean Proficiency. In schools where high po-
Page 2 and 3: ISSN 1546-3206
Page 4 and 5: Journal of Urban Education: Focus o
Page 6 and 7: iiJournal of Urban Education: Focus
Page 8 and 9: 4Journal of Urban Education: Focus
Page 24 and 25: TWO-WAY IMMERSION PROGRAM ADVOCACYF
Page 46 and 47: SHAKE HANDS AND COME OUT FIGHTING:T
Page 56 and 57: SONNY’S BLUES, INTERNATIONALISM,
Page 78 and 79: PROMOTING POSITIVE SELF-IMAGES ANDA
Page 80 and 81:
76Journal of Urban Education: Focus
Page 82 and 83:
Page 84 and 85:
Page 86 and 87:
Page 88 and 89:
Page 90 and 91:
Page 92 and 93:
Page 94 and 95:
Page 96 and 97:
Page 98 and 99:
Page 100 and 101:
Page 102 and 103:
Page 104 and 105:
100Journal of Urban Education: Focu
Page 106 and 107:
Page 108 and 109:
Page 110 and 111:
Page 112 and 113:
SCHOOL VARIABLES AND TEST PERFORMAN
Page 114 and 115:
Page 116 and 117:
Page 118 and 119:
Page 120 and 121:
Page 122 and 123:
Page 124 and 125:
Page 126 and 127:
CLOSING THE AFRICAN AMERICAN ACHIEV
Page 128 and 129:
EDUCATING THE OTHER AMERICA:TOP EXP
Page 130:
Journal of Urban Education is a Pub
show all

Download - Southern University New Orleans

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?