普通高中学生增值评价研究
|
摘要
为尽快建立促进学生全面发展的评价体系,教育部于2002、2003下发《教育部关于积极推进中小学评价与考试制度改革的通知》、《教育部关于印发<普通高中课程方案(实验)〉和语文等15个学科课程标准(实验)的通知》。2006年之后,我国省市教育部门逐渐出台普通高中学生综合素质评价方案,建立了促进学生全面发展的综合素质评价指标体系,使我国学生评价由理论向实践迈出了坚实的一步。
我国各省市、自治区普通高中学生综合素质评价体系具有一下特点。评价标准突出统一性;评价方法以定性为主,形成性评价为主;评价功能注重激励。但是,指标体系及评价方案自身存在的技术层面的问题的确存在。这突出表现在:评价目标重外在性、统一性,轻差异性;评价方法重定性评价,轻定量评价,重形成性评价,轻诊断性评价;评价鉴定功能缺失。
增值评价可作为一种理想的选择。
增值评价是发展性评价的具体表现形式,是发展性评价方法的一种。理解增值评价,需要把握以下几点。首先,“增值”是一种内容,指学生各方面素质进步。其次,“增值”是一种理念,它重视学生发展,强调学生各方面素质发展,关注学生过程,是一种较全面、科学、可取的观点。第三,增值是一种标准,指学生自身成就进步幅度大小。第四,增值是一种方法,它侧重量化数据,但也兼顾质性内容。
学生增值评价指:在通过接受一定阶段教育后,对学生个体德、智、体、美、劳等方面发展程度进行的差异性价值判断,为学生学习及生活、教师教育及教学、学校教育及管理提供信息,促进每个学生不同程度发展,实现学生潜能发挥的最大化。简而言之,学生增值评价是以学生个体发展为评价目的,以学生个体为评价对象,以学生为德、智、体、美、劳为评价指标,以学生德、智、体、美、劳等领域增值幅度作为评价标准,以学生成长过程作为评价阶段。具体而言,学生增值评价具有以下特点。(1)强调价值研究的基础性。(2)突出统一性与差异性的结合。(3)强调量化与质性模式的相互依存。(4)着眼于学生未来的发展。
普通高中学生增值评价四级指标体系是一套系统性强、各级指标内在关系紧密、各项指标之间独立性强的指标体系。普通高中学生增值评价指标由3项一级指标、4项二级指标、12项三级指标、42项四级指标构成。横向联系独立性强,且相互补充,相互依存;纵向联系紧密,具有较强的归属性。评价标准包含三个方面:过程标准、结果标准及增值结果标准。学生增值评价结果主要采用统一的标准---增值幅度---来评价,既可指正向,也可指负向。“增值幅度”大小(含正、负两个方向)统一使用“转化率”来衡量。学生增值评价对象为学生个体。学生增值评价周期为一个学期。学生增值评价主体多元,既包括学校评价部门人员、任课教师、班主任老师、家长,又包括学生,但主要为学校。普通高中学校学生增值评价强调输入、过程、输出指标因素的一致,涉及信息主要为学生基本情况信息(输入信息)、学生过程信息、学生输出指标信息及关键行为事件信息。数据信息收集渠道主要为观察法、调查法、日志法、关键事件法、文献法等。评价结果数据统计计算比较简单,易操作。学生增值评价采用的方法技术的基本思想是:首先,根据收集每学年度(Y1/Y2/Y3)或学期(T1Y1, T2Y1; T1Y2 ,T2Y2 ;T1Y3 ,T2Y3)或高中阶段(Y1,Y3)四级指标日常观察、工作记录、调查问卷和考试成绩等原始数据,其中调查问卷数据统计按学生自评20%、同伴互评20%、教师评价60%计入结果,求出所有学生各项四级指标平均值,然后用每个学生该项指标原始得分减去该指标平均分求得该指标离差(R1, R2);两学期离差相减,即R2-- R1,求得原始增值分(VAR);原始增值分(VAR)与该指标权重系数(I)相乘得到标准增值分(SVA);各四级指标标准增值分之和除以该序列四级指标因素个数,然后乘以三级指标权重,求得相关三级指标标准增值分(SVA);依次类推,分别求得二级、一级指标标准增值分,得出每个学生增值结果。学生增值评价评价过程一般分为十个步骤。(1)数据收集;(2)填写表格;(3)加权统计每个学生各级指标得分;(4)加权统计学生综合评分;(5)形成学生增值评价报告;(6)结果反馈;(7)复议;(8)修改评价报告;(9)结果运用;(10)评价方案调整与改进。
本研究将围绕怎样建构普通高中学生增值评价指标体系及评价模型主题。首先,对基于多学科领域“学生增值评价”内涵作一阐述,分析学生增值评价的基本观点。其次,深入考察我国普通高中学生综合素质评价实践领域发展现状,对其特点与不足进行充分分析。第三,在澄清理论认识前提下,探讨如何构建较高质量学生增值评价指标体系、评价量表及测量模型。最后,在上述工作基础上提出评价实施过程策略与评价过程模型。
本文共分四章,第一章主要探讨学生增值评价内涵及增值评价的基本观点,即评价观。本章包括两部分内容:第一部分为建立在哲学等学科领域理论研究与实践成果基础上的学生增值评价思想价值体系分析;第二部分对学生增值评价评价目标、评价功能等从多个维度进行剖析,使大家能更深入的认识这种评价的内涵或观点。第二章侧重我国普通高中学生综合素质评价现状分析及应对策略。本章涉及三部分内容:第一部分为我国普通高中学生综合素质评价特点分析;第二部分揭示存在问题,指出在我国实行学生增值评价的必要性。第三章为普通高中学生增值评价体系构建及评价量表的编制。全章共两部分。第一部分研究指标体系建构的基本原则、评价指标选择的依据及内在联系,形成我国普通高中学生增值评级指标体系;第二部分呈现评价量表编制的流程。第四章主要研讨评价实施过程中应注意的事项,包括三部分。第一部分研究评价的方法、周期及使用范围;第二部分主要为评价的过程及步骤,包括分数合成方法技术及测量模型;第三部分对上述内容的总结概括基础上,提出评价过程的基本模型。
In order to promote the establishment of the evaluation system, the Educational Bureau delivered "the Notice on Promoting the Reform of Evaluation Mechanism and Examination Mechanism Actively in Primary Schools as Well as in Middle Schools" in 2002, and " the Notice about the Curricular Plan (experimental) as well as the Curricular Standards about the 15 Subjects including Chinese" in 2003. Later on, the local educational bureau have made evaluation plans or established the indicator systems in provinces, cities and the autonomous regions. In fact, we have taken a large step from theory to practice.
The comprehensive quality evaluation indicator system or the evaluation plan shows the following symptoms in these areas: unity stands out in the standard systems. The quality method has taken the main form, and formative method has been shown emphasis on in the methodology systems. Inspiration has been thought great of in its evaluation function. The assessment mechanism is complete and scientific. Nevertheless, the techniques exist of a few defaults in the ever plans and indicator systems, which are mainly as follows. The evaluation targets system has shown more emphasis on the targets out of the students as well as on too much unity, but less difference. More focus on quality, but less on quantity, as well as more emphasis on formative evaluation, but less on consultative, are the main flow in the methodology systems in the evaluation process. Consultative function been ignored in the evaluation.
Therefore, the thus-existed evaluation systems can't be used absolutely in practice, which needs more systems to evolve in. Value-added method can be an ideal choice.
"Value-Added Assessment" is one of the many forms in developmental evaluation. To master this methodology, we should think of it in the following ways. First of all, Value-Added is a kind of content, referring to the progress of the all-round qualities of a student. Second, Value-Added is an idea, which emphasizes the students' development, focusing on every aspect of the students' qualities and the process of the students’development. Therefore, it is a complete, adoptive point of view. Third, added-value is a standard, referring to the changed rate of each student’qualities. Forth, Value-Added is a method, which thinks greater of quantity, but quality method is included.
Value-Added Assessment of a student development is a kind of judgment of value about the development rate in each student's morals, intelligences, physical characteristics, beauty commitment, and physical labor, etc., in order to provide information for improvement in each student's study and life, in teachers' education and teaching, and in school's education and arrangement. In concrete, it aims to promote each student's development. It is an assessment of each student. Its indicators are each student's morals, intelligences, physical characteristics, beauty commitment, and physical labor, etc. Its standard is each student's value-added rate in every aspect of each student. Its course is the student's process of study and life. Value-Added Assessment of each student has the following symptoms. (1) Its system of thoughts emphasizes the basic study of value. (2) The combination of unity and differences stand out in its standard system. (3) Its methodological system shows emphasis on the combination of quality method and quantity method. (4) Its function gives an eye to the future development of each student.
The value-added evaluation index system is made up of a set of indicators that are correlative strong at all levels and are independent within various indicators. It is made up of 3 first-level indicators, four second-level indicators, 12 third-level indicators, and 42 forth-level indicators. The horizontal linkages are independent and mutually complementary; the vertical indicators are close-knit, with strong attribution. The evaluation criteria for value-added assessment consist of three aspects: the end criterion, the process criterion and the value-added criterion. The results for value-added evaluation are mainly in a uniform standard-value-added -to evaluate, which can be both positive and negative. The size of added-value (both positive and negative) could be united to use "conversion rate" to measure. The object for value-added assessment is the individual student. The evaluation cycle of value-added evaluation for students is a semester. The subjectivities for added-value assessment are multiple, both including assessment department staff in school, teachers, class adviser, parents, and also including students, but mainly refer to the school. The value-added assessment for ordinary high school student emphasize that indicators in its three dimensions as "input-course-output" are of the same ,which are related to the basic situation information for student (input information), student course information, student output information, and key act and event information. Data collection methods are observational method, survey method, journal method, critical incident method, and literature method. The statistical calculation for results is relatively simple and easy to operate. The basic thoughts of the procedures for added-value evaluation are: Firstly, according to the data from observation, work records, questionnaires, which is summed by 20% of self-assessment , 20% of peer assessment and 60% of teacher assessment ,test scores and other in each school year (Y1/Y2/Y3) or semester (T1Y1, T2Y1; T1Y2, T2Y2; T1Y3, T2Y3), or high school (Y1, Y3), produce every average figure for indicators of the four levels, and then get the deviation(R1, R2) using the difference of original scores for each student and average obtained; two semesters deviation subtract, that is, R2 - R1, obtained the original added-value points (VAR); the original value of points (VAR) with the index weight coefficient (I) obtained by multiplying the standard value-added points (SVA); all four indicators of the standard value-added divided by the sequence of four points and the number of index factors, and then multiplied by three index weight, and get three indicators related to sub-standard value-added (SVA); turn and so on, respectively, the secondary demand, a standard value-added sub-indicators, the effectiveness of value-added results obtained for each student. The process of the student Value-added assessment is generally divided into 10 steps. (1) data collection; (2) fill out the forms; (3) weighted statistical indicators for each student scoring at all levels; (4) weighted statistical Student score; (5) the formation of student value-added evaluation report; (6) the feedback of results; (7) the reconsideration; (8) the modification of the report; (9) the use of the results; (10) the adjustments and improvements on the evaluation plan.
This research focuses on the construction of the evaluation indicator system and the evaluation model in Senior High School. First, I give a description of the viewpoints of the Value-Added Evaluation of a student from the framework of a few subject fields, and analyze the basic viewpoints about it. Second, I talk about the current status of the all-round quality evaluation of the Senior High School students, analyzing its symptoms and shortcomings. Third, I research on the construction of the Value-Added indicator system, the measuring tool and model. Last of all, the implement plots and the process model are delivered.
The thesis is made up of four chapters. The first chapter deals with the viewpoints of this evaluation and its basic viewpoints, that is, the evaluation viewpoints. This chapter is formed with two parts, the first of which talks about its value system in the eye of a few subject areas including philosophy and its achievements in practice. In order to make its viewpoints well understood, the second part analyses its targets, function, and so on. The second chapter focuses on the analysis of the current status on the comprehensive quality evaluation of the senior high school students, which is made up of two parts. The first part deals with its symptoms. The second one talks about its shortcomings and delivers the necessity to carry out the value-added evaluation in our country. The third chapter mainly talks about the construction of the evaluation indicator system as well as how to make the measuring tool, with which two parts are formed. The first one delivers the general principles, the basis for the choice of the indicators, and their inner relations, as a result of which the evaluation indicator system is constructed. The second one deals with the courses of making the measuring tool. The forth chapter mainly talks about the details in practice with three parts included. The first one researches on the evaluation method, the evaluation period, and the scope in evaluation practice. The second part mainly deals with the course and steps in evaluation, including its method and technology to compose the marks, as well as the mesuring model. The process model is delivered in the third part.
我国各省市、自治区普通高中学生综合素质评价体系具有一下特点。评价标准突出统一性;评价方法以定性为主,形成性评价为主;评价功能注重激励。但是,指标体系及评价方案自身存在的技术层面的问题的确存在。这突出表现在:评价目标重外在性、统一性,轻差异性;评价方法重定性评价,轻定量评价,重形成性评价,轻诊断性评价;评价鉴定功能缺失。
增值评价可作为一种理想的选择。
增值评价是发展性评价的具体表现形式,是发展性评价方法的一种。理解增值评价,需要把握以下几点。首先,“增值”是一种内容,指学生各方面素质进步。其次,“增值”是一种理念,它重视学生发展,强调学生各方面素质发展,关注学生过程,是一种较全面、科学、可取的观点。第三,增值是一种标准,指学生自身成就进步幅度大小。第四,增值是一种方法,它侧重量化数据,但也兼顾质性内容。
学生增值评价指:在通过接受一定阶段教育后,对学生个体德、智、体、美、劳等方面发展程度进行的差异性价值判断,为学生学习及生活、教师教育及教学、学校教育及管理提供信息,促进每个学生不同程度发展,实现学生潜能发挥的最大化。简而言之,学生增值评价是以学生个体发展为评价目的,以学生个体为评价对象,以学生为德、智、体、美、劳为评价指标,以学生德、智、体、美、劳等领域增值幅度作为评价标准,以学生成长过程作为评价阶段。具体而言,学生增值评价具有以下特点。(1)强调价值研究的基础性。(2)突出统一性与差异性的结合。(3)强调量化与质性模式的相互依存。(4)着眼于学生未来的发展。
普通高中学生增值评价四级指标体系是一套系统性强、各级指标内在关系紧密、各项指标之间独立性强的指标体系。普通高中学生增值评价指标由3项一级指标、4项二级指标、12项三级指标、42项四级指标构成。横向联系独立性强,且相互补充,相互依存;纵向联系紧密,具有较强的归属性。评价标准包含三个方面:过程标准、结果标准及增值结果标准。学生增值评价结果主要采用统一的标准---增值幅度---来评价,既可指正向,也可指负向。“增值幅度”大小(含正、负两个方向)统一使用“转化率”来衡量。学生增值评价对象为学生个体。学生增值评价周期为一个学期。学生增值评价主体多元,既包括学校评价部门人员、任课教师、班主任老师、家长,又包括学生,但主要为学校。普通高中学校学生增值评价强调输入、过程、输出指标因素的一致,涉及信息主要为学生基本情况信息(输入信息)、学生过程信息、学生输出指标信息及关键行为事件信息。数据信息收集渠道主要为观察法、调查法、日志法、关键事件法、文献法等。评价结果数据统计计算比较简单,易操作。学生增值评价采用的方法技术的基本思想是:首先,根据收集每学年度(Y1/Y2/Y3)或学期(T1Y1, T2Y1; T1Y2 ,T2Y2 ;T1Y3 ,T2Y3)或高中阶段(Y1,Y3)四级指标日常观察、工作记录、调查问卷和考试成绩等原始数据,其中调查问卷数据统计按学生自评20%、同伴互评20%、教师评价60%计入结果,求出所有学生各项四级指标平均值,然后用每个学生该项指标原始得分减去该指标平均分求得该指标离差(R1, R2);两学期离差相减,即R2-- R1,求得原始增值分(VAR);原始增值分(VAR)与该指标权重系数(I)相乘得到标准增值分(SVA);各四级指标标准增值分之和除以该序列四级指标因素个数,然后乘以三级指标权重,求得相关三级指标标准增值分(SVA);依次类推,分别求得二级、一级指标标准增值分,得出每个学生增值结果。学生增值评价评价过程一般分为十个步骤。(1)数据收集;(2)填写表格;(3)加权统计每个学生各级指标得分;(4)加权统计学生综合评分;(5)形成学生增值评价报告;(6)结果反馈;(7)复议;(8)修改评价报告;(9)结果运用;(10)评价方案调整与改进。
本研究将围绕怎样建构普通高中学生增值评价指标体系及评价模型主题。首先,对基于多学科领域“学生增值评价”内涵作一阐述,分析学生增值评价的基本观点。其次,深入考察我国普通高中学生综合素质评价实践领域发展现状,对其特点与不足进行充分分析。第三,在澄清理论认识前提下,探讨如何构建较高质量学生增值评价指标体系、评价量表及测量模型。最后,在上述工作基础上提出评价实施过程策略与评价过程模型。
本文共分四章,第一章主要探讨学生增值评价内涵及增值评价的基本观点,即评价观。本章包括两部分内容:第一部分为建立在哲学等学科领域理论研究与实践成果基础上的学生增值评价思想价值体系分析;第二部分对学生增值评价评价目标、评价功能等从多个维度进行剖析,使大家能更深入的认识这种评价的内涵或观点。第二章侧重我国普通高中学生综合素质评价现状分析及应对策略。本章涉及三部分内容:第一部分为我国普通高中学生综合素质评价特点分析;第二部分揭示存在问题,指出在我国实行学生增值评价的必要性。第三章为普通高中学生增值评价体系构建及评价量表的编制。全章共两部分。第一部分研究指标体系建构的基本原则、评价指标选择的依据及内在联系,形成我国普通高中学生增值评级指标体系;第二部分呈现评价量表编制的流程。第四章主要研讨评价实施过程中应注意的事项,包括三部分。第一部分研究评价的方法、周期及使用范围;第二部分主要为评价的过程及步骤,包括分数合成方法技术及测量模型;第三部分对上述内容的总结概括基础上,提出评价过程的基本模型。
In order to promote the establishment of the evaluation system, the Educational Bureau delivered "the Notice on Promoting the Reform of Evaluation Mechanism and Examination Mechanism Actively in Primary Schools as Well as in Middle Schools" in 2002, and " the Notice about the Curricular Plan (experimental) as well as the Curricular Standards about the 15 Subjects including Chinese" in 2003. Later on, the local educational bureau have made evaluation plans or established the indicator systems in provinces, cities and the autonomous regions. In fact, we have taken a large step from theory to practice.
The comprehensive quality evaluation indicator system or the evaluation plan shows the following symptoms in these areas: unity stands out in the standard systems. The quality method has taken the main form, and formative method has been shown emphasis on in the methodology systems. Inspiration has been thought great of in its evaluation function. The assessment mechanism is complete and scientific. Nevertheless, the techniques exist of a few defaults in the ever plans and indicator systems, which are mainly as follows. The evaluation targets system has shown more emphasis on the targets out of the students as well as on too much unity, but less difference. More focus on quality, but less on quantity, as well as more emphasis on formative evaluation, but less on consultative, are the main flow in the methodology systems in the evaluation process. Consultative function been ignored in the evaluation.
Therefore, the thus-existed evaluation systems can't be used absolutely in practice, which needs more systems to evolve in. Value-added method can be an ideal choice.
"Value-Added Assessment" is one of the many forms in developmental evaluation. To master this methodology, we should think of it in the following ways. First of all, Value-Added is a kind of content, referring to the progress of the all-round qualities of a student. Second, Value-Added is an idea, which emphasizes the students' development, focusing on every aspect of the students' qualities and the process of the students’development. Therefore, it is a complete, adoptive point of view. Third, added-value is a standard, referring to the changed rate of each student’qualities. Forth, Value-Added is a method, which thinks greater of quantity, but quality method is included.
Value-Added Assessment of a student development is a kind of judgment of value about the development rate in each student's morals, intelligences, physical characteristics, beauty commitment, and physical labor, etc., in order to provide information for improvement in each student's study and life, in teachers' education and teaching, and in school's education and arrangement. In concrete, it aims to promote each student's development. It is an assessment of each student. Its indicators are each student's morals, intelligences, physical characteristics, beauty commitment, and physical labor, etc. Its standard is each student's value-added rate in every aspect of each student. Its course is the student's process of study and life. Value-Added Assessment of each student has the following symptoms. (1) Its system of thoughts emphasizes the basic study of value. (2) The combination of unity and differences stand out in its standard system. (3) Its methodological system shows emphasis on the combination of quality method and quantity method. (4) Its function gives an eye to the future development of each student.
The value-added evaluation index system is made up of a set of indicators that are correlative strong at all levels and are independent within various indicators. It is made up of 3 first-level indicators, four second-level indicators, 12 third-level indicators, and 42 forth-level indicators. The horizontal linkages are independent and mutually complementary; the vertical indicators are close-knit, with strong attribution. The evaluation criteria for value-added assessment consist of three aspects: the end criterion, the process criterion and the value-added criterion. The results for value-added evaluation are mainly in a uniform standard-value-added -to evaluate, which can be both positive and negative. The size of added-value (both positive and negative) could be united to use "conversion rate" to measure. The object for value-added assessment is the individual student. The evaluation cycle of value-added evaluation for students is a semester. The subjectivities for added-value assessment are multiple, both including assessment department staff in school, teachers, class adviser, parents, and also including students, but mainly refer to the school. The value-added assessment for ordinary high school student emphasize that indicators in its three dimensions as "input-course-output" are of the same ,which are related to the basic situation information for student (input information), student course information, student output information, and key act and event information. Data collection methods are observational method, survey method, journal method, critical incident method, and literature method. The statistical calculation for results is relatively simple and easy to operate. The basic thoughts of the procedures for added-value evaluation are: Firstly, according to the data from observation, work records, questionnaires, which is summed by 20% of self-assessment , 20% of peer assessment and 60% of teacher assessment ,test scores and other in each school year (Y1/Y2/Y3) or semester (T1Y1, T2Y1; T1Y2, T2Y2; T1Y3, T2Y3), or high school (Y1, Y3), produce every average figure for indicators of the four levels, and then get the deviation(R1, R2) using the difference of original scores for each student and average obtained; two semesters deviation subtract, that is, R2 - R1, obtained the original added-value points (VAR); the original value of points (VAR) with the index weight coefficient (I) obtained by multiplying the standard value-added points (SVA); all four indicators of the standard value-added divided by the sequence of four points and the number of index factors, and then multiplied by three index weight, and get three indicators related to sub-standard value-added (SVA); turn and so on, respectively, the secondary demand, a standard value-added sub-indicators, the effectiveness of value-added results obtained for each student. The process of the student Value-added assessment is generally divided into 10 steps. (1) data collection; (2) fill out the forms; (3) weighted statistical indicators for each student scoring at all levels; (4) weighted statistical Student score; (5) the formation of student value-added evaluation report; (6) the feedback of results; (7) the reconsideration; (8) the modification of the report; (9) the use of the results; (10) the adjustments and improvements on the evaluation plan.
This research focuses on the construction of the evaluation indicator system and the evaluation model in Senior High School. First, I give a description of the viewpoints of the Value-Added Evaluation of a student from the framework of a few subject fields, and analyze the basic viewpoints about it. Second, I talk about the current status of the all-round quality evaluation of the Senior High School students, analyzing its symptoms and shortcomings. Third, I research on the construction of the Value-Added indicator system, the measuring tool and model. Last of all, the implement plots and the process model are delivered.
The thesis is made up of four chapters. The first chapter deals with the viewpoints of this evaluation and its basic viewpoints, that is, the evaluation viewpoints. This chapter is formed with two parts, the first of which talks about its value system in the eye of a few subject areas including philosophy and its achievements in practice. In order to make its viewpoints well understood, the second part analyses its targets, function, and so on. The second chapter focuses on the analysis of the current status on the comprehensive quality evaluation of the senior high school students, which is made up of two parts. The first part deals with its symptoms. The second one talks about its shortcomings and delivers the necessity to carry out the value-added evaluation in our country. The third chapter mainly talks about the construction of the evaluation indicator system as well as how to make the measuring tool, with which two parts are formed. The first one delivers the general principles, the basis for the choice of the indicators, and their inner relations, as a result of which the evaluation indicator system is constructed. The second one deals with the courses of making the measuring tool. The forth chapter mainly talks about the details in practice with three parts included. The first one researches on the evaluation method, the evaluation period, and the scope in evaluation practice. The second part mainly deals with the course and steps in evaluation, including its method and technology to compose the marks, as well as the mesuring model. The process model is delivered in the third part.
引文
①2008年4月30日潍坊市教育局奎文区教育网,网址:http://www.kwedu.cn
②这段话选自山东省教育厅副厅长张志勇同志代表山东省教育厅,在“2008年全国基础教育工作会议”上所作《坚持整体推进深化改革创新全面实施素质教育》发言。
①叶澜等.全球化、信息化背景下的中国基础教育改革研究报告集[M].上海:华东师范大学出版社,2004:285.
①叶澜等.全球化、信息化背景下的中国基础教育改革研究报告集[M].上海:华东师范大学出版社,2004:282.
②汤林春.学校效能评价研究[D].上海:华东师范大学博士学位论文,2005:55.
①钟启泉等.为了中华民族的复兴为了每位学生的发展[M].上海:华东师范大学出版社,2001:9-10.
②朱小蔓.基础教育阶段现代学校制度的理论与实验研究[M].北京:教育科学出版社,2008:92-95.
③朱小蔓.基础教育阶段现代学校制度的理论与实验研究[M].北京:教育科学出版社,2008:89.
④任春荣.教育公平视角下的学校效能评价[J].教育导刊,2007,9:53-55.
⑤边玉芳,林志红.增值评价:一种绿色升学率理念下的学校评价模式[J].北京师范大学学报(社会科学版),2007,6:11-18.
①Ronald H. Heck. Assessing School Achievement Progress: Comparing Alternative Approaches Educational Administration Quarterly, Vol. 42, No. 5,December 2006,p.674.
②Robert L. Linn. Assessment and Accountability.Educational Researcher, Volume 29,No. 2,2000,pp.3-10
③Daniel Fallon.The Buffalo upon the Chimneypiece the Value of Evidence. Journal of Teacher Education, Vol. 57, No. 2, March/April 2006,p.150.
④William Sanders. Value-Added Assessment from Student Achievement Data: Opportunities and Hurdles. Journal of Personnel Evaluation in Education 14:4, p.335, 2000. ?2000 Kluwer Academic Publishers. Manufactured in The Netherlands.
⑤Audrey Amrein-Beardsley. Methodological Concerns about the Education Value-Added Assessment System. Educational Researcher, 2008,Vol. 37, No. 2, p. 65. DOI: 10.3102/0013189X08316420 ? 2008 AERA. http://er.aera.net
⑥George H. Noell, Jeanne L. Burns. Value-Added Assessment of Teacher Prepareration an Illustrtion of Emerging Technology. Journal of Teacher Education, Vol. 57, No. 1, January/February 2006,pp.37-50.
⑦Charles Teddlie & David Reynolds. Contemporary Issues in School Effectiveness Research with Applications in China.楮宏启.中国教育管理评论(第四卷)[M].北京:教育科学出版社, 2007: 110.
①Carmen D. Tekwe, Randy L. Carter, Chang-Xing Ma, James Algina, Maurice E. Lucas, Jeffrey Roth, Mario Ariet, Thomas Fisher, Michael B. Resnick . An Empirical Comparison of Statistical Models for Value-Added Assessment of School Performance. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics Spring 2004, Vol. 29, No. 1, p. 12.
②Joseph A. Martineau. Distorting Value Added: The Use of Longitudinal, Vertically Scaled Student Achievement Data for Growth-Based, Value-Added Accountability. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics Spring 2006, Vol. 31, No. 1, p. 36.
③Susan Kochan. Evolution of School Performance Research in the USA: From School Effectiveness to School Accountability and Back. T. Townsend (Ed.), International Handbook of School Effectiveness and Improvement,485–502.? 2007 Springer.
④Ronald H. Heck. Assessing School Achievement Progress: Comparing Alternative Approaches. Educational Administration Quarterly, Vol. 42, No. 5,December 2006,p. 669.
①Ronald H. Heck. Assessing School Achievement Progress: Comparing Alternative Approaches. Educational Administration Quarterly, Vol. 42, No. 5,December 2006, p.669.
②Ronald H. Heck. Assessing School Achievement Progress: Comparing Alternative Approaches. Educational Administration Quarterly, Vol. 42, No. 5,December 2006,pp.672-673.
①Ronald H. Heck. Assessing School Achievement Progress: Comparing Alternative Approaches. Educational Administration Quarterly, Vol. 42, No. 5,December 2006,p.669.
②Bruce R. Thompson. Equitable Measurement of School Effectiveness. Urban Education, Vol. 39 No. 2, March 2004, pp.200-229.
③Robert L. Linn. Assessment and Accountability. Educational Researcher, Volume 29 No. 2, 2000,p.10.
④Robert L. Linn. Assessment and Accountability. Educational Researcher, Volume 29 No. 2, 2000,pp.8-10.
⑤Robert L. Linn. Assessment and Accountability. Educational Researcher, Volume 29 No. 2, 2000,pp.9-10.
⑥George H. Noell, Jeanne L. Burns. Value-Added Assessment of Teacher Preparation an Illustration of Emerging Technology. Journal of Teacher Education, Vol. 57, No. 1, January/February 2006,p.40.
⑦Carmen D. Tekwe, Randy L. Carter, Chang-Xing Ma, James Algina, Maurice E. Lucas, Jeffrey Roth, Mario Ariet, Thomas Fisher, Michael B. Resnick . An Empirical Comparison of Statistical Models for Value-Added Assessment of School Performance. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics Spring 2004, Vol. 29, No. 1, p. 12.
⑧Harold C. Doran,J. R. Lockwood. Fitting Value-Added Models in R. Journal of Educational and BehavioralStatistics Summer 2006, Vol. 31, No. 2, pp.205–230.
①Daniel Fallon. The Buffalo upon the Chimneypiece the Value of Evidence. Journal of Teacher Education,Vol. 57, No. 2, March/April 2006,p.149.
②谌启标.学校效能研究论纲[J].教育理论与实践,2001,6b:25-28.
①David Grissmer. Class Size Effects: Assessing the Evidence, its Policy Implications, and Future Research Agenda. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, Summer 1999, Vol. 21. No. 2. pp. 231-248.
②Bruce R. Thompson. Equitable Measurement of School Effectiveness. Urban Education, Vol. 39 No. 2, March 2004, pp.200-229.
③Jim Spinks. Resources and School Effectiveness and Improvement. T. Townsend (Ed.), International Handbook of School Effectiveness and Improvement, 451–468.? 2007 Springer.
④Joel K. Kiboss, Mwangi Ndirangu, Eric W. Wekesa1. Effectiveness of a Computer-Mediated Simulations Program in School Biology on Pupils’Learning Outcomes in Cell Theory. Journal of Science Education and Technology, Vol. 13, No. 2, June 2004 .
①B. Rowan, R. Correnti, and R. J. Miller. What Large-Scale Survey Research Tells Us about Teacher Effects on Student Achievement:Insights from the Prospects Study of Elementary Schools. Teachers College Record,104(8), 2002, pp.1525-1567.韦恩·K·霍伊,塞西尔·G·米斯克尔.教育管理学:理论·研究·实践[M].范国睿主译. .北京:教育科学出版社,2007: 269.
②R. H. Heck. Examining the Impact of School Quality on School Outcomes and Improvement: A Value-Added Approach. Educational Administration Quarterly, 36(4), 2000, pp.513-552.
③Ronald H. Heck. Examining the Relationship Between Teacher Quality as an Organizational Property of Schools and Students’Achievement and Growth Rates Educational Administration Quarterly, Vol. 43, No. 4 ,October 2007,p.401.
①Tim Konold, Brian Jablonski, Anthony Nottingham, Lara Kessler, Stephen Byrd, Scott Imig ,Robert Berry, Robert McNergney . Adding Value to Public Schools Investigating Teacher Education, Teaching, and Pupil Learning. Journal of Teacher Education, Volume 59 Number 4 September/October 2008 300-312 ? 2008 Sage Publications 10.1177/0022487108321378 http://jte.sagepub.com hosted at http://online.sagepub.com
②George H. Noell, Jeanne L. Burns. Value-Added Assessment of Teacher Preparation An Illustration of Emerging Technology. Journal of Teacher Education, Vol. 57, No. 1, January/February 2006,pp.37-50.
③Gregory J. Palardy, Russell W. Rumberger. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis. June 2008, Vol. 30, No. 2, pp. 111–140. DOI: 10.3102/0162373708317680 ? 2008 AERA. http://eepa.aera.net .
①Christopher Day, Pam Sammons, and Qing Gu. Combining Qualitative and Quantitative Methodologies in Research on Teachers’Lives,Work, and Effectiveness: From Integration to Synergy. Educational Researcher, Vol. 37, No. 6, pp. 330–342.DOI: 10.3102/0013189X08324091 ? 2008 AERA. http://er.aera.net.
②Thomas J. Lasley, Dary Siedentop, Robert Yinger. A Systemic Approach to Enhancing Teacher Quality the Ohio Model. Journal of Teacher Education, Vol. 57, No. 1, January/February 2006,pp.13-21.
③H. Del Schalock, Mark D. Schalock, Robert Ayres. Scaling up Research in Teacher Education New Demands on Theory, Measurement, and Design. Journal of Teacher Education, Vol. 57, No. 2, March/April 2006 ,pp.102-119. DOI: 10.1177/0022487105285615 ? 2006 by the American Association of Colleges for Teacher Education.
④L.M. Desimone, A.C. Porter, M.S. Garet, K.S. Yoon, and B.F. Briman. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 24(2),81-112 2002.
①William F. Tate IV. The Political Economy of Teacher Quality in School Mathematics African American Males, Opportunity Structures, Politics, and Method. American Behavioral Scientist, Volume 51 Number 7 March 2008 953-971 ? 2008 Sage Publications 10.1177/0002764207311999 http://abs.sagepub.com hosted at http://online.sagepub.com.
②P. Mortimore. The Road to Improvement: Reflections on School Effectiveness[M]. Lisse, Netherlands: Swets & Zeitlinger,1998.
③V. Battistich, et al. Beyond the Three R’s: a Broader Agenda for School Reform[J]. The elementary school Journal,1999,99:415-431.
④David Reynolds. School Effectiveness and School Improvement (SESI): Links with the International Standards/Accountability Agenda.T. Townsend (Ed.), International Handbook of School Effectiveness and Improvement, 471–484. ? 2007 Springer.
⑤韦恩K.霍伊,塞西尔G.米斯克尔.教育管理学:理论·研究·实践[M].范国睿主译.北京:教育科学出版社,2007: 272.
⑥D. P. Thompson, J. F. McNamara, and J.R. Hoyle. Job Satisfaction in Educational Organizations: A Synthesis of Research Findings. Educational Administration Quarterly, 33(1). 1997,pp.7-37.
①J. Scheerens, R. Bosker. The Foundations of Educational Effectiveness. Oxford: Permagon.1997.
②R.D.Goddard, M.Tschannen-Moran, and W.K.Hoy. Teacher Trust in Students and Parents: A Multilevel Examination of the Disrtibution and Effects of Teacher Trust in Urban Elementary Schools. Elementary School Journal, 102,2001,PP. 3-7.
③R.D.Goddard, S.R.Sweetland, and W.K.Hoy. Academic Emphasis of Urban Elementary Schools and Student Achievement: A Multi-level Analysis. Educational Administration Quarterly, 5, 2000,PP.683-702.
④R.D.Goddard,W.D. Hoy, and L. LoGerfo. Collective Efficacy and Student Achievement in Public High School: A Path Analysis. Paper Presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Chicage, II.2003.
⑤Robet L. Linn. Assessment and Accountability.Educational Researcher, Volume 29,No. 2,2000,pp.4-16.
①Tim Konold, Brian Jablonski, Anthony Nottingham, Lara Kessler, Stephen Byrd, Scott Imig, Robert Berry, Robert McNergney. Adding Value to Public Schools Investigating Teacher Education, Teaching, and Pupil Learning. Journal of Teacher Education, Volume 59 ,Number 4, September/October 2008,p. 301.
②Ronald H. Heck Examining the Relationship Between Teacher Quality as an Organizational Property of Schools and Students’Achievement and Growth Rates Educational Administration Quarterly Vol. 43, No. 4 ,October 2007,pp.400-401.
①Carmen D. Tekwe, Randy L. Carter, Chang-Xing Ma, James Algina, Maurice E. Lucas, Jeffrey Roth, Mario Ariet, Thomas Fisher, Michael B. Resnick. An Empirical Comparison of Statistical Models for Value-Added Assessment of School Performance. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics. Spring 2004, Vol. 29, No. 1, pp. 11–36.
①Ronald H. Heck. Assessing School Achievement Progress: Comparing Alternative Approaches . Educational Administration Quarterly. Vol. 42, No. 5 ,December 2006),pp.667-699.
②Joseph A. Martineau. Distorting Value Added: The Use of Longitudinal, Vertically Scaled Student Achievement Data for Growth-Based, Value-Added Accountability Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics .Spring 2006, Vol. 31, No. 1, pp. 35–62.
③William Sanders, Paul Wright. Controlling for Student Background in Value-Added Assessment of Teachers. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics Spring 2004, Vol. 29, No. 1, pp. 37–65.
④Howard Wainer. Introduction to a Special Issue of the Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics on Value-Added AssessmentJournal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics Spring 2004, Vol. 29, No. 1, pp. 1–3.
①Daniel Koretz Thomas A. Louis Laura HamiltonModels for Value-Added Modeling of Teacher EffectsJournal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics Spring 2004, Vol. 29, No. 1, pp. 67–101.
②J. R. Lockwood, Daniel F. McCaffrey, Louis T. Mariano, Claude Setodji. Bayesian Methods for Scalable Multivariate Value-Added Assessment. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics June 2007, Vol. 32, No. 2, pp. 125–150.
①Donald B. Rubin, Elizabeth A. Stuart, Elaine L. Zanutto. A Potential Outcomes View of Value-Added Assessment in Education. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, Spring 2004, Vol. 29, No. 1, pp. 103–116.
②Ronald H. Heck. Examining the Relationship Between Teacher Quality as an Organizational Property of Schools and Students’Achievement and Growth Rates Educational Administration Quarterly Vol. 43, No. 4 ,October 2007,pp. 401--402.
③Howard Wainer. Introduction to a Special Issue of the Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics on Value-Added AssessmentJournal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, Spring 2004, Vol. 29, No. 1, pp. 1–3.
④Thomas J. Lasley, Daryl Siedentop, Robert Yinger. A Systemic Approach to Enhancing Teacher Quality the Ohio Model. Journal of Teacher Education, Vol. 57, No. 1, January/February 2006,pp.13-21
⑤William L. Sanders. Value-Added Assessment from Student Achievement Data: Opportunities and HurdlesJournal of Personnel Evaluation in Education 14:4, 329-339, 2000. ? 2000 Kluwer Academic Publishers.Manufactured in The Netherlands.
①Robet L. Linn. Assessment and Accountability.Educational Researcher, Volume 29,No. 2, 2000, pp.8-10.
①张煜.学校效能评价[J].中小学管理,1997,(7-8).
②谌启标.学校效能论[J].江西教育科研, 2001,(6a).
③谌启标.学校效能研究论纲[J].教育理论与实践,2001, 6b:25-28.
④谌启标.美国“有效学校”述评[J].教育研究与实验,2003,1: 34-37.
⑤谌启标.学校效能研究与学校重建[J].教育发展研究,2007,10b:14-18.
⑥孟繁华.构建现代学校的学习型组织[J].比较教育研究, 2002,1:53-56.
⑦钱家荣.高效能学校及其特征[J].外国中小学教育,2003,8:20-22.
⑧陈欣.学校效能的多维透视[J].教学与管理,2003,(7).
①朱科蓉,李春景.学校效能研究的历史、现状与趋势[J].教学与管理,2003,(1).
②陈丰伟.国外学校校能研究述评[J].江西教育科研,2003,(10).
③杨琼.学校效能与学校改革:对英国最新研究成果的述评[J].外国教育研究,2003,(12).
④杨琼,范国睿.学校校能研究的现状及其反思[J].上海教育科研,2003,(6).
⑤盖雁,尹钟祥.发展中的普通教育评价---我国普教评价理论与实践发展综述(J).现代教育科学.2003,6:21.
⑥汤林春.学校效能研究略论[J].中小学管理,2004,2:6.
⑦汤林春,梁玲玲.学校效能评价的尝试[J].上海教育科研.2005,4:24-26.
①汤林春.学校效能评价研究[D].上海:华东师范大学博士学位论文,2005.
②汤林春.学校效能的学校因素研究[J].上海教育科研,2006,8:30-33.
③汤林春.试论学校效能评价的两种思路[J].教育管理研究, 2007,2: 69.
④谈松华.试行效能评价[J].中国远程教育,2004,4:68.
⑤孙河川.欧洲八国学校效能与改进研究.---国家层影响要素对教育改进的影响[J].教育研究(增刊),2004.
⑥陈明高,马晓晴,曹晖.教师集体效能研究述评[J].山东师范大学学报,2005,4:139-141.
①石雷山.教师集体效能---教师效能研究的新进展[J].外国教育研究, 2005,10:72-75.
②蔡永红.美英两国学校效能研究的回顾与反思[J].外国教育研究,2006,5:32-33.
③台州市椒江区教育局课题组.区域推进学校效能评估的实践探索[J].教育发展研究,2005,11b:87-91.
④赵晖.普通初级中学学校效能评价研究初探[D].上海师范大学硕士论文,2005.
⑤弗兰西斯科·索夫,杨燕燕.课程效能评价---以“教育效能与教育评价”为例[J].外国教育研究.2005,5:57-59.
⑥谷珊.学校效能评价:对某市高中的实证研究[D].天津师范大学硕士论文,2007.
①温恒福.学校效能的基本理论问题[J].教育研究,2007,2:56-60.
①陈光春.学校效能研究新进展[J].教育发展研究, 2007,10b:23-26.
②任春荣.教育公平视角下的学校效能评价[J].教育导刊,2007,9:53-55.
③边玉芳,林志红.增值评价:一种绿色升学率理念下的学校评价模式[J].北京师范大学学报,2007,6:11-18.
④赵树贤.卡坦斯学校效能评价模式及其拓展研究[J].中国教育学刊,2007,6:27-31.
⑤卢乃桂,张佳伟.学校效能与学校改进走向结合的理论基础的探讨[J].教育学报, 2007,5:3-7.
①王俭.论当代学校效能的价值取向[J].基础教育参考,2007,(6).
②孙绵涛.教育效能论[M].北京:人民教育出版社,2007.
③六个方面特点指:通过纵向研究数据测量个体变化;采用自然实验将混在一起的变量分开;对假设的原因变量进行有效的测量;④系统检验某种反应的变化,如学习成就、学习态度及行为等;⑤从几种假设的机制解释中,明确出一种;⑥充分控制社会选择、初始水平和自我完善等因素的效果。三种模式包括:社会系统理论模型,“主体-情境”模式以及“功能-层次”模式。褚宏启.中国教育管理评论(第4卷)[M].北京:教育科学出版社,2007:1-123.
④朱小蔓.基础教育阶段现代现代学校制度的理论与实践研究[M].北京:教育科学出版社,2007:88-101.
⑤郑金洲、程亮.中国教育新进展---2007[M].上海:华东师范大学出版社,2008:124-147.
⑥冯大鸣.美、英、澳教育管理前沿图景[M].北京:教育科学出版社,2004:207-253.
⑦叶澜等.全球化、信息化背景下的中国基础教育改革研究报告集[M].上海:华东师范大学社,2004:281-375.
⑧蔡进雄.转型领导与学校效能[ M] .台北:师大书苑,2001:119 - 121.
①Cheng, Y. C. (1997). Monitoring school effectiveness: Conceptual and practical dilemmas in developing a framework. In H. Meng, Y. Zhou, & Y. Fang (eds.) School based indicators of effectiveness: Experiences and practices in APEC members. (pp. 197–206), China: Guangxi Normal University Press.
②郑燕祥.教育领导与改革新范式[M].上海:上海教育出版社,2005:1-51.
①David Reynolds. School Effectiveness and School Improvement (SESI): Links with the International Standards/Accountability Agenda.T. Townsend (Ed.), International Handbook of School Effectiveness and Improvement, 478-479 ? 2007 Springer.
②George H. Noell, Jeanne L. Burns. Value-Added Assessment of Teacher Preparation An Illustration of Emerging Technology. Journal of Teacher Education, Vol. 57, No. 1, January/February 2006),pp.37-50.
③Mona S. Wineburg. Evidence in Teacher Preparation Establishing a Framework for Accountability. Journal of Teacher Education, Vol. 57, No. 1, January/February 2006,pp. 51-64.
④Susan Kochan. Evolution of School Performance Research in the USA: From School Effectiveness to School Accountability and Back. T. Townsend (Ed.) International Handbook of School Effectiveness and Improvement, 491. ? 2007 Springer.
①刘在花.美英两国学校效能研究的回顾与反思[J].外国教育研究, 2006,5:32-33.
②蔡永红.美国学校效能研究的回顾与反思[J].比较教育研究. 2005,11:5.
③W1lliam L. Sanders. Value-Added Assessment from Student Achievement Data: Opportunities and HurdlesJournal of Personnel Evaluation in Education 14:4, 336, 2000. ? 2000 Kluwer Academic Publishers. Manufactured in The Netherlands.
④朱小蔓.基础教育阶段现代学校制度的理论与实验研究[M].北京:教育科学出版社,2008:97.
⑤George H. Noell , Jeanne L. Burns. Value-Added Assessment of Teacher Preparation an Illustration of Emerging Technology. Journal of Teacher Education, Vol. 57, No. 1, January/February 2006,pp.37-50.
⑥Mona S. Wineburg. Evidence in Teacher Preparation Establishing a Framework for Accountability. Journal of Teacher Education, Vol. 57, No. 1, January/February 2006 ,pp.51-64. Linda E. Lee. Honey, Wooden Spoons, and Clay Pots: The Evolution of a Lithuanian Learning Conversation. L.M. Earl and H. Timperley (eds.), Professional Learning Conversations: 81 Challenges in Using Evidence for Improvement.. Springer Science & Business Media B.V. 2009,p. 86.
⑦Daniel Fallon. The Buffalo upon the Chimneypiece the Value of Evidence. Journal of Teacher Education, Vol. 57, No. 2, March/April 2006,p. 151.
⑧William Sanders. Value-Added Assessment from Student Achievement Data: Opportunities and HurdlesJournal of Personnel Evaluation in Education 14:4, 335, 2000. ? 2000 Kluwer Academic Publishers. Manufactured in The Netherlands.
⑨韦恩·K·霍伊,塞西尔·G·.米斯克尔.教育管理学:理论·研究·实践[M].范国睿主译.北京:教育科学出版社,2007:280.
①Daniel Fallon. The Buffalo upon the Chimneypiece the Value of Evidence. Journal of Teacher Education, Vol. 57, No. 2, March/April 2006 ,p.151.
②Daniel Fallon. The Buffalo upon the Chimneypiece the Value of Evidence. Journal of Teacher Education, Vol. 57, No. 2, March/April 2006 ,p.142.
③Joyce Van Tassel-Baska. Leadership for the Future in Gifted Education Presidential Address, NAGC 2006Gifted Child Quarterly Volume 51 Number 1 Winter 2007 5-10 ? 2007 National Association for Gifted Children 10.1177/0016986206297087 http://gcq.sagepub.com hosted at http://online.sagepub.com
④Robet L. Linn. Assessment and Accountability.Educational Researcher, Volume 29,No. 2,2000,p.10.
⑤Joyce Van Tassel-Baska. Leadership for the Future in Gifted Education Presidential Address, NAGC 2006Gifted Child Quarterly Volume 51 Number 1 Winter 2007 5-10 ? 2007 National Association for Gifted Children 10.1177/0016986206297087 http://gcq.sagepub.com hosted at http://online.sagepub.com
⑥Donald B. Rubin, Elizabeth A. Stuart, Elaine L. Zanutto. A Potential Outcomes View of Value-Added Assessment in EducationJournal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics Spring 2004, Vol. 29, No. 1, pp. 103–116.
⑦Ronald H. Heck. Assessing School Achievement Progress: Comparing Alternative ApproachesEducational Administration Quarterly Vol. 42, No. 5 ,December 2006,pp.667-699.
①William Sanders. Value-Added Assessment from Student Achievement Data: Opportunities and Hurdles. Journal of Personnel Evaluation in Education 14:4, 335. 2000. 2000 Kluwer Academic Publishers. Manufactured in the Netherlands.
②褚宏启.中国教育管理评论(第4卷)[M].北京:教育科学出版社,2007:69.
③汤林春,梁玲玲.学校效能评价的尝试[J].上海教育科研,2005, 4: 24.
④马晓强,彭文蓉,[英]萨丽·托马斯.学校效能的增值评价———对河北省保定市普通高中学校的实证研究[J].教育研究.2006,10:.77-83.谷珊.学校效能评价:对某市高中的实证研究[D].天津:天津师范大学硕士论文, 2007.徐群,闻金童.中美优秀高中建设比较研究[J].上海教育科研, 2002,2: 56-60.楮福靖.枣庄市重点高中组织文化与组织效能关系的研究[D].济南:山东师范大学教育硕士论文, 2003.
①刘本固.教育评价的理论与实践[M].杭州:浙江教育出版社,2000:49—51.
①W·詹姆斯·疱法姆.测验的反思[M].北京:中国轻工业出版社,2005:67.
②陈玉琨,沈玉顺.关于教育质量本质的探析.国际教育评估与质量保证会议交流材料,1996.
③李如海.教育观与质量观伦略[J].高等工程教育研究,1998,1.
①陈玉琨,李如海.我国教育评价的世纪回顾与未来展望[J].华东师范大学学报(教育科学版),2000,1:11.
②范国睿,罗刚.学校教育质量的发展性评价——从理念到行动.叶澜等.全球化、信息化背景下的中国基础教育改革研究报告集[M].上海:华东师范大学出版社,2004: 376.
③泰勒.课程与教学的基本原理[M].施良方译.北京:人民教育出版社,1994:85.
④克龙巴赫.通过评价改进教程.教育学文集·教育评价.陈玉琨、赵中建译. 164.
⑤斯塔弗尔比姆.方案评价的CIPP模式.教育学文集·教育评价[M].陈玉琨译. 301.
①田杰.评定·选拔·调控·个性化表现[J].中国教育学刊, 2003,3: 57.
②李雁冰.重塑教育评定——艾斯纳的课程评价初探[J].外国教育资料,2000,1:27-28.
③田杰.评定·选拔·调控·个性化表现[J].中国教育学刊, 2003,3:58.
④田杰.评定·选拔·调控·个性化表现[J].中国教育学刊. 2003,3:58.
①龚晓华.教育评价主题---促进人的发展[J].教育理论与实践,2003,9:8.
②朱小蔓.基础教育阶段现代学校制度的理论与实验研究[M].北京:教育科学出版社,2008: 90.
①Carmen D. Tekwe,Randy L. Carter,Chang-Xing Ma,James Algina,Maurice E. Lucas, Jeffrey Roth, Mario Ariet, Thomas Fisher, Michael B. Resnick. An Empirical Comparison of Statistical Models for Value-Added Assessment of School Performance. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics. Spring 2004, Vol. 29, No. 1, pp. 11–36.
②Mortimore, P. (1998). The Road to Improvement: Reflections on School Effectiveness. Lisse: Swets and Zeitlinger.卢乃桂,张佳伟.学校效能与学校改进走向结合的理论基础的探讨[J].教育学报,2007,5.
③William L. Sanders, Paul Wright. Controlling for Student Background in Value-Added Assessment of Teachers. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics Spring 2004, Vol. 29, No. 1, p. 38.
④Daniel Fallon. The Buffalo upon the Chimneypiece the Value of Evidence. Journal of Teacher Education,Vol. 57, No. 2, March/April 2006. 150.
⑤William L. Sanders . Value-Added Assessment from Student Achievement Data: Opportunities and HurdlesJournal of Personnel Evaluation in Education 14:4, 333, 2000.? 2000 Kluwer Academic Publishers. Manufactured in The Netherlands.
①Bruce R. Thompson. Equitable Measurement of School Effectiveness Urban Education, Vol. 39 No. 2, March 2004,p.203.
②Robert Lissitz. Value Added Models in Education: Theory and Practice. Applied Psychological Measurement, Vol. 30 No. 3, May 2006,p. 250.
③Mark Girod, Gerald Girod. Exploring the Efficacy of the Cook School District Simulation.Journal of Teacher Education, Vol. 57, No. 5, November/December 2006,p.481.
④William L. Sanders. Value-Added Assessment from Student Achievement Data: Opportunities and HurdlesJournal of Personnel Evaluation in Education 14:4, 332-333.2000. ? 2000 Kluwer Academic Publishers. Manufactured in The Netherlands.
⑤Ronald H. Heck. Assessing School Achievement Progress: Comparing Alternative ApproachesEducational Administration Quarterly Vol. 42, No. 5 ,December 2006,p.673.
①William L. Sanders. Value-Added Assessment from Student Achievement Data: Opportunities and HurdlesJournal of Personnel Evaluation in Education 14:4, 336, 2000. ? 2000 Kluwer Academic Publishers. Manufactured in The Netherlands.
②Carmen D. Tekwe,Randy L. Carter,Chang-Xing Ma,James Algina,Maurice E. Lucas, Jeffrey Roth,Mario Ariet,Thomas Fisher,Michael B. Resnick. An Empirical Comparison of Statistical Models for Value-Added Assessment of School Performance. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, Spring 2004, Vol. 29, No. 1, pp. 12-13.
③Ronald H. Heck. Assessing School Achievement Progress: Comparing Alternative ApproachesEducational Administration Quarterly Vol. 42, No. 5 ,December 2006,pp.667-699.
④Daniel Fallon. The Buffalo upon the Chimneypiece the Value of Evidence. Journal of Teacher Education, Vol. 57, No. 2, March/April 2006,pp.139-154.
⑤William L. Sanders.Value-Added Assessment from Student Achievement Data: Opportunities and Hurdles. Journal of Personnel Evaluation in Education 14:4, 335, 2000.2000 Kluwer Academic Publishers Manufactured in the Netherlands.
①Daniel Fallon. The Buffalo upon the Chimneypiece the Value of Evidence. Journal of Teacher Education, Vol. 57, No. 2, March/April 2006,P.151.
②Mona S. Wineburg. Evidence in Teacher Preparation Establishing a Framework for Accountability. Journal of Teacher Education, Vol. 57, No. 1, January/February 2006,PP.51-64. Linda E. Lee. Honey, Wooden Spoons, and Clay Pots: The Evolution of a Lithuanian Learning Conversation. L.M. Earl and H. Timperley (eds.), Professional Learning Conversations: 81 Challenges in Using Evidence for Improvement.. Springer Science & Business Media B.V. 2009,p86.
③Dan Liston, Jennie Whitcomb, Hilda Borko. NCLB and Scientifically-Based Research Opportunities Lost and Found. Journal of Teacher Education, Vol. 58, No. 2, March/April 2007 99-107 DOI: 10.1177/0022487107299980 ? 2007 by the American Association of Colleges for Teacher Education.
④[英]萨丽·托马斯.运用“增值”评量指标评估学校表现[J].教育研究, 2005,9:21.
⑤杨琼.学校效能与学校改革:对英国最新研究成果的书评[J].外国教育研究, 2003,12: 36.
⑥任春荣.增值测量法在学校效能评价中的应用及现实意义[J].谷珊.学校效能评价:对某市高中的实证研究[D].天津:天津师范大学硕士论文,2007.
⑦汤林春,梁玲玲.学校效能评价的尝试[J].上海教育科研,2005,4:24.
①William L. Sanders. Value-Added Assessment from Student Achievement Data: Opportunities and HurdlesJournal of Personnel Evaluation in Education 14:4, 329-339, 2000. ? 2000 Kluwer Academic Publishers. Manufactured in The Netherlands.
②Robet L. Linn. Assessment and Accountability.Educational Researcher, Volume 29,No. 2,2000,p. 8.
③Dan Liston, Jennie Whitcomb, Hilda Borko. NCLB and Scientifically-Based Research Opportunities Lost and Found. Journal of Teacher Education, Vol. 58, No. 2, March/April 2007, 99-107 DOI: 10.1177/0022487107299980 ? 2007 by the American Association of Colleges for Teacher Education.④R.H.Hall . Organizations: Structures, Processes, and Outcomes( 8th ed.), Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.2002.
①R.H.Hall . Organizations: Structures, Processes, and Outcomes( 8th ed.), Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.2002.
①朱小蔓.基础教育阶段现代学校制度的理论与实验研究[M].北京:教育科学出版社, 2008: 89-90.
①马克思恩格斯全集第23卷[M].北京:人民出版社,1972:190.
②韩庆祥,亢安毅.马克思开辟的道路---人的全面发展研究[M] .北京:人民出版社.2005:54.
①[美]霍华德·加德纳.多元智能.沈致隆译.北京:新华出版社.2004:8-12.
②[美]霍华德·加德纳.多元智能.沈致隆译.北京:新华出版社.2004:49..
①[美]马斯洛.马斯洛人本主义哲学[M].成明编译.北京:九州出版社,2003.
①陈奎憙,张建成,谭光鼎,王丽云.教育社会学.任务与思想[M].上海:华中师范大学出版社, 2009:7.
②张人杰.国外教育社会学基本文选[M].上海:华东师范大学出版社, 2009:22-30.
③张人杰.国外教育社会学基本文选[M].上海:华东师范大学出版社, 2009:8-19.
①张人杰.国外教育社会学基本文选[M].上海:华东师范大学出版社, 2009:405.
②王炳照.中国教育改革30年(基础教育卷)[M].北京:北京师范大学出版社,2009:1-14.
①汤林春.学校效能评价研究[D].上海:华东师范大学博士学位论文, 2005:55-127.
①Joyce Van Tassel-Baska. Leadership for the Future in Gifted Education Presidential Address, NAGC 2006 Gifted Child Quarterly, Volume 51, Number 1, Winter 2007,pp. 5-10 ? 2007 National Association for Gifted Children 10.1177/0016986206297087 http://gcq.sagepub.com hosted at http://online.sagepub.com
②Lisa Andrejko. Value-Added Assessment: A View from a Practitioner. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, Spring 2004, Vol. 29, No. 1, p.8.
③Daniel Fallon. The Buffalo upon the Chimneypiece the Value of Evidence. Journal of Teacher Education, Vol. 57, No. 2, March/April 2006. 152.
①林少杰.发展性评价的认识·现代教育论丛[J].教育改革动态.2003, 6: 27-30.
②朱小曼.基础教育阶段现代学校制度的理论与实验研究[M].北京:教育科学出版社,2008: 92.
①龚孝华.教育评价主题---促进人的发展[J].教育理论与实践,2003,9: 5-8.
②朱小蔓.基础教育阶段现代学校制度的理论与实验研究[M].北京:教育科学出版社,2008:90.
③朱小曼.基础教育阶段现代学校制度的理论与实验研究[M].北京:教育科学出版社,2008:92.
①钟启泉等.为了中华民族的复兴为了每位学生的发展[M].上海:华东师范大学出版社,2001:9-10.
①邬向明.教育评价:复杂的人与薄弱的评价理论——新课程改革背景下选拔性教育评价要素与原则的选择[J].课程·教材·教法, 2006,9: 21.
①金媂,王钢.教育评价与测量[M].北京:教育科学出版社,2007:10-11.
②杨光德.中国学分制[M].上海:上海科学技术文献出版社,1996:13.张茂聪,车丽娜.山东省高中课程改革的经验与问题[M].济南:山东人民出版社, 2007: 224.
①[美]B·S·布卢姆.教育评价[M].邱渊等译.上海:华东师范大学出版社,1987:2-5 .
①[英]萨丽·托马斯.运用“增值”评量指标评估学校表现[J].教育研究, 2005, 9: 20-27.
①朱小曼.基础教育阶段现代学校制度的理论与实验研究[M].北京:教育科学出版社,2008:89-90.
②任春荣.教育公平视角下的学校效能评价[J].教育导刊,2007,9:53-55.
③Audrey Amrein-Beardsley. Methodological Concerns about the Education Value-Added Assessment System. Educational Researcher, Vol. 37, No. 2, p. 65 DOI: 10.3102/0013189X08316420 ? 2008 AERA. http://er.aera.net
④Robet L. Linn. Assessment and Accountability.Educational Researcher, Volume 29,No. 2,2000.pp.9-10.
⑤Ronald H. Heck. Assessing School Achievement Progress: Comparing Alternative Approaches. Educational Administration Quarterly Vol. 42, No. 5 (December 2006) 674.
①B·S·布卢姆.教育评价[M].邱渊等译.上海:华东师范大学出版社,1987.2-5.
①张人杰.国外教育社会学基本文选[M].上海:华东师范大学出版社,2009: 405.
①孙袁华,张熙.建构我国的高质量义务教育评价指标体系—种国际化视野的归类比较与综合分析[J].教育理论与实践,2003,8:16-17.
①孙袁华,张熙.建构我国的高质量义务教育评价指标体系———种国际化视野的归类比较与综合分析[J].教育理论与实践,2003,8:14-19.
①马克思恩格斯全集第23卷[M].北京:人民出版社,1972:190.
①汤林春.学校效能评价研究[D].上海:华东师范大学博士学位论文,2005:126.
②高玉祥.个性心理学[M].北京:北京师范大学出版社, 2007:301.
③高玉祥.个性心理学[M].北京:北京师范大学出版社, 2007:303.
①顾云虎.应然与实然两种视角下的学力研究----学力模式比较和思考[J].上海教育, 2001,9.
②钟启泉.学力理论的历史发展[J].全球教育展望, 2001.
①[日]田中耕治.学力调查若干问题探析[J].教育研究,2006,7.
②朱晓曼.素质教育评价:理念与思路[J].人民教育,2007,9:35.
③Susan Kochan. Evolution of School Performance Research in the USA: From School Effectiveness to School Accountability and Back. T. Townsend (Ed.), International Handbook of School Effectiveness and Improvement, 489–490. ? 2007 Springer.
④孙绵涛.教育效能论[M].北京:人民教育出版社,2007:184.
①《马克思恩格斯全集》第23卷[M].北京:人民出版社,1972:190.
②B·S·布卢姆.教育评价[M].邱渊等译.上海:华东师范大学出版社,1987:2-5.
③汤林春.学校效能评价研究[D].上海:华东师范大学博士学位论文,2005:126.
①汤林春.学校效能评价研究[D].上海:华东师范大学博士学位论文,2005.
②汤林春.学校效能评价研究[D].上海:华东师范大学博士学位论文,2005:72.
①汤林春.学校效能评价研究[D].上海:华东师范大学博士学位论文,2005:76.
②David Reynolds. School Effectiveness and School Improvement (SESI): Links with the InterantionalStandards/Accountability Agenda. T. Townsend (Ed.), International Handbook of School Effectiveness and Improvement, 471–484. ? 2007 Springer.
①汤林春.学校效能评价[D].上海:华东师范大学博士学位论文,2005:73-78.
②陈奎憙,张建成,谭光鼎,王丽云.教育社会学:任务与思想[M].上海:华中师范大学出版社,2009:7-8.
③韩庆祥,亢安毅.马克思开辟的道路---人的全面发展研究[M].北京:人民出版社,2005:54.
①汤林春.学校效能评价研究[D].上海:华东师范大学博士学位论文, 2005:126.
②钟启泉.学力理论的历史发展[J].全球教育展望, 2001.
①郑燕祥.教育领导与改革新范式[M].上海:上海教育出版社,2005:27-28.
①彭贤智.对学习品质的结构与培养策略的研究[J].唐山师范学院学报,2004,1:75.
①张人杰.国外教育社会学基本文选[M].上海:华东师范大学出版社,2009:18.
①张人杰.国外教育社会学基本文选[M].上海:华东师范大学出版社,2009:22-29.
②孙绵涛.教育效能论[M].北京:人民教育出版社, 2007:229-230.
①[美]詹姆斯·梅里特.铸就一生的9种品格[M].郝子岩译.北京:中国戏剧出版社,2006.
②张人杰.国外教育社会学基本文选[M],上海:华东师范大学出版社,2009: 199-229.
③刘本固.教育评价的理论与实践[M].杭州:浙江教育出版社,2000:173-175.
④[美]马斯洛.马斯洛人本主义哲学[M].成明编译.北京:九州出版社,2003.
①钟启泉等.为了中华民族的复兴为了每位学生的发展[M].上海:华东师范大学出版社,2001:4.
②黄济.教育哲学通论[M].太原:山西教育出版社,2004:435.
③王承绪,赵祥麟.西方现代教育论著选[M].北京:人民教育出版社,2001: 8.
①张人杰.国外教育社会学基本文选[M].上海:华东师范大学出版社,2009:29-30.
②B·S·布卢姆.教育评价[M].邱渊等译.上海:华东师范大学出版社,1987:2-5.
③[美]霍华德·加德纳.多元智能[M].沈致隆译.北京:新华出版社,2004:72.
①[美]霍华德·加德纳.多元智能[M].沈致隆译.北京:新华出版社.2004:8-9.
①李戎.美学概论[M].济南:齐鲁出版社,1992:439—444.
[1]赵承福,陈泽河.创造教育研究新进展[M].济南:山东人民出版社,2002.
[2]朱小蔓.基础教育阶段现代学校制度的理论与实验研究[M].北京:教育科学出版社,2008.
[3]孙绵涛.教育效能论[M].北京:人民教育出版社, 2007.
[4]楮宏启.中国教育管理评论(第四卷)[M].北京:教育科学出版社, 2007.
[5]钟启泉,张华等.为了中华民族的复兴为了每位学生的发展[M].上海:华东师范大学出版社,2001.
[6]郑金洲、程亮.中国教育新进展---2007[M].上海:华东师范大学出版社,2008.
[7]冯大鸣.美、英、澳教育管理前沿图景[M].北京:教育科学出版社,2004.
[8]蔡进雄.转型领导与学校效能[ M] .台北:师大书苑,2001.
[9]郑燕祥.教育领导与改革新范式[M].上海:上海教育出版社,2005.
[10]刘本固.教育评价的理论与实践[M].浙江:浙江教育出版社,2000.
[11]韩庆祥,亢安毅.马克思开辟的道路---人的全面发展研究[M].人民出版社.2005.
[12]陈奎憙,张建成,谭光鼎,王丽云.教育社会学.任务与思想[M].上海:华中师范大学出版社.2009.
[13]黄济.教育哲学通论[M].太原:山西教育出版社,2004.
[14]王承绪,赵祥麟.西方现代教育论著选[M].北京:人民教育出版社,2001.
[15]张人杰.国外教育社会学基本文选[M],上海,华东师范大学出版社,2009.
[16]李戎.美学概论[M].济南:齐鲁出版社,1992.
[17]张茂聪,车丽娜.山东省高中课程改革的经验与问题[M].济南:山东人民出版社,2007.
[18]孙瑞请,宋宝如.数学教育实验与教育评价概论(第2版)[M].北京:北京师范大学出版社,2007.
[19]叶澜等.全球化、信息化背景下的中国基础教育改革研究报告集[M].上海:华东师范大学出版社,2004.
[20]金媂,王钢.教育评价与测量[M].北京:教育科学出版社,2007.
[21]肖远军.教育评价原理及应用[M].杭州:浙江大学出版社,2004.
[22]叶浩生.西方心理学的历史与体系[M].北京:人民教育出版社,1998.
[23]高玉祥.个性心理学[M].北京:北京师范大学出版社,2007.
[24]素质教育调研组.共同的关注——素质教育系统调研[M].北京:教育科学出版社,2006.
[25]朱小蔓.对策与建议——2005-2006年度教育热点、难点问题分析[M].北京:教育科学出版社,2007.
[26]吴霓.学校教育管理实施ISO9000族标准的研究与实践[M].北京:教育科学出版社,2006.
[27]王海芳.学生发展性评价的操作与案例[M].中国轻工业出版社,2006.
[28]陈玉琨.教育评价学[M].北京:人民教育出版社,1999.
[29]李淑华.更有效的评价细节[M].重庆:西南师范大学出版社,2009.
[30]辛自强.问题解决与知识建构[M].北京:教育科学出版社,2005.
[31]张文新.青少年发展心理学[M].济南:山东人民出版社,2002.
[32]张文新,纪林芹,董会芹等.中小学生的欺负问题与干预[M].济南:山东人民出版社,2006.
[33]程书肖.教育评价方法与技术[M].北京:北京师范大学出版社,2007.
[34]胡中锋.教育测量与评价[M].广州:广州高等教育出版社,2006.
[35]穆涛,赵慧敏.绩效管理评价体系[M].深圳:海天出版社,2006.
[36]魏超群.数学教育评价[M].南宁:广西教育出版社,1996.
[37]沈玉顺.课堂评价[M].北京:北京师范大学出版社,2006.
[38]周斌.决策与执行:制度是腋下的学校变革[M].北京:教育科学出版社,2005.
[39]谌启标.有效学校[M].大连:辽宁师范大学出版社,2006.
[40]王海传.人的发展的制度安排[M].武汉:华中师范大学出版社,2007.
[41]庄西真.国家的限度“制度化”学校的社会逻辑[M].南京:南京师范大学出版社,2006.
[42]王炳照.中国教育改革30年(基础教育卷)[M].北京:北京师范大学出版社,2009.
[43]范国睿.多元与融合:多位视野中的学校发展[M].北京:教育科学出版社,2002.
[44]程凤春.教学全面质量管理[M].北京:教育科学出版社,2004.
[45]周浩波.教育哲学[M].北京:人民教育出版社,2000.
[46]钟启泉.现代课程论[M].上海:上海教育出版社. 1989.
[47]潘洪建.教学知识论[M].兰州:甘肃教育出版社. 2004.
[1]马克思恩格斯选集(第一、二、三、四卷)[M].北京:人民出版社,1972.
[2][美]戴安娜?哈特.真实性评价[M].国家基础教育课程改革“促进教师发展与学生成长的评价研究”项目组译.北京:中国轻工业出版社,2004.
[3]联合国教科文组织教育丛书.为了21世纪的教育---问题与展望[M].王晓辉,赵中建译.北京:教育科学出版社, 2002.
[4][美]韦恩·K·霍伊,塞西尔·G·米斯克尔.教育管理学:理论·研究·实践[M].范国睿主译.北京:教育科学出版社,2007.
[5][美]约瑟夫·A·马克斯威尔.质性研究设计[M].北京:中国轻工业出版社,2008.
[6]瞿保奎.教育学文集·教育评价[M].北京:人民教育出版社,1989.
[7]泰勒.课程与教学的基本原理[M].施良方译.北京:人民教育出版社,1994:85.
[8][美]安迪·斯蒂克斯,[美]弗兰克·鄂贝克.有效的课堂指导手册[M].屈书杰译.北京:教育科学出版社,2008.
[9][美]霍华德·加德纳.多元智能[M].沈致隆译.北京:新华出版社.2004:8-12.
[10][美]B·S·布卢姆等.教育评价[M].邱渊等译.上海:华东师范大学出版社,1987.
[11][美]W·詹姆斯·庖法姆.测验的反思——对高利害测验的建议[M].国家基础教育课程改革“促进教师发展与学生成长的评价研究”项目组译.北京:中国轻工业出版社,2005.
[12][德]爱塔·克莱福特,詹·D·李乌维.多层次模型分析导论[M].重庆:重庆大学出版社,2007.
[13][美]W·詹姆斯·庖法姆.促进教学的课堂评价[M].国家基础教育课程改革“促进教师发展与学生成长的评价研究”项目组译.北京:中国轻工业出版社,2003.
[14][美]戈兰特·威金斯.教育性评价[M].国家基础教育课程改革“促进教师发展与学生成长的评价研究”项目组译.北京:中国轻工业出版社,2005.
[15][美]罗伯特·L·林,诺尔曼·E·格朗兰德.教学中的测验与评价[M].国家基础教育课程改革“促进教师发展与学生成长的评价研究”项目组译.北京:中国轻工业出版社,2003.
[16][美]格利·D·鲍里奇,马丁·L·汤姆巴瑞.中小学教育评价[M].国家基础教育课程改革“促进教师发展与学生成长的评价研究”项目组译.北京:中国轻工业出版社,2004.
[17][美]詹姆斯·巴腾,安杰罗·考林斯.成长记录袋评价——教育工作者手册[M].国家基础教育课程改革“促进教师发展与学生成长的评价研究”项目组译.北京:中国轻工业出版社,2005.
[18][美]哈瑞·托瑞,罗伯特·伍德.深度评价——用“评价中心”测评人的综合才能[M].唐云,梁志祥,付丹丹译.北京:中国轻工业出版社,2007.
[19][英]马克·帕金森.人格测试[M].邹志敏译.北京:中国轻工业出版社,2007.
[20][英]吉姆·巴瑞特.潜能评估[M].唐云,梁志祥,付丹丹译.北京:中国轻工业出版社,2007.
[21][美]巴巴拉·E·瓦尔乌德,弗吉尼亚·约翰逊·安德森.等级评分——学习和评价的有效工具[M].国家基础教育课程改革“促进教师发展与学生成长的评价研究”项目组译.北京:中国轻工业出版社,2004.
[22][澳]布赖恩·J·卡德威尔,吉姆·M·斯宾克斯.超越自我管理学校[M].胡东芳等译.上海:上海教育出版社,2005.
[23][美]小詹姆斯·诺兰,琳达·A·胡娃.教师督导与评价——理论与实践的结合[M].兰英主译.北京:中国轻工业出版社,2007.
[24][美]E·马克·汉森.教育管理与组织行为[M].冯大鸣译.上海:上海教育出版社,2005.
[25][]A·班杜拉.自我效能:控制的实施(上、下册)[M].缪小春等译.上海:华东师范大学出版社,2003.
[26][美]罗伯特·J·马扎诺,[美]詹尼弗·S·诺福德,[美]戴安娜·E·佩恩特,[美]黛博拉·J·皮克林,[美]巴巴拉·B·盖迪.有效的课堂教学手册[M].杨永华,周佳萍译.北京:教育科学出版社,2008.
[27][美]S·斯特林菲尔德,S·罗斯,L·史密斯.重建学校的大胆计划[M].窦卫霖等译.上海:华东师范大学出版社,2003.
[28][美]埃里希·弗洛姆.生命之爱[M].王大鹏译.北京:国际文化出版公司,2001.
[29][奥]阿尔弗雷德·阿德勒.理解人性[M].陈太胜,陈文颖译.北京:国际文化出版公司,2000.
[30][美]弗莱德·C·鲁能伯格,阿兰·C·奥姆斯滕.教育管理学理论与实践[M].孙志军等译.北京:中国轻工业出版社,2003.
[31]罗伯特·G·欧文斯.教育组织行为学[M].窦卫霖,温建平,王越译.上海:华东师范大学出版社,2001.
[32][美]詹姆斯·梅里特.铸就一生的9种品格[M].郝子岩译.北京:中国戏剧出版社,2006.
[33] [美]马斯洛.马斯洛人本主义哲学[M].成明编译.北京:九州出版社,2003.
[34]联合国教科文组织国际教育发展委员会.学会生存[M].华东师范大学比较教育研究所译.北京:教育科学出版社,1996.
[35][美]马克赫斯切.管理经济学[M].李国津译.北京:机械工业出版社,2007.
[36]克龙巴赫.通过评价改进教程.教育学文集·教育评价.陈玉琨、赵中建译.
[37]D·L·斯塔弗尔比姆.方案评价的CIPP模式.教育学文集·教育评价.陈玉琨译.
[1]任春荣.教育公平视角下的学校效能评价[J].教育导刊,2007,(9).
[2]边玉芳,林志红.增值评价:一种绿色升学率理念下的学校评价模式[J].北京师范大学学报(社会科学版),2007,(6).
[3]谌启标.学校效能研究论纲[J].教育理论与实践,2001,(6).
[4]张煜.学校效能评价[J].中小学管理,1997,(7-8).
[5]谌启标.学校效能论[J].江西教育科研,2001,(6a).
[6]谌启标.美国“有效学校”研究述评[J].教育研究与实验,2003,(1).
[7]谌启标.学校效能研究与学校重建[J].教育发展研究,2007,(10b).
[8]孟繁华.构建现代学校的学习型组织[J].比较教育研究,2002,(1).
[9]钱家荣.高效能学校及其特征[J].外国中小学教育,2003,(8).
[10]陈欣.学校效能的多维透视[J].教学与管理,2003,(7).
[11]朱科蓉,李春景.学校效能研究的历史、现状与趋势[J].教学与管理,2003,(1).
[12]陈丰伟.国外学校校能研究述评[J].江西教育科研,2003,(10).
[13]杨琼.学校效能与学校改革:对英国最新研究成果的述评[J].外国教育研究,2003,(12).
[14]杨琼,范国睿.学校校能研究的现状及其反思[J].上海教育科研,2003,(6).
[15]盖雁,尹钟祥.发展中的普通教育评价---我国普教评价理论与实践发展综述.现代教育科学.2003,(6).
[16]汤林春.学校效能略论[J].中小学管理,2004,(2)
[17]汤林春,梁玲玲.学校效能评价的尝试[J].上海教育科研.2005,(4).
[18]汤林春.学校效能的学校因素研究[J].上海教育科研,2006,(8).
[19]汤林春.试论学校效能评价的两种思路[J].教育管理研究,2007,(2).
[20]谈松华.试行效能评价[J].中国远程教育,2004,(4).
[21]孙河川.欧洲八国学校效能与改进研究.---国家层影响要素对教育改进的影响[J].教育研究(增刊),2004.
[22]陈明高,马晓晴,曹晖.教师集体效能研究述评[J].山东师范大学学报,2005,(4).
[23]石雷山.教师集体效能---教师效能研究的新进展[J].外国教育研究,2005,(10).
[24]蔡永红.美英两国学校效能研究的回顾与反思[J].外国教育研究,2006,(5).
[25]台州市椒江区教育局课题组.区域推进学校效能评估的实践探索[J].教育发展研究,2005,(11b).
[26]弗兰西斯科·索夫,杨燕燕.课程效能评价---以“教育效能与教育评价”为例[J].外国教育研究,2005,(5).
[27]温恒福.学校效能的基本理论问题[J].教育研究,2007,(2).
[28]陈光春.学校效能研究新进展[J].教育发展研究,2007,(10b).
[29]赵树贤.卡坦斯学校效能评价模式及其拓展研究[J].中国教育学刊,2007,(6).
[30]卢乃桂,张佳伟.学校效能与学校改进走向结合的理论基础的探讨[J].教育学报,2007,(5).
[31]王俭.论当代学校效能的价值取向[J].基础教育参考,2007,(6).
[32]蔡永红.学校效能研究的回顾与反思——从研究方法的角度[J].教育研究,2007,(2).
[33]刘在花.美英两国学校效能研究的回顾与反思[J].外国教育研究,2006,(5).
[34]蔡永红.美国学校效能研究的回顾与反思[J].比较教育研究,2005,(11).
[35]马晓强,彭文蓉,[英]萨丽·托马斯.学校效能的增值评价———对河北省保定市普通高中学校的实证研究[J].教育研究,2006,(10).
[36]徐群,闻金童.中美优秀高中建设比较研究[J].上海教育科研,2002,(2).
[37]李如海.教育观与质量观伦略[J].高等工程教育研究,1998,(1).
[38]陈玉琨,李如海.我国教育评价的世纪回顾与未来展望[J].华东师范大学学报(教育科学版),2000,(1).
[39]余继凤.西方国家学校效能研究的反思及其未来发展[J].外国教育研究,2005,(6).
[40]田杰.评定·选拔·调控·个性化表现[J].中国教育学刊,2003,(3).
[41]李雁冰.重塑教育评定——艾斯纳的课程评价初探[J].外国教育资料,2000,(1).
[42]龚晓华.教育评价主题---促进人的发展[J].教育理论与实践,2003,(9).
[43][英]萨丽·托马斯.运用“增值”评量指标评估学校表现[J].教育研究,2005,(9).
[44]林少杰.发展性评价的认识·现代教育论丛[J].教育改革动态,2003,(6).
[45]杨希洁. PISA特点分析及其对我国基础教育评价制度改革的启示[J].教育科学研究,2008,(2).
[46]顾云虎.应然与实然两种视角下的学力研究----学力模式比较和思考[J].上海教育,2001,(9).
[47]钟启泉.学力理论的历史发展[J].全球教育展望,2001.
[48]田中耕治.学力调查若干问题探析[J].教育研究,2006,(7).
[49]朱小蔓.素质教育评价:理念与思路[J].人民教育,2007,(9)
[50]彭贤智.对学习品质的结构与培养策略的研究[J].唐山师范学院学报,2004,(1).
[51]胡永梅.校本评估理论初探[J].教育理论与实践,2004,(10).
[1]汤林春.学校效能评价研究[D].上海:华东师范大学博士学位论文,2005.
[2]谷珊.学校效能评价:对某市高中的实证研究[D].天津:天津师范大学硕士学位论文,2007.
[3]赵晖.普通初级中学学校效能评价研究初探[D].上海:上海师范大学硕士学位论文,2005.
[4]楮福靖.枣庄市重点高中组织文化与组织效能关系的研究[D].济南:山东师范大学教育硕士学位论文,2003.
[5]王凯.发展性校本学生评价[D].上海:华东师范大学博士学位论文,2004.
[6]俎媛媛.真实性学生评价研究[D].上海:华东师范大学博士学位论文,2007.
[7]周文叶.学生表现性评价研究[D].上海:华东师范大学博士学位论文,2009.
[8]邓晶.学校效能提升的框架分析[D].北京:首都师范大学硕士学位论文,2005.
[1]Fred C. Lunenburg(America), Allan C. Ornstein(America). Educational Administration Concepts and Practice.北京:外语教学与研究出版社,2004.
[2]赵勇,杨文中.当代教育科学前沿报告(美国教育文选2006-2007)[M].上海:华东师范大学出版社,2007.
[3]R.H.Hall. Organizations: Structures, Processes, and Outcomes( 8th ed.), Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.2002.
[4]P. Mortimore. The Road to Improvement: Reflections on School Effectiveness[M]. Lisse, Netherlands: Swets & Zeitlinger,1998.
[5]J. Scheerens, R. Bosker. The Foundations of Educational Effectiveness, Oxford:Permagon.1997.
[6]Earl Babbie. The Basics of Social Research.北京:外语教学与研究出版社,2005.
[1]Jim Spinks. Resources and School Effectiveness and Improvement. T. Townsend (Ed.), International Handbook of School Effectiveness and Improvement, 451–468.? 2007 Springer.
[2]William L. Sanders. Value-Added Assessment from Student Achievement Data: Opportunities and HurdlesJournal of Personnel Evaluation in Education 14:4, 329-339, 2000.? 2000 Kluwer Academic Publishers. Manufactured in The Netherlands.
[3]Ronald H. Heck. Assessing School Achievement Progress: Comparing Alternative Approaches. Educational Administration Quarterly, Vol. 42, No. 5,December 2006,pp.667-699.
[4] Robert L. Linn. Assessments and Accountability.Educational Researcher, March 2000, Volume 29,No. 2, pp. 4-16.
[5]Daniel Fallon. The Buffalo upon the Chimneypiece the Value of Evidence. Journal of Teacher Education, Vol. 57, No. 2, March/April 2006,pp.139-154.DOI: 10.1177/0022487105285675? 2006 by the American Association of Colleges for Teacher Education.
[6]Audrey Amrein-Beardsley. Methodological Concerns about the Education Value-Added Assessment System. Educational Researcher, Vol. 37, No. 2, pp. 65-75 DOI: 10.3102/0013189X08316420 ? 2008 AERA. http://er.aera.net
[7]George H. Noell, Jeanne L. Burns. Value-Added Assessment of Teacher Preparation an Illustration of Emerging Technonogy.Journal of Teacher Education, Vol. 57, No. 1,January/February2006,pp.37-50.DOI: 10.1177/0022487105284466 ? 2006 by the American Association of Colleges for Teacher Education
[8] Carmen D. Tekwe, Randy L. Carter, Chang-Xing Ma, James Algina, Maurice E. Lucas, Jeffrey Roth, Mario Ariet, Thomas Fisher, Michael B. Resnick . An Empirical Comparison of Statistical Models for Value-Added Assessment of School Performance. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics ,Spring2004, Vol. 29, No. 1, pp. 11-36.
[9] Joseph A. Martineau. Distorting Value Added: The Use of Longitudinal, Vertically Scaled Student Achievement Data for Growth-Based, Value-Added Accountability. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, Spring 2006, Vol. 31, No. 1, pp.35-62.
[10]Susan Kochan. Evolution of School Performance Research in the USA: From School Effectiveness to School Accountability and Back. T. Townsend (Ed.), International Handbook of School Effectiveness and Improvement,485–502.? 2007 Springer.
[11] Eric A. Hanushek. The Failure of Input-Based Schooling Policies. Economic Journal, 2003, pp. 64-98.
[12] Joel K. Kiboss, Mwangi Ndirangu, Eric W. Wekesa1. Effectiveness of a Computer-Mediated Simulations Program in School Biology on Pupils’Learning Outcomes in Cell Theory. Journal of Science Education and Technology, Vol. 13, No. 2, June 2004 .
[13] Hedley Beare. Four Decades of Body-Surfing The Breakers of School Reform: Just Waving, not Drowning. T. Townsend (Ed.), International Handbook of School Effectiveness and Improvement, 27–40. ? 2007 Springer.
[14] David Grissmer. Class Size Effects: Assessing the Evidence, its Policy Implications, and Future Research Agenda. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, Summer 1999, Vol. 21. No. 2. pp. 231-248.
[15] R.G. Ehrenberg et al.. Class Size and Student Achievement .Psychology Science in the Public Interest, 2001, 2:pp.1-30.
[16] B. Nye, L. V. Hedges. The Effects of Small Classes on Academic Achievement: the Results of the Tennessee Class Size Experiment. American Educational Research Journal, 2000, 37: pp.123-151.
[17] H. Goldstein.et al. Meta-Analysis Using Multilevel Models with an Application to the Study of Class Size Effects. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, 2000,49,pp.399-412.
[18] Debbi C. Harris. Lowering the Bar or Moving the Target: A WageDecomposition of Michigan’s Charter and Traditional Public School Teachers. Educational Administration Quarterly, Vol. 42, No. 3,August 2006, pp.424-460.
[19] Bruce R. Thompson. Equitable Measurement of School Effectiveness. Urban Education,Vol.39,No. 2, March 2004, pp.200-229.DOI: 10.1177/0042085903261325? 2004 Corwin Press, Inc.
[20]Ronald H. Heck. Examining the Relationship Between Teacher Quality as an Organizational Property of Schools and Students’Achievement and Growth Rates. Educational Administration Quarterly, Vol. 43, No. 4 ,October 2007,pp.399-432.
[21] James Griffith. The Relation of Organizational Process Orientation to School Effectiveness and Efficiency in Elementory Public Schools. Social Psychology of Education, 1:297-321,1998. 1998Kluwer Academic Publishers Printed in the Netherlands.
[22] Allan Walker, Philip Hallinger, and Haiyan Qian. Leadership Development for School Effectiveness and Improvement in East Asia. T. Townsend (Ed.), International Handbook of School Effectiveness and Improvement, 659–678. ? 2007 Springer.
[23]R. H. Heck. Examining the Impact of School Quality on School Outcomes and Improvement: A Value-Added Approach. Educational Administration Quarterly, 36(4), 2000, pp.513-552.
[24] Vincent A. Anfara Jr., Faye Patterson, Alison Buehler, Brian Gearity. School Improvement Planning in East Tennessee Middle Schools: A Content Analysis and Perceptions Study. NASSP Bulletin, Vol. 90, No. 4, December 2006, pp.277-300 DOI: 10.1177/0192636506294848 ? 2006 by the National Association of Secondary School Principals http://bul.sagepub.com hosted at http://online.sagepub.com
[25]B. Rowan, R. Correnti, R. J. Miller. What Large-Scale Survey Research Tells Us about Teacher Effects on Student Achievement:Insights from the Prospects Study of Elementary Schools. Teachers College Record,104(8), 2002,pp. 1525-1567.
[26] P. Hallinger, R. H. Heck. Exploring the Principal’s Contribution to SchoolEffectiveness,1980-1985 School Effectiveness and School Improvement,9(2),1998,pp.157-191.
[27] S. H. Fuhrman. Challenges in Systemic Education Reform. CPRE Policy Brief No. RB-14.Phyladelphia,PA: University of Pennsylvania, Consortiumn for Policy Research in Education,1994.
[28] R. F. Elmore. Bridging the Gap between Standards and Achievement. Washington, DC: Albert Shanker Institute, 2002a.
[29] Janet H. Chrispeels, Carrie A. Andrews with Margarita González. System Supports for Teacher Learning and School Improvement. T. Townsend (Ed.), International Handbook of School Effectiveness and Improvement, 787–806. ? 2007 Springer.
[30] Knight Jim. Do schools Have Learning Disabilities? Focus on Exceptional Children. V.30 ,May 1998.
[31] Thomas J. Lasley, Dary Siedentop, Robert Yinger. A Systemic Approach to Enhancing Teacher Quality the Ohio Model. Journal of Teacher Education, Vol. 57, No. 1, January/February 2006, 13-21.DOI: 10.1177/0022487105284455? 2006 by the American Association of Colleges for Teacher Education.
[32] Tim Konold, Brian Jablonski, Anthony Nottingham, Lara Kessler, Stephen Byrd, Scott Imig ,Robert Berry, Robert McNergney . Adding Value to Public Schools Investigating Teacher Education, Teaching, and Pupil Learning. Journal of Teacher Education, Volume 59 Number 4 September/October 2008,pp. 300-312 ? 2008 Sage Publications 10.1177/0022487108321378 http://jte.sagepub.com hosted at http://online.sagepub.com.
[33] Heather C. Hill, Sarah Theule Lubienski. Teachers’Mathematics Knowledge for Teaching and School Context A Study of California TeachersEducational Policy,Volume 21 Number 5 November 2007,pp. 747-768 ? 2007 Corwin Press 10.1177/0895904807307061 http://epx.sagepub.com hosted at http://online.sagepub.com.
[34] Andrew J. Rotherham, Julie Mikuta, Julia Freeland. Letter to the Next President. Journal of Teacher Education, Vol. 59, No. 3, May/June 2008,pp.242-251 DOI: 10.1177/0022487108317021 ? 2008 by the American Association of Colleges for Teacher Education.
[35]H. Del Schalock, Mark D. Schalock, Robert Ayres. Scaling up Research in Teacher Education New Demands on Theory, Measurement, and Design. Journal of Teacher Education, Vol. 57, No. 2, March/April 2006,pp. 102-119. DOI: 10.1177/0022487105285615 ? 2006 by the American Association of Colleges for Teacher Education.
[36] Michael D. Andrew, Casey D. Cobb, Peter J. Giampietro. Verbal Ability and Teacher Effectiveness. Journal of Teacher Education, Vol. 56, No. 4, September/October 2005,pp. 343-354.
[37] Gregory J. Palardy, Russell W. Rumberger. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis. June 2008, Vol. 30, No. 2, pp. 111–140 DOI: 10.3102/0162373708317680 ? 2008 AERA. http://eepa.aera.net .
[38] Christopher Day, Pam Sammons, and Qing Gu. Combining Qualitative and Quantitative Methodologies in Research on Teachers’Lives,Work, and Effectiveness: From Integration to Synergy. Educational Researcher, Vol. 37, No. 6, pp. 330–342.DOI: 10.3102/0013189X08324091 ? 2008 AERA. http://er.aera.net.
[39] D.K. Cohen, S.W. Raudenbush, and D.L. Ball. Resources, Instruction, and Research. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis,25(2), 2003,pp.119-142.
[40]David Reynolds. School Effectiveness and School Improvement (SESI): Links with the International Standards/Accountability Agenda.T. Townsend (Ed.), International Handbook of School Effectiveness and Improvement, 471–484 ? 2007 Springer.
[41]William F. Tate IV. The Political Economy of Teacher Quality in School Mathematics African American Males, Opportunity Structures, Politics, and Method. American Behavioral Scientist, Volume 51 Number 7 March 2008,pp. 953-971 ? 2008 Sage Publications 10.1177/0002764207311999 http://abs.sagepub.com hosted at http://online.sagepub.com.
[42]Dale Ballou, William Sanders, Paul Wright. Controlling for Student Backgroundin Value-Added Assessment of Teachers. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, Spring 2004, Vol. 29, No. 1, pp. 37–65.
[43]V. Battistich, et al. Beyond the Three R’s: a Broader Agenda for School Reform. The elementary school Journal,1999,99:pp.415-431.
[44]Marilyn Cochran-Smith, Mary Kim Fries. Sticks, Stones, and Ideology: The Discourse of Reform in Teacher Education. Educational Researcher, November 2001, Vol. 30. No. 8, pp. 3–15.
[45]L.M. Desimone, A.C. Porter, M.S. Garet, K.S. Yoon, and B.F. Briman. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 2002,24(2),pp.81-112.
[46] Mark Girod , Gerald Girod. Exploring the Efficacy of the Cook School District Simulation. Journal of Teacher Education, Vol. 57, No. 5, November/December 2006,pp.481-497.DOI: 10.1177/0022487106293742? 2006 by the American Association of Colleges for Teacher Education
[47] Harold C. Doran,J. R. Lockwood. Fitting Value-Added Models in R. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, Summer 2006, Vol. 31, No. 2, pp. 205–230.
[48] C. Miskel, R. Fevurly, and J. Stewart. Organizational Structures and Processes, Perceived School Effectiveness, Loyalty and Job Satisfaction. Educational Administration Quarterly,1979,15, pp.97-118.
[49]J. R. Hackman, G..R. Oldham. Work Redesign. Reading, MA: Addison Wesley; C. Miskel, J. DeFrain, and K. Wilfox. A Test of Expectancy Work Motivation Theory in Educational Organizations. Educational Administration Quarterly,1980,16,pp.70-92.
[50]C. Miskel, D. McDonald, S. Bloom. Structural and Expectancy Linkages within Schools and Organizational Effectiveness. Educational Administration Quarterly, 1983,19,pp. 49-82.
[52] D. P. Thompson, J. F. McNamara, J.R. Hoyle. Job Satisfaction in Educational Organizations: A Synthesis of Research Findings. Educational Administration Quarterly, 1997,33(1).pp.7-37.
[53] Frankie Denise Powell,Larry D. Fieldes, Edwin D. Bell, Gwendolyn S. Johnson. Manhood, Scholarship, Perseverance, Uplift, and Elementary Students An Example of School and Community Collaboration. Urban Education, Volume 42 Number 4 July 2007,pp. 296-312 ? 2007 Corwin Press 10.1177/0042085907302727 http://uex.sagepub.com hosted at http://online.sagepub.com.
[54] G. D Bolman, G. M. Hews, L. T. Overman, and S. Brown. Comprehensive School Reform and Student Achievement Report. 2002,No. 59. Baltimore, MD: CRESPA. Awailable at www. csos.jhu. edu/crespar.
[55] Marilyn Cochran-Smith. Studying Teacher Education What we Know and Need to Know. Journal of Teacher Education, Vol. 56, No. 4, September/October 2005 301-306.DOI: 10.1177/0022487105280116 ? 2005 by the American Association of Colleges for Teacher Education.
[56] Lisa Andrejko. Value-Added Assessment: A View from a Practitioner. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, Spring 2004, Vol. 29, No. 1, pp. 7–9.
[57] Mona S. Wineburg. Evidence in Teacher Preparation Establishing a Frmework for Accountability. Journal of Teacher Education, Vol. 57, No. 1, January/February 2006,pp.51-64.DOI: 10.1177/0022487105284475? 2006 by the American Association of Colleges for Teacher Education.
[58]S.C. Purkey, M.S.Smith. Effective Schools: A Rewiew. Elementary School Journal, 1983,83, pp.427-452.
[59]R.D.,Goddard, M.Tschannen-Moran, W. K. Hoy. Teacher Trust in Students and Parents: A Multilevel Examination of the Disrtibution and Effects of Teacher Trust in Urban Elementary Schools. Elementary School Journal,2001, 102, pp.3-7.
[60] R.D.Goddard, S. R. Sweetland, W. K. Hoy. Academic Emphasis of Urban Elementary Schools and Student Achievement: A Multi-level Analysis. Educational Administration Quarterly, 2000,Vol. 5, pp.683-702.
[61] R.D.Goddard, W. D.Hoy, L. LoGerfo. Collective Efficacy and Student Achievement in Public High School: A Path Analysis. Paper Presented at theAnnual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Chicage, II.2003.
[62] Bert P. M. Creemers, Louise Stoll, Gerry Reezigt, and the ESI Team. Effective School Improvement Ingredients for Success: The Results of an International Comparative Study of Best Practice Case Studies. T. Townsend (Ed.) International Handbook of School Effectiveness and Improvement, 825–838. ? 2007 Springer.
[63]J. R. Lockwood, Daniel F. McCaffrey, Louis T. Mariano, Claude Setodji. Bayesian Methods for Scalable Multivariate Value-Added Assessment. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, June 2007, Vol. 32, No. 2, pp. 125–150 DOI: 10.3102/1076998606298039? AERA and ASA. http://jebs.aera.net
[64]Robert Lissitz. Value Added Models in Education: Theory and Practice. Applied Psychological Measurement, Vol. 30 No. 3, May 2006, p.250.
[65]Dan Liston, Jennie Whitcomb, Hilda Borko. NCLB and SCcientifically-Based Research Opportunities Lost and Found. Journal of Teacher Education, Vol. 58, No. 2, March/April 2007,pp.99-107 DOI: 10.1177/0022487107299980 ? 2007 by the American Association of Colleges for Teacher Education.
[66]Mohr Nancy, Dichter Alan. Building a Learning Organization. Phi Delta Kappan, Vol.82 No.10,June 2001.
[67]Howard Wainer.Introduction to a Special Issue of the Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics on Value-Added Assessment.National Board of Medical Examiners Editor, Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics Spring 2004, Vol. 29, No. 1, pp. 1–3.
[68]Donald B. Rubin, Elizabeth A. Stuart, Elaine L. Zanutto. A Potential Outcomes View of Value-Added Assessment in Education. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics Spring 2004, Vol. 29, No. 1, pp. 103–116.
[69]Daniel F. McCaffrey, J. R. Lockwood, Daniel Koretz,Thomas A. Louis,Laura Hamilton. Models for Value-Added Modeling of Teacher Effects. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics Spring 2004, Vol. 29, No. 1, pp. 67–101.
[70]Michael Seltzer,Kilchan Choi,Yeow Meng Thum. Examining RelationshipsBetween Where Students Start and how Rapidly they Progress: Using New Developments in Growth Modeling to Gain Insight into the Distribution of Achievement Within Schools.Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, Fall 2003, Vol. 25, No. 3, pp. 263–286.
[71]Haggai Kupermintz. Teacher Effects and Teacher Effectiveness: A Validity Investigation of the Tennessee Value Added Assessment System.Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis , Fall 2003, Vol. 25, No. 3, pp. 287–298.
[72]Madhabi Chatterji. Models and Methods for Examining Standards-Based Reforms and Accountability Initiatives: Have the Tools of Inquiry Answered Pressing Questions on Improving Schools? Review of Educational Research, Fall 2002, Vol. 72, No. 3, pp. 345–386.
[73]J. R. Lockwood,Thomas A. Louis,Daniel F. McCaffrey.Uncertainty in Rank Estimation: Implications for Value-Added Modeling Accountability Systems.Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, Fall 2002, Vol. 27, No. 3, pp. 255–270.
[74]Laura Desimone. How Can Comprehensive School Reform Models Be Successfully Implemented?Review of Educational Research, Fall 2002, Vol. 72, No. 3, pp. 433–479.
[75]Richard Correnti, Brian Rowan. Opening Up the Black Box: Literacy Instruction in Schools Participating in Three Comprehensive School Reform Programs. American Educational Research Journal June 2007, Vol. 44, No. 2, pp. 298–338 DOI: 10.3102/0002831207302501 ? 2007 AERA. http://aerj.aera.net.
[76]Eric A. Hanushek. Some Findings From an Independent Investigation of the Tennessee STAR Experiment and From Other Investigations of Class Size Effects. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, Summerl999, Vol. 21, No. 2, pp. 143-163.
[77]Sue Lasky, Amanda Datnow, Sam Stringfield, and Kirsten Sundell. Diverse Populations and School Effectiveness and Improvement in the USA. T. Townsend (Ed.) International Handbook of School Effectiveness and Improvement, 557–576. ? 2007 Springer.
[78] Charles Ungerleider, Ben Levin. Accountability, Funding and School Improvement in Canada. T. Townsend (Ed.) International Handbook of School Effectiveness and Improvement, 411–424. ? 2007 Springer.
②这段话选自山东省教育厅副厅长张志勇同志代表山东省教育厅,在“2008年全国基础教育工作会议”上所作《坚持整体推进深化改革创新全面实施素质教育》发言。
①叶澜等.全球化、信息化背景下的中国基础教育改革研究报告集[M].上海:华东师范大学出版社,2004:285.
①叶澜等.全球化、信息化背景下的中国基础教育改革研究报告集[M].上海:华东师范大学出版社,2004:282.
②汤林春.学校效能评价研究[D].上海:华东师范大学博士学位论文,2005:55.
①钟启泉等.为了中华民族的复兴为了每位学生的发展[M].上海:华东师范大学出版社,2001:9-10.
②朱小蔓.基础教育阶段现代学校制度的理论与实验研究[M].北京:教育科学出版社,2008:92-95.
③朱小蔓.基础教育阶段现代学校制度的理论与实验研究[M].北京:教育科学出版社,2008:89.
④任春荣.教育公平视角下的学校效能评价[J].教育导刊,2007,9:53-55.
⑤边玉芳,林志红.增值评价:一种绿色升学率理念下的学校评价模式[J].北京师范大学学报(社会科学版),2007,6:11-18.
①Ronald H. Heck. Assessing School Achievement Progress: Comparing Alternative Approaches Educational Administration Quarterly, Vol. 42, No. 5,December 2006,p.674.
②Robert L. Linn. Assessment and Accountability.Educational Researcher, Volume 29,No. 2,2000,pp.3-10
③Daniel Fallon.The Buffalo upon the Chimneypiece the Value of Evidence. Journal of Teacher Education, Vol. 57, No. 2, March/April 2006,p.150.
④William Sanders. Value-Added Assessment from Student Achievement Data: Opportunities and Hurdles. Journal of Personnel Evaluation in Education 14:4, p.335, 2000. ?2000 Kluwer Academic Publishers. Manufactured in The Netherlands.
⑤Audrey Amrein-Beardsley. Methodological Concerns about the Education Value-Added Assessment System. Educational Researcher, 2008,Vol. 37, No. 2, p. 65. DOI: 10.3102/0013189X08316420 ? 2008 AERA. http://er.aera.net
⑥George H. Noell, Jeanne L. Burns. Value-Added Assessment of Teacher Prepareration an Illustrtion of Emerging Technology. Journal of Teacher Education, Vol. 57, No. 1, January/February 2006,pp.37-50.
⑦Charles Teddlie & David Reynolds. Contemporary Issues in School Effectiveness Research with Applications in China.楮宏启.中国教育管理评论(第四卷)[M].北京:教育科学出版社, 2007: 110.
①Carmen D. Tekwe, Randy L. Carter, Chang-Xing Ma, James Algina, Maurice E. Lucas, Jeffrey Roth, Mario Ariet, Thomas Fisher, Michael B. Resnick . An Empirical Comparison of Statistical Models for Value-Added Assessment of School Performance. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics Spring 2004, Vol. 29, No. 1, p. 12.
②Joseph A. Martineau. Distorting Value Added: The Use of Longitudinal, Vertically Scaled Student Achievement Data for Growth-Based, Value-Added Accountability. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics Spring 2006, Vol. 31, No. 1, p. 36.
③Susan Kochan. Evolution of School Performance Research in the USA: From School Effectiveness to School Accountability and Back. T. Townsend (Ed.), International Handbook of School Effectiveness and Improvement,485–502.? 2007 Springer.
④Ronald H. Heck. Assessing School Achievement Progress: Comparing Alternative Approaches. Educational Administration Quarterly, Vol. 42, No. 5,December 2006,p. 669.
①Ronald H. Heck. Assessing School Achievement Progress: Comparing Alternative Approaches. Educational Administration Quarterly, Vol. 42, No. 5,December 2006, p.669.
②Ronald H. Heck. Assessing School Achievement Progress: Comparing Alternative Approaches. Educational Administration Quarterly, Vol. 42, No. 5,December 2006,pp.672-673.
①Ronald H. Heck. Assessing School Achievement Progress: Comparing Alternative Approaches. Educational Administration Quarterly, Vol. 42, No. 5,December 2006,p.669.
②Bruce R. Thompson. Equitable Measurement of School Effectiveness. Urban Education, Vol. 39 No. 2, March 2004, pp.200-229.
③Robert L. Linn. Assessment and Accountability. Educational Researcher, Volume 29 No. 2, 2000,p.10.
④Robert L. Linn. Assessment and Accountability. Educational Researcher, Volume 29 No. 2, 2000,pp.8-10.
⑤Robert L. Linn. Assessment and Accountability. Educational Researcher, Volume 29 No. 2, 2000,pp.9-10.
⑥George H. Noell, Jeanne L. Burns. Value-Added Assessment of Teacher Preparation an Illustration of Emerging Technology. Journal of Teacher Education, Vol. 57, No. 1, January/February 2006,p.40.
⑦Carmen D. Tekwe, Randy L. Carter, Chang-Xing Ma, James Algina, Maurice E. Lucas, Jeffrey Roth, Mario Ariet, Thomas Fisher, Michael B. Resnick . An Empirical Comparison of Statistical Models for Value-Added Assessment of School Performance. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics Spring 2004, Vol. 29, No. 1, p. 12.
⑧Harold C. Doran,J. R. Lockwood. Fitting Value-Added Models in R. Journal of Educational and BehavioralStatistics Summer 2006, Vol. 31, No. 2, pp.205–230.
①Daniel Fallon. The Buffalo upon the Chimneypiece the Value of Evidence. Journal of Teacher Education,Vol. 57, No. 2, March/April 2006,p.149.
②谌启标.学校效能研究论纲[J].教育理论与实践,2001,6b:25-28.
①David Grissmer. Class Size Effects: Assessing the Evidence, its Policy Implications, and Future Research Agenda. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, Summer 1999, Vol. 21. No. 2. pp. 231-248.
②Bruce R. Thompson. Equitable Measurement of School Effectiveness. Urban Education, Vol. 39 No. 2, March 2004, pp.200-229.
③Jim Spinks. Resources and School Effectiveness and Improvement. T. Townsend (Ed.), International Handbook of School Effectiveness and Improvement, 451–468.? 2007 Springer.
④Joel K. Kiboss, Mwangi Ndirangu, Eric W. Wekesa1. Effectiveness of a Computer-Mediated Simulations Program in School Biology on Pupils’Learning Outcomes in Cell Theory. Journal of Science Education and Technology, Vol. 13, No. 2, June 2004 .
①B. Rowan, R. Correnti, and R. J. Miller. What Large-Scale Survey Research Tells Us about Teacher Effects on Student Achievement:Insights from the Prospects Study of Elementary Schools. Teachers College Record,104(8), 2002, pp.1525-1567.韦恩·K·霍伊,塞西尔·G·米斯克尔.教育管理学:理论·研究·实践[M].范国睿主译. .北京:教育科学出版社,2007: 269.
②R. H. Heck. Examining the Impact of School Quality on School Outcomes and Improvement: A Value-Added Approach. Educational Administration Quarterly, 36(4), 2000, pp.513-552.
③Ronald H. Heck. Examining the Relationship Between Teacher Quality as an Organizational Property of Schools and Students’Achievement and Growth Rates Educational Administration Quarterly, Vol. 43, No. 4 ,October 2007,p.401.
①Tim Konold, Brian Jablonski, Anthony Nottingham, Lara Kessler, Stephen Byrd, Scott Imig ,Robert Berry, Robert McNergney . Adding Value to Public Schools Investigating Teacher Education, Teaching, and Pupil Learning. Journal of Teacher Education, Volume 59 Number 4 September/October 2008 300-312 ? 2008 Sage Publications 10.1177/0022487108321378 http://jte.sagepub.com hosted at http://online.sagepub.com
②George H. Noell, Jeanne L. Burns. Value-Added Assessment of Teacher Preparation An Illustration of Emerging Technology. Journal of Teacher Education, Vol. 57, No. 1, January/February 2006,pp.37-50.
③Gregory J. Palardy, Russell W. Rumberger. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis. June 2008, Vol. 30, No. 2, pp. 111–140. DOI: 10.3102/0162373708317680 ? 2008 AERA. http://eepa.aera.net .
①Christopher Day, Pam Sammons, and Qing Gu. Combining Qualitative and Quantitative Methodologies in Research on Teachers’Lives,Work, and Effectiveness: From Integration to Synergy. Educational Researcher, Vol. 37, No. 6, pp. 330–342.DOI: 10.3102/0013189X08324091 ? 2008 AERA. http://er.aera.net.
②Thomas J. Lasley, Dary Siedentop, Robert Yinger. A Systemic Approach to Enhancing Teacher Quality the Ohio Model. Journal of Teacher Education, Vol. 57, No. 1, January/February 2006,pp.13-21.
③H. Del Schalock, Mark D. Schalock, Robert Ayres. Scaling up Research in Teacher Education New Demands on Theory, Measurement, and Design. Journal of Teacher Education, Vol. 57, No. 2, March/April 2006 ,pp.102-119. DOI: 10.1177/0022487105285615 ? 2006 by the American Association of Colleges for Teacher Education.
④L.M. Desimone, A.C. Porter, M.S. Garet, K.S. Yoon, and B.F. Briman. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 24(2),81-112 2002.
①William F. Tate IV. The Political Economy of Teacher Quality in School Mathematics African American Males, Opportunity Structures, Politics, and Method. American Behavioral Scientist, Volume 51 Number 7 March 2008 953-971 ? 2008 Sage Publications 10.1177/0002764207311999 http://abs.sagepub.com hosted at http://online.sagepub.com.
②P. Mortimore. The Road to Improvement: Reflections on School Effectiveness[M]. Lisse, Netherlands: Swets & Zeitlinger,1998.
③V. Battistich, et al. Beyond the Three R’s: a Broader Agenda for School Reform[J]. The elementary school Journal,1999,99:415-431.
④David Reynolds. School Effectiveness and School Improvement (SESI): Links with the International Standards/Accountability Agenda.T. Townsend (Ed.), International Handbook of School Effectiveness and Improvement, 471–484. ? 2007 Springer.
⑤韦恩K.霍伊,塞西尔G.米斯克尔.教育管理学:理论·研究·实践[M].范国睿主译.北京:教育科学出版社,2007: 272.
⑥D. P. Thompson, J. F. McNamara, and J.R. Hoyle. Job Satisfaction in Educational Organizations: A Synthesis of Research Findings. Educational Administration Quarterly, 33(1). 1997,pp.7-37.
①J. Scheerens, R. Bosker. The Foundations of Educational Effectiveness. Oxford: Permagon.1997.
②R.D.Goddard, M.Tschannen-Moran, and W.K.Hoy. Teacher Trust in Students and Parents: A Multilevel Examination of the Disrtibution and Effects of Teacher Trust in Urban Elementary Schools. Elementary School Journal, 102,2001,PP. 3-7.
③R.D.Goddard, S.R.Sweetland, and W.K.Hoy. Academic Emphasis of Urban Elementary Schools and Student Achievement: A Multi-level Analysis. Educational Administration Quarterly, 5, 2000,PP.683-702.
④R.D.Goddard,W.D. Hoy, and L. LoGerfo. Collective Efficacy and Student Achievement in Public High School: A Path Analysis. Paper Presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Chicage, II.2003.
⑤Robet L. Linn. Assessment and Accountability.Educational Researcher, Volume 29,No. 2,2000,pp.4-16.
①Tim Konold, Brian Jablonski, Anthony Nottingham, Lara Kessler, Stephen Byrd, Scott Imig, Robert Berry, Robert McNergney. Adding Value to Public Schools Investigating Teacher Education, Teaching, and Pupil Learning. Journal of Teacher Education, Volume 59 ,Number 4, September/October 2008,p. 301.
②Ronald H. Heck Examining the Relationship Between Teacher Quality as an Organizational Property of Schools and Students’Achievement and Growth Rates Educational Administration Quarterly Vol. 43, No. 4 ,October 2007,pp.400-401.
①Carmen D. Tekwe, Randy L. Carter, Chang-Xing Ma, James Algina, Maurice E. Lucas, Jeffrey Roth, Mario Ariet, Thomas Fisher, Michael B. Resnick. An Empirical Comparison of Statistical Models for Value-Added Assessment of School Performance. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics. Spring 2004, Vol. 29, No. 1, pp. 11–36.
①Ronald H. Heck. Assessing School Achievement Progress: Comparing Alternative Approaches . Educational Administration Quarterly. Vol. 42, No. 5 ,December 2006),pp.667-699.
②Joseph A. Martineau. Distorting Value Added: The Use of Longitudinal, Vertically Scaled Student Achievement Data for Growth-Based, Value-Added Accountability Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics .Spring 2006, Vol. 31, No. 1, pp. 35–62.
③William Sanders, Paul Wright. Controlling for Student Background in Value-Added Assessment of Teachers. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics Spring 2004, Vol. 29, No. 1, pp. 37–65.
④Howard Wainer. Introduction to a Special Issue of the Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics on Value-Added AssessmentJournal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics Spring 2004, Vol. 29, No. 1, pp. 1–3.
①Daniel Koretz Thomas A. Louis Laura HamiltonModels for Value-Added Modeling of Teacher EffectsJournal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics Spring 2004, Vol. 29, No. 1, pp. 67–101.
②J. R. Lockwood, Daniel F. McCaffrey, Louis T. Mariano, Claude Setodji. Bayesian Methods for Scalable Multivariate Value-Added Assessment. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics June 2007, Vol. 32, No. 2, pp. 125–150.
①Donald B. Rubin, Elizabeth A. Stuart, Elaine L. Zanutto. A Potential Outcomes View of Value-Added Assessment in Education. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, Spring 2004, Vol. 29, No. 1, pp. 103–116.
②Ronald H. Heck. Examining the Relationship Between Teacher Quality as an Organizational Property of Schools and Students’Achievement and Growth Rates Educational Administration Quarterly Vol. 43, No. 4 ,October 2007,pp. 401--402.
③Howard Wainer. Introduction to a Special Issue of the Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics on Value-Added AssessmentJournal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, Spring 2004, Vol. 29, No. 1, pp. 1–3.
④Thomas J. Lasley, Daryl Siedentop, Robert Yinger. A Systemic Approach to Enhancing Teacher Quality the Ohio Model. Journal of Teacher Education, Vol. 57, No. 1, January/February 2006,pp.13-21
⑤William L. Sanders. Value-Added Assessment from Student Achievement Data: Opportunities and HurdlesJournal of Personnel Evaluation in Education 14:4, 329-339, 2000. ? 2000 Kluwer Academic Publishers.Manufactured in The Netherlands.
①Robet L. Linn. Assessment and Accountability.Educational Researcher, Volume 29,No. 2, 2000, pp.8-10.
①张煜.学校效能评价[J].中小学管理,1997,(7-8).
②谌启标.学校效能论[J].江西教育科研, 2001,(6a).
③谌启标.学校效能研究论纲[J].教育理论与实践,2001, 6b:25-28.
④谌启标.美国“有效学校”述评[J].教育研究与实验,2003,1: 34-37.
⑤谌启标.学校效能研究与学校重建[J].教育发展研究,2007,10b:14-18.
⑥孟繁华.构建现代学校的学习型组织[J].比较教育研究, 2002,1:53-56.
⑦钱家荣.高效能学校及其特征[J].外国中小学教育,2003,8:20-22.
⑧陈欣.学校效能的多维透视[J].教学与管理,2003,(7).
①朱科蓉,李春景.学校效能研究的历史、现状与趋势[J].教学与管理,2003,(1).
②陈丰伟.国外学校校能研究述评[J].江西教育科研,2003,(10).
③杨琼.学校效能与学校改革:对英国最新研究成果的述评[J].外国教育研究,2003,(12).
④杨琼,范国睿.学校校能研究的现状及其反思[J].上海教育科研,2003,(6).
⑤盖雁,尹钟祥.发展中的普通教育评价---我国普教评价理论与实践发展综述(J).现代教育科学.2003,6:21.
⑥汤林春.学校效能研究略论[J].中小学管理,2004,2:6.
⑦汤林春,梁玲玲.学校效能评价的尝试[J].上海教育科研.2005,4:24-26.
①汤林春.学校效能评价研究[D].上海:华东师范大学博士学位论文,2005.
②汤林春.学校效能的学校因素研究[J].上海教育科研,2006,8:30-33.
③汤林春.试论学校效能评价的两种思路[J].教育管理研究, 2007,2: 69.
④谈松华.试行效能评价[J].中国远程教育,2004,4:68.
⑤孙河川.欧洲八国学校效能与改进研究.---国家层影响要素对教育改进的影响[J].教育研究(增刊),2004.
⑥陈明高,马晓晴,曹晖.教师集体效能研究述评[J].山东师范大学学报,2005,4:139-141.
①石雷山.教师集体效能---教师效能研究的新进展[J].外国教育研究, 2005,10:72-75.
②蔡永红.美英两国学校效能研究的回顾与反思[J].外国教育研究,2006,5:32-33.
③台州市椒江区教育局课题组.区域推进学校效能评估的实践探索[J].教育发展研究,2005,11b:87-91.
④赵晖.普通初级中学学校效能评价研究初探[D].上海师范大学硕士论文,2005.
⑤弗兰西斯科·索夫,杨燕燕.课程效能评价---以“教育效能与教育评价”为例[J].外国教育研究.2005,5:57-59.
⑥谷珊.学校效能评价:对某市高中的实证研究[D].天津师范大学硕士论文,2007.
①温恒福.学校效能的基本理论问题[J].教育研究,2007,2:56-60.
①陈光春.学校效能研究新进展[J].教育发展研究, 2007,10b:23-26.
②任春荣.教育公平视角下的学校效能评价[J].教育导刊,2007,9:53-55.
③边玉芳,林志红.增值评价:一种绿色升学率理念下的学校评价模式[J].北京师范大学学报,2007,6:11-18.
④赵树贤.卡坦斯学校效能评价模式及其拓展研究[J].中国教育学刊,2007,6:27-31.
⑤卢乃桂,张佳伟.学校效能与学校改进走向结合的理论基础的探讨[J].教育学报, 2007,5:3-7.
①王俭.论当代学校效能的价值取向[J].基础教育参考,2007,(6).
②孙绵涛.教育效能论[M].北京:人民教育出版社,2007.
③六个方面特点指:通过纵向研究数据测量个体变化;采用自然实验将混在一起的变量分开;对假设的原因变量进行有效的测量;④系统检验某种反应的变化,如学习成就、学习态度及行为等;⑤从几种假设的机制解释中,明确出一种;⑥充分控制社会选择、初始水平和自我完善等因素的效果。三种模式包括:社会系统理论模型,“主体-情境”模式以及“功能-层次”模式。褚宏启.中国教育管理评论(第4卷)[M].北京:教育科学出版社,2007:1-123.
④朱小蔓.基础教育阶段现代现代学校制度的理论与实践研究[M].北京:教育科学出版社,2007:88-101.
⑤郑金洲、程亮.中国教育新进展---2007[M].上海:华东师范大学出版社,2008:124-147.
⑥冯大鸣.美、英、澳教育管理前沿图景[M].北京:教育科学出版社,2004:207-253.
⑦叶澜等.全球化、信息化背景下的中国基础教育改革研究报告集[M].上海:华东师范大学社,2004:281-375.
⑧蔡进雄.转型领导与学校效能[ M] .台北:师大书苑,2001:119 - 121.
①Cheng, Y. C. (1997). Monitoring school effectiveness: Conceptual and practical dilemmas in developing a framework. In H. Meng, Y. Zhou, & Y. Fang (eds.) School based indicators of effectiveness: Experiences and practices in APEC members. (pp. 197–206), China: Guangxi Normal University Press.
②郑燕祥.教育领导与改革新范式[M].上海:上海教育出版社,2005:1-51.
①David Reynolds. School Effectiveness and School Improvement (SESI): Links with the International Standards/Accountability Agenda.T. Townsend (Ed.), International Handbook of School Effectiveness and Improvement, 478-479 ? 2007 Springer.
②George H. Noell, Jeanne L. Burns. Value-Added Assessment of Teacher Preparation An Illustration of Emerging Technology. Journal of Teacher Education, Vol. 57, No. 1, January/February 2006),pp.37-50.
③Mona S. Wineburg. Evidence in Teacher Preparation Establishing a Framework for Accountability. Journal of Teacher Education, Vol. 57, No. 1, January/February 2006,pp. 51-64.
④Susan Kochan. Evolution of School Performance Research in the USA: From School Effectiveness to School Accountability and Back. T. Townsend (Ed.) International Handbook of School Effectiveness and Improvement, 491. ? 2007 Springer.
①刘在花.美英两国学校效能研究的回顾与反思[J].外国教育研究, 2006,5:32-33.
②蔡永红.美国学校效能研究的回顾与反思[J].比较教育研究. 2005,11:5.
③W1lliam L. Sanders. Value-Added Assessment from Student Achievement Data: Opportunities and HurdlesJournal of Personnel Evaluation in Education 14:4, 336, 2000. ? 2000 Kluwer Academic Publishers. Manufactured in The Netherlands.
④朱小蔓.基础教育阶段现代学校制度的理论与实验研究[M].北京:教育科学出版社,2008:97.
⑤George H. Noell , Jeanne L. Burns. Value-Added Assessment of Teacher Preparation an Illustration of Emerging Technology. Journal of Teacher Education, Vol. 57, No. 1, January/February 2006,pp.37-50.
⑥Mona S. Wineburg. Evidence in Teacher Preparation Establishing a Framework for Accountability. Journal of Teacher Education, Vol. 57, No. 1, January/February 2006 ,pp.51-64. Linda E. Lee. Honey, Wooden Spoons, and Clay Pots: The Evolution of a Lithuanian Learning Conversation. L.M. Earl and H. Timperley (eds.), Professional Learning Conversations: 81 Challenges in Using Evidence for Improvement.. Springer Science & Business Media B.V. 2009,p. 86.
⑦Daniel Fallon. The Buffalo upon the Chimneypiece the Value of Evidence. Journal of Teacher Education, Vol. 57, No. 2, March/April 2006,p. 151.
⑧William Sanders. Value-Added Assessment from Student Achievement Data: Opportunities and HurdlesJournal of Personnel Evaluation in Education 14:4, 335, 2000. ? 2000 Kluwer Academic Publishers. Manufactured in The Netherlands.
⑨韦恩·K·霍伊,塞西尔·G·.米斯克尔.教育管理学:理论·研究·实践[M].范国睿主译.北京:教育科学出版社,2007:280.
①Daniel Fallon. The Buffalo upon the Chimneypiece the Value of Evidence. Journal of Teacher Education, Vol. 57, No. 2, March/April 2006 ,p.151.
②Daniel Fallon. The Buffalo upon the Chimneypiece the Value of Evidence. Journal of Teacher Education, Vol. 57, No. 2, March/April 2006 ,p.142.
③Joyce Van Tassel-Baska. Leadership for the Future in Gifted Education Presidential Address, NAGC 2006Gifted Child Quarterly Volume 51 Number 1 Winter 2007 5-10 ? 2007 National Association for Gifted Children 10.1177/0016986206297087 http://gcq.sagepub.com hosted at http://online.sagepub.com
④Robet L. Linn. Assessment and Accountability.Educational Researcher, Volume 29,No. 2,2000,p.10.
⑤Joyce Van Tassel-Baska. Leadership for the Future in Gifted Education Presidential Address, NAGC 2006Gifted Child Quarterly Volume 51 Number 1 Winter 2007 5-10 ? 2007 National Association for Gifted Children 10.1177/0016986206297087 http://gcq.sagepub.com hosted at http://online.sagepub.com
⑥Donald B. Rubin, Elizabeth A. Stuart, Elaine L. Zanutto. A Potential Outcomes View of Value-Added Assessment in EducationJournal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics Spring 2004, Vol. 29, No. 1, pp. 103–116.
⑦Ronald H. Heck. Assessing School Achievement Progress: Comparing Alternative ApproachesEducational Administration Quarterly Vol. 42, No. 5 ,December 2006,pp.667-699.
①William Sanders. Value-Added Assessment from Student Achievement Data: Opportunities and Hurdles. Journal of Personnel Evaluation in Education 14:4, 335. 2000. 2000 Kluwer Academic Publishers. Manufactured in the Netherlands.
②褚宏启.中国教育管理评论(第4卷)[M].北京:教育科学出版社,2007:69.
③汤林春,梁玲玲.学校效能评价的尝试[J].上海教育科研,2005, 4: 24.
④马晓强,彭文蓉,[英]萨丽·托马斯.学校效能的增值评价———对河北省保定市普通高中学校的实证研究[J].教育研究.2006,10:.77-83.谷珊.学校效能评价:对某市高中的实证研究[D].天津:天津师范大学硕士论文, 2007.徐群,闻金童.中美优秀高中建设比较研究[J].上海教育科研, 2002,2: 56-60.楮福靖.枣庄市重点高中组织文化与组织效能关系的研究[D].济南:山东师范大学教育硕士论文, 2003.
①刘本固.教育评价的理论与实践[M].杭州:浙江教育出版社,2000:49—51.
①W·詹姆斯·疱法姆.测验的反思[M].北京:中国轻工业出版社,2005:67.
②陈玉琨,沈玉顺.关于教育质量本质的探析.国际教育评估与质量保证会议交流材料,1996.
③李如海.教育观与质量观伦略[J].高等工程教育研究,1998,1.
①陈玉琨,李如海.我国教育评价的世纪回顾与未来展望[J].华东师范大学学报(教育科学版),2000,1:11.
②范国睿,罗刚.学校教育质量的发展性评价——从理念到行动.叶澜等.全球化、信息化背景下的中国基础教育改革研究报告集[M].上海:华东师范大学出版社,2004: 376.
③泰勒.课程与教学的基本原理[M].施良方译.北京:人民教育出版社,1994:85.
④克龙巴赫.通过评价改进教程.教育学文集·教育评价.陈玉琨、赵中建译. 164.
⑤斯塔弗尔比姆.方案评价的CIPP模式.教育学文集·教育评价[M].陈玉琨译. 301.
①田杰.评定·选拔·调控·个性化表现[J].中国教育学刊, 2003,3: 57.
②李雁冰.重塑教育评定——艾斯纳的课程评价初探[J].外国教育资料,2000,1:27-28.
③田杰.评定·选拔·调控·个性化表现[J].中国教育学刊, 2003,3:58.
④田杰.评定·选拔·调控·个性化表现[J].中国教育学刊. 2003,3:58.
①龚晓华.教育评价主题---促进人的发展[J].教育理论与实践,2003,9:8.
②朱小蔓.基础教育阶段现代学校制度的理论与实验研究[M].北京:教育科学出版社,2008: 90.
①Carmen D. Tekwe,Randy L. Carter,Chang-Xing Ma,James Algina,Maurice E. Lucas, Jeffrey Roth, Mario Ariet, Thomas Fisher, Michael B. Resnick. An Empirical Comparison of Statistical Models for Value-Added Assessment of School Performance. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics. Spring 2004, Vol. 29, No. 1, pp. 11–36.
②Mortimore, P. (1998). The Road to Improvement: Reflections on School Effectiveness. Lisse: Swets and Zeitlinger.卢乃桂,张佳伟.学校效能与学校改进走向结合的理论基础的探讨[J].教育学报,2007,5.
③William L. Sanders, Paul Wright. Controlling for Student Background in Value-Added Assessment of Teachers. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics Spring 2004, Vol. 29, No. 1, p. 38.
④Daniel Fallon. The Buffalo upon the Chimneypiece the Value of Evidence. Journal of Teacher Education,Vol. 57, No. 2, March/April 2006. 150.
⑤William L. Sanders . Value-Added Assessment from Student Achievement Data: Opportunities and HurdlesJournal of Personnel Evaluation in Education 14:4, 333, 2000.? 2000 Kluwer Academic Publishers. Manufactured in The Netherlands.
①Bruce R. Thompson. Equitable Measurement of School Effectiveness Urban Education, Vol. 39 No. 2, March 2004,p.203.
②Robert Lissitz. Value Added Models in Education: Theory and Practice. Applied Psychological Measurement, Vol. 30 No. 3, May 2006,p. 250.
③Mark Girod, Gerald Girod. Exploring the Efficacy of the Cook School District Simulation.Journal of Teacher Education, Vol. 57, No. 5, November/December 2006,p.481.
④William L. Sanders. Value-Added Assessment from Student Achievement Data: Opportunities and HurdlesJournal of Personnel Evaluation in Education 14:4, 332-333.2000. ? 2000 Kluwer Academic Publishers. Manufactured in The Netherlands.
⑤Ronald H. Heck. Assessing School Achievement Progress: Comparing Alternative ApproachesEducational Administration Quarterly Vol. 42, No. 5 ,December 2006,p.673.
①William L. Sanders. Value-Added Assessment from Student Achievement Data: Opportunities and HurdlesJournal of Personnel Evaluation in Education 14:4, 336, 2000. ? 2000 Kluwer Academic Publishers. Manufactured in The Netherlands.
②Carmen D. Tekwe,Randy L. Carter,Chang-Xing Ma,James Algina,Maurice E. Lucas, Jeffrey Roth,Mario Ariet,Thomas Fisher,Michael B. Resnick. An Empirical Comparison of Statistical Models for Value-Added Assessment of School Performance. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, Spring 2004, Vol. 29, No. 1, pp. 12-13.
③Ronald H. Heck. Assessing School Achievement Progress: Comparing Alternative ApproachesEducational Administration Quarterly Vol. 42, No. 5 ,December 2006,pp.667-699.
④Daniel Fallon. The Buffalo upon the Chimneypiece the Value of Evidence. Journal of Teacher Education, Vol. 57, No. 2, March/April 2006,pp.139-154.
⑤William L. Sanders.Value-Added Assessment from Student Achievement Data: Opportunities and Hurdles. Journal of Personnel Evaluation in Education 14:4, 335, 2000.2000 Kluwer Academic Publishers Manufactured in the Netherlands.
①Daniel Fallon. The Buffalo upon the Chimneypiece the Value of Evidence. Journal of Teacher Education, Vol. 57, No. 2, March/April 2006,P.151.
②Mona S. Wineburg. Evidence in Teacher Preparation Establishing a Framework for Accountability. Journal of Teacher Education, Vol. 57, No. 1, January/February 2006,PP.51-64. Linda E. Lee. Honey, Wooden Spoons, and Clay Pots: The Evolution of a Lithuanian Learning Conversation. L.M. Earl and H. Timperley (eds.), Professional Learning Conversations: 81 Challenges in Using Evidence for Improvement.. Springer Science & Business Media B.V. 2009,p86.
③Dan Liston, Jennie Whitcomb, Hilda Borko. NCLB and Scientifically-Based Research Opportunities Lost and Found. Journal of Teacher Education, Vol. 58, No. 2, March/April 2007 99-107 DOI: 10.1177/0022487107299980 ? 2007 by the American Association of Colleges for Teacher Education.
④[英]萨丽·托马斯.运用“增值”评量指标评估学校表现[J].教育研究, 2005,9:21.
⑤杨琼.学校效能与学校改革:对英国最新研究成果的书评[J].外国教育研究, 2003,12: 36.
⑥任春荣.增值测量法在学校效能评价中的应用及现实意义[J].谷珊.学校效能评价:对某市高中的实证研究[D].天津:天津师范大学硕士论文,2007.
⑦汤林春,梁玲玲.学校效能评价的尝试[J].上海教育科研,2005,4:24.
①William L. Sanders. Value-Added Assessment from Student Achievement Data: Opportunities and HurdlesJournal of Personnel Evaluation in Education 14:4, 329-339, 2000. ? 2000 Kluwer Academic Publishers. Manufactured in The Netherlands.
②Robet L. Linn. Assessment and Accountability.Educational Researcher, Volume 29,No. 2,2000,p. 8.
③Dan Liston, Jennie Whitcomb, Hilda Borko. NCLB and Scientifically-Based Research Opportunities Lost and Found. Journal of Teacher Education, Vol. 58, No. 2, March/April 2007, 99-107 DOI: 10.1177/0022487107299980 ? 2007 by the American Association of Colleges for Teacher Education.④R.H.Hall . Organizations: Structures, Processes, and Outcomes( 8th ed.), Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.2002.
①R.H.Hall . Organizations: Structures, Processes, and Outcomes( 8th ed.), Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.2002.
①朱小蔓.基础教育阶段现代学校制度的理论与实验研究[M].北京:教育科学出版社, 2008: 89-90.
①马克思恩格斯全集第23卷[M].北京:人民出版社,1972:190.
②韩庆祥,亢安毅.马克思开辟的道路---人的全面发展研究[M] .北京:人民出版社.2005:54.
①[美]霍华德·加德纳.多元智能.沈致隆译.北京:新华出版社.2004:8-12.
②[美]霍华德·加德纳.多元智能.沈致隆译.北京:新华出版社.2004:49..
①[美]马斯洛.马斯洛人本主义哲学[M].成明编译.北京:九州出版社,2003.
①陈奎憙,张建成,谭光鼎,王丽云.教育社会学.任务与思想[M].上海:华中师范大学出版社, 2009:7.
②张人杰.国外教育社会学基本文选[M].上海:华东师范大学出版社, 2009:22-30.
③张人杰.国外教育社会学基本文选[M].上海:华东师范大学出版社, 2009:8-19.
①张人杰.国外教育社会学基本文选[M].上海:华东师范大学出版社, 2009:405.
②王炳照.中国教育改革30年(基础教育卷)[M].北京:北京师范大学出版社,2009:1-14.
①汤林春.学校效能评价研究[D].上海:华东师范大学博士学位论文, 2005:55-127.
①Joyce Van Tassel-Baska. Leadership for the Future in Gifted Education Presidential Address, NAGC 2006 Gifted Child Quarterly, Volume 51, Number 1, Winter 2007,pp. 5-10 ? 2007 National Association for Gifted Children 10.1177/0016986206297087 http://gcq.sagepub.com hosted at http://online.sagepub.com
②Lisa Andrejko. Value-Added Assessment: A View from a Practitioner. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, Spring 2004, Vol. 29, No. 1, p.8.
③Daniel Fallon. The Buffalo upon the Chimneypiece the Value of Evidence. Journal of Teacher Education, Vol. 57, No. 2, March/April 2006. 152.
①林少杰.发展性评价的认识·现代教育论丛[J].教育改革动态.2003, 6: 27-30.
②朱小曼.基础教育阶段现代学校制度的理论与实验研究[M].北京:教育科学出版社,2008: 92.
①龚孝华.教育评价主题---促进人的发展[J].教育理论与实践,2003,9: 5-8.
②朱小蔓.基础教育阶段现代学校制度的理论与实验研究[M].北京:教育科学出版社,2008:90.
③朱小曼.基础教育阶段现代学校制度的理论与实验研究[M].北京:教育科学出版社,2008:92.
①钟启泉等.为了中华民族的复兴为了每位学生的发展[M].上海:华东师范大学出版社,2001:9-10.
①邬向明.教育评价:复杂的人与薄弱的评价理论——新课程改革背景下选拔性教育评价要素与原则的选择[J].课程·教材·教法, 2006,9: 21.
①金媂,王钢.教育评价与测量[M].北京:教育科学出版社,2007:10-11.
②杨光德.中国学分制[M].上海:上海科学技术文献出版社,1996:13.张茂聪,车丽娜.山东省高中课程改革的经验与问题[M].济南:山东人民出版社, 2007: 224.
①[美]B·S·布卢姆.教育评价[M].邱渊等译.上海:华东师范大学出版社,1987:2-5 .
①[英]萨丽·托马斯.运用“增值”评量指标评估学校表现[J].教育研究, 2005, 9: 20-27.
①朱小曼.基础教育阶段现代学校制度的理论与实验研究[M].北京:教育科学出版社,2008:89-90.
②任春荣.教育公平视角下的学校效能评价[J].教育导刊,2007,9:53-55.
③Audrey Amrein-Beardsley. Methodological Concerns about the Education Value-Added Assessment System. Educational Researcher, Vol. 37, No. 2, p. 65 DOI: 10.3102/0013189X08316420 ? 2008 AERA. http://er.aera.net
④Robet L. Linn. Assessment and Accountability.Educational Researcher, Volume 29,No. 2,2000.pp.9-10.
⑤Ronald H. Heck. Assessing School Achievement Progress: Comparing Alternative Approaches. Educational Administration Quarterly Vol. 42, No. 5 (December 2006) 674.
①B·S·布卢姆.教育评价[M].邱渊等译.上海:华东师范大学出版社,1987.2-5.
①张人杰.国外教育社会学基本文选[M].上海:华东师范大学出版社,2009: 405.
①孙袁华,张熙.建构我国的高质量义务教育评价指标体系—种国际化视野的归类比较与综合分析[J].教育理论与实践,2003,8:16-17.
①孙袁华,张熙.建构我国的高质量义务教育评价指标体系———种国际化视野的归类比较与综合分析[J].教育理论与实践,2003,8:14-19.
①马克思恩格斯全集第23卷[M].北京:人民出版社,1972:190.
①汤林春.学校效能评价研究[D].上海:华东师范大学博士学位论文,2005:126.
②高玉祥.个性心理学[M].北京:北京师范大学出版社, 2007:301.
③高玉祥.个性心理学[M].北京:北京师范大学出版社, 2007:303.
①顾云虎.应然与实然两种视角下的学力研究----学力模式比较和思考[J].上海教育, 2001,9.
②钟启泉.学力理论的历史发展[J].全球教育展望, 2001.
①[日]田中耕治.学力调查若干问题探析[J].教育研究,2006,7.
②朱晓曼.素质教育评价:理念与思路[J].人民教育,2007,9:35.
③Susan Kochan. Evolution of School Performance Research in the USA: From School Effectiveness to School Accountability and Back. T. Townsend (Ed.), International Handbook of School Effectiveness and Improvement, 489–490. ? 2007 Springer.
④孙绵涛.教育效能论[M].北京:人民教育出版社,2007:184.
①《马克思恩格斯全集》第23卷[M].北京:人民出版社,1972:190.
②B·S·布卢姆.教育评价[M].邱渊等译.上海:华东师范大学出版社,1987:2-5.
③汤林春.学校效能评价研究[D].上海:华东师范大学博士学位论文,2005:126.
①汤林春.学校效能评价研究[D].上海:华东师范大学博士学位论文,2005.
②汤林春.学校效能评价研究[D].上海:华东师范大学博士学位论文,2005:72.
①汤林春.学校效能评价研究[D].上海:华东师范大学博士学位论文,2005:76.
②David Reynolds. School Effectiveness and School Improvement (SESI): Links with the InterantionalStandards/Accountability Agenda. T. Townsend (Ed.), International Handbook of School Effectiveness and Improvement, 471–484. ? 2007 Springer.
①汤林春.学校效能评价[D].上海:华东师范大学博士学位论文,2005:73-78.
②陈奎憙,张建成,谭光鼎,王丽云.教育社会学:任务与思想[M].上海:华中师范大学出版社,2009:7-8.
③韩庆祥,亢安毅.马克思开辟的道路---人的全面发展研究[M].北京:人民出版社,2005:54.
①汤林春.学校效能评价研究[D].上海:华东师范大学博士学位论文, 2005:126.
②钟启泉.学力理论的历史发展[J].全球教育展望, 2001.
①郑燕祥.教育领导与改革新范式[M].上海:上海教育出版社,2005:27-28.
①彭贤智.对学习品质的结构与培养策略的研究[J].唐山师范学院学报,2004,1:75.
①张人杰.国外教育社会学基本文选[M].上海:华东师范大学出版社,2009:18.
①张人杰.国外教育社会学基本文选[M].上海:华东师范大学出版社,2009:22-29.
②孙绵涛.教育效能论[M].北京:人民教育出版社, 2007:229-230.
①[美]詹姆斯·梅里特.铸就一生的9种品格[M].郝子岩译.北京:中国戏剧出版社,2006.
②张人杰.国外教育社会学基本文选[M],上海:华东师范大学出版社,2009: 199-229.
③刘本固.教育评价的理论与实践[M].杭州:浙江教育出版社,2000:173-175.
④[美]马斯洛.马斯洛人本主义哲学[M].成明编译.北京:九州出版社,2003.
①钟启泉等.为了中华民族的复兴为了每位学生的发展[M].上海:华东师范大学出版社,2001:4.
②黄济.教育哲学通论[M].太原:山西教育出版社,2004:435.
③王承绪,赵祥麟.西方现代教育论著选[M].北京:人民教育出版社,2001: 8.
①张人杰.国外教育社会学基本文选[M].上海:华东师范大学出版社,2009:29-30.
②B·S·布卢姆.教育评价[M].邱渊等译.上海:华东师范大学出版社,1987:2-5.
③[美]霍华德·加德纳.多元智能[M].沈致隆译.北京:新华出版社,2004:72.
①[美]霍华德·加德纳.多元智能[M].沈致隆译.北京:新华出版社.2004:8-9.
①李戎.美学概论[M].济南:齐鲁出版社,1992:439—444.
[1]赵承福,陈泽河.创造教育研究新进展[M].济南:山东人民出版社,2002.
[2]朱小蔓.基础教育阶段现代学校制度的理论与实验研究[M].北京:教育科学出版社,2008.
[3]孙绵涛.教育效能论[M].北京:人民教育出版社, 2007.
[4]楮宏启.中国教育管理评论(第四卷)[M].北京:教育科学出版社, 2007.
[5]钟启泉,张华等.为了中华民族的复兴为了每位学生的发展[M].上海:华东师范大学出版社,2001.
[6]郑金洲、程亮.中国教育新进展---2007[M].上海:华东师范大学出版社,2008.
[7]冯大鸣.美、英、澳教育管理前沿图景[M].北京:教育科学出版社,2004.
[8]蔡进雄.转型领导与学校效能[ M] .台北:师大书苑,2001.
[9]郑燕祥.教育领导与改革新范式[M].上海:上海教育出版社,2005.
[10]刘本固.教育评价的理论与实践[M].浙江:浙江教育出版社,2000.
[11]韩庆祥,亢安毅.马克思开辟的道路---人的全面发展研究[M].人民出版社.2005.
[12]陈奎憙,张建成,谭光鼎,王丽云.教育社会学.任务与思想[M].上海:华中师范大学出版社.2009.
[13]黄济.教育哲学通论[M].太原:山西教育出版社,2004.
[14]王承绪,赵祥麟.西方现代教育论著选[M].北京:人民教育出版社,2001.
[15]张人杰.国外教育社会学基本文选[M],上海,华东师范大学出版社,2009.
[16]李戎.美学概论[M].济南:齐鲁出版社,1992.
[17]张茂聪,车丽娜.山东省高中课程改革的经验与问题[M].济南:山东人民出版社,2007.
[18]孙瑞请,宋宝如.数学教育实验与教育评价概论(第2版)[M].北京:北京师范大学出版社,2007.
[19]叶澜等.全球化、信息化背景下的中国基础教育改革研究报告集[M].上海:华东师范大学出版社,2004.
[20]金媂,王钢.教育评价与测量[M].北京:教育科学出版社,2007.
[21]肖远军.教育评价原理及应用[M].杭州:浙江大学出版社,2004.
[22]叶浩生.西方心理学的历史与体系[M].北京:人民教育出版社,1998.
[23]高玉祥.个性心理学[M].北京:北京师范大学出版社,2007.
[24]素质教育调研组.共同的关注——素质教育系统调研[M].北京:教育科学出版社,2006.
[25]朱小蔓.对策与建议——2005-2006年度教育热点、难点问题分析[M].北京:教育科学出版社,2007.
[26]吴霓.学校教育管理实施ISO9000族标准的研究与实践[M].北京:教育科学出版社,2006.
[27]王海芳.学生发展性评价的操作与案例[M].中国轻工业出版社,2006.
[28]陈玉琨.教育评价学[M].北京:人民教育出版社,1999.
[29]李淑华.更有效的评价细节[M].重庆:西南师范大学出版社,2009.
[30]辛自强.问题解决与知识建构[M].北京:教育科学出版社,2005.
[31]张文新.青少年发展心理学[M].济南:山东人民出版社,2002.
[32]张文新,纪林芹,董会芹等.中小学生的欺负问题与干预[M].济南:山东人民出版社,2006.
[33]程书肖.教育评价方法与技术[M].北京:北京师范大学出版社,2007.
[34]胡中锋.教育测量与评价[M].广州:广州高等教育出版社,2006.
[35]穆涛,赵慧敏.绩效管理评价体系[M].深圳:海天出版社,2006.
[36]魏超群.数学教育评价[M].南宁:广西教育出版社,1996.
[37]沈玉顺.课堂评价[M].北京:北京师范大学出版社,2006.
[38]周斌.决策与执行:制度是腋下的学校变革[M].北京:教育科学出版社,2005.
[39]谌启标.有效学校[M].大连:辽宁师范大学出版社,2006.
[40]王海传.人的发展的制度安排[M].武汉:华中师范大学出版社,2007.
[41]庄西真.国家的限度“制度化”学校的社会逻辑[M].南京:南京师范大学出版社,2006.
[42]王炳照.中国教育改革30年(基础教育卷)[M].北京:北京师范大学出版社,2009.
[43]范国睿.多元与融合:多位视野中的学校发展[M].北京:教育科学出版社,2002.
[44]程凤春.教学全面质量管理[M].北京:教育科学出版社,2004.
[45]周浩波.教育哲学[M].北京:人民教育出版社,2000.
[46]钟启泉.现代课程论[M].上海:上海教育出版社. 1989.
[47]潘洪建.教学知识论[M].兰州:甘肃教育出版社. 2004.
[1]马克思恩格斯选集(第一、二、三、四卷)[M].北京:人民出版社,1972.
[2][美]戴安娜?哈特.真实性评价[M].国家基础教育课程改革“促进教师发展与学生成长的评价研究”项目组译.北京:中国轻工业出版社,2004.
[3]联合国教科文组织教育丛书.为了21世纪的教育---问题与展望[M].王晓辉,赵中建译.北京:教育科学出版社, 2002.
[4][美]韦恩·K·霍伊,塞西尔·G·米斯克尔.教育管理学:理论·研究·实践[M].范国睿主译.北京:教育科学出版社,2007.
[5][美]约瑟夫·A·马克斯威尔.质性研究设计[M].北京:中国轻工业出版社,2008.
[6]瞿保奎.教育学文集·教育评价[M].北京:人民教育出版社,1989.
[7]泰勒.课程与教学的基本原理[M].施良方译.北京:人民教育出版社,1994:85.
[8][美]安迪·斯蒂克斯,[美]弗兰克·鄂贝克.有效的课堂指导手册[M].屈书杰译.北京:教育科学出版社,2008.
[9][美]霍华德·加德纳.多元智能[M].沈致隆译.北京:新华出版社.2004:8-12.
[10][美]B·S·布卢姆等.教育评价[M].邱渊等译.上海:华东师范大学出版社,1987.
[11][美]W·詹姆斯·庖法姆.测验的反思——对高利害测验的建议[M].国家基础教育课程改革“促进教师发展与学生成长的评价研究”项目组译.北京:中国轻工业出版社,2005.
[12][德]爱塔·克莱福特,詹·D·李乌维.多层次模型分析导论[M].重庆:重庆大学出版社,2007.
[13][美]W·詹姆斯·庖法姆.促进教学的课堂评价[M].国家基础教育课程改革“促进教师发展与学生成长的评价研究”项目组译.北京:中国轻工业出版社,2003.
[14][美]戈兰特·威金斯.教育性评价[M].国家基础教育课程改革“促进教师发展与学生成长的评价研究”项目组译.北京:中国轻工业出版社,2005.
[15][美]罗伯特·L·林,诺尔曼·E·格朗兰德.教学中的测验与评价[M].国家基础教育课程改革“促进教师发展与学生成长的评价研究”项目组译.北京:中国轻工业出版社,2003.
[16][美]格利·D·鲍里奇,马丁·L·汤姆巴瑞.中小学教育评价[M].国家基础教育课程改革“促进教师发展与学生成长的评价研究”项目组译.北京:中国轻工业出版社,2004.
[17][美]詹姆斯·巴腾,安杰罗·考林斯.成长记录袋评价——教育工作者手册[M].国家基础教育课程改革“促进教师发展与学生成长的评价研究”项目组译.北京:中国轻工业出版社,2005.
[18][美]哈瑞·托瑞,罗伯特·伍德.深度评价——用“评价中心”测评人的综合才能[M].唐云,梁志祥,付丹丹译.北京:中国轻工业出版社,2007.
[19][英]马克·帕金森.人格测试[M].邹志敏译.北京:中国轻工业出版社,2007.
[20][英]吉姆·巴瑞特.潜能评估[M].唐云,梁志祥,付丹丹译.北京:中国轻工业出版社,2007.
[21][美]巴巴拉·E·瓦尔乌德,弗吉尼亚·约翰逊·安德森.等级评分——学习和评价的有效工具[M].国家基础教育课程改革“促进教师发展与学生成长的评价研究”项目组译.北京:中国轻工业出版社,2004.
[22][澳]布赖恩·J·卡德威尔,吉姆·M·斯宾克斯.超越自我管理学校[M].胡东芳等译.上海:上海教育出版社,2005.
[23][美]小詹姆斯·诺兰,琳达·A·胡娃.教师督导与评价——理论与实践的结合[M].兰英主译.北京:中国轻工业出版社,2007.
[24][美]E·马克·汉森.教育管理与组织行为[M].冯大鸣译.上海:上海教育出版社,2005.
[25][]A·班杜拉.自我效能:控制的实施(上、下册)[M].缪小春等译.上海:华东师范大学出版社,2003.
[26][美]罗伯特·J·马扎诺,[美]詹尼弗·S·诺福德,[美]戴安娜·E·佩恩特,[美]黛博拉·J·皮克林,[美]巴巴拉·B·盖迪.有效的课堂教学手册[M].杨永华,周佳萍译.北京:教育科学出版社,2008.
[27][美]S·斯特林菲尔德,S·罗斯,L·史密斯.重建学校的大胆计划[M].窦卫霖等译.上海:华东师范大学出版社,2003.
[28][美]埃里希·弗洛姆.生命之爱[M].王大鹏译.北京:国际文化出版公司,2001.
[29][奥]阿尔弗雷德·阿德勒.理解人性[M].陈太胜,陈文颖译.北京:国际文化出版公司,2000.
[30][美]弗莱德·C·鲁能伯格,阿兰·C·奥姆斯滕.教育管理学理论与实践[M].孙志军等译.北京:中国轻工业出版社,2003.
[31]罗伯特·G·欧文斯.教育组织行为学[M].窦卫霖,温建平,王越译.上海:华东师范大学出版社,2001.
[32][美]詹姆斯·梅里特.铸就一生的9种品格[M].郝子岩译.北京:中国戏剧出版社,2006.
[33] [美]马斯洛.马斯洛人本主义哲学[M].成明编译.北京:九州出版社,2003.
[34]联合国教科文组织国际教育发展委员会.学会生存[M].华东师范大学比较教育研究所译.北京:教育科学出版社,1996.
[35][美]马克赫斯切.管理经济学[M].李国津译.北京:机械工业出版社,2007.
[36]克龙巴赫.通过评价改进教程.教育学文集·教育评价.陈玉琨、赵中建译.
[37]D·L·斯塔弗尔比姆.方案评价的CIPP模式.教育学文集·教育评价.陈玉琨译.
[1]任春荣.教育公平视角下的学校效能评价[J].教育导刊,2007,(9).
[2]边玉芳,林志红.增值评价:一种绿色升学率理念下的学校评价模式[J].北京师范大学学报(社会科学版),2007,(6).
[3]谌启标.学校效能研究论纲[J].教育理论与实践,2001,(6).
[4]张煜.学校效能评价[J].中小学管理,1997,(7-8).
[5]谌启标.学校效能论[J].江西教育科研,2001,(6a).
[6]谌启标.美国“有效学校”研究述评[J].教育研究与实验,2003,(1).
[7]谌启标.学校效能研究与学校重建[J].教育发展研究,2007,(10b).
[8]孟繁华.构建现代学校的学习型组织[J].比较教育研究,2002,(1).
[9]钱家荣.高效能学校及其特征[J].外国中小学教育,2003,(8).
[10]陈欣.学校效能的多维透视[J].教学与管理,2003,(7).
[11]朱科蓉,李春景.学校效能研究的历史、现状与趋势[J].教学与管理,2003,(1).
[12]陈丰伟.国外学校校能研究述评[J].江西教育科研,2003,(10).
[13]杨琼.学校效能与学校改革:对英国最新研究成果的述评[J].外国教育研究,2003,(12).
[14]杨琼,范国睿.学校校能研究的现状及其反思[J].上海教育科研,2003,(6).
[15]盖雁,尹钟祥.发展中的普通教育评价---我国普教评价理论与实践发展综述.现代教育科学.2003,(6).
[16]汤林春.学校效能略论[J].中小学管理,2004,(2)
[17]汤林春,梁玲玲.学校效能评价的尝试[J].上海教育科研.2005,(4).
[18]汤林春.学校效能的学校因素研究[J].上海教育科研,2006,(8).
[19]汤林春.试论学校效能评价的两种思路[J].教育管理研究,2007,(2).
[20]谈松华.试行效能评价[J].中国远程教育,2004,(4).
[21]孙河川.欧洲八国学校效能与改进研究.---国家层影响要素对教育改进的影响[J].教育研究(增刊),2004.
[22]陈明高,马晓晴,曹晖.教师集体效能研究述评[J].山东师范大学学报,2005,(4).
[23]石雷山.教师集体效能---教师效能研究的新进展[J].外国教育研究,2005,(10).
[24]蔡永红.美英两国学校效能研究的回顾与反思[J].外国教育研究,2006,(5).
[25]台州市椒江区教育局课题组.区域推进学校效能评估的实践探索[J].教育发展研究,2005,(11b).
[26]弗兰西斯科·索夫,杨燕燕.课程效能评价---以“教育效能与教育评价”为例[J].外国教育研究,2005,(5).
[27]温恒福.学校效能的基本理论问题[J].教育研究,2007,(2).
[28]陈光春.学校效能研究新进展[J].教育发展研究,2007,(10b).
[29]赵树贤.卡坦斯学校效能评价模式及其拓展研究[J].中国教育学刊,2007,(6).
[30]卢乃桂,张佳伟.学校效能与学校改进走向结合的理论基础的探讨[J].教育学报,2007,(5).
[31]王俭.论当代学校效能的价值取向[J].基础教育参考,2007,(6).
[32]蔡永红.学校效能研究的回顾与反思——从研究方法的角度[J].教育研究,2007,(2).
[33]刘在花.美英两国学校效能研究的回顾与反思[J].外国教育研究,2006,(5).
[34]蔡永红.美国学校效能研究的回顾与反思[J].比较教育研究,2005,(11).
[35]马晓强,彭文蓉,[英]萨丽·托马斯.学校效能的增值评价———对河北省保定市普通高中学校的实证研究[J].教育研究,2006,(10).
[36]徐群,闻金童.中美优秀高中建设比较研究[J].上海教育科研,2002,(2).
[37]李如海.教育观与质量观伦略[J].高等工程教育研究,1998,(1).
[38]陈玉琨,李如海.我国教育评价的世纪回顾与未来展望[J].华东师范大学学报(教育科学版),2000,(1).
[39]余继凤.西方国家学校效能研究的反思及其未来发展[J].外国教育研究,2005,(6).
[40]田杰.评定·选拔·调控·个性化表现[J].中国教育学刊,2003,(3).
[41]李雁冰.重塑教育评定——艾斯纳的课程评价初探[J].外国教育资料,2000,(1).
[42]龚晓华.教育评价主题---促进人的发展[J].教育理论与实践,2003,(9).
[43][英]萨丽·托马斯.运用“增值”评量指标评估学校表现[J].教育研究,2005,(9).
[44]林少杰.发展性评价的认识·现代教育论丛[J].教育改革动态,2003,(6).
[45]杨希洁. PISA特点分析及其对我国基础教育评价制度改革的启示[J].教育科学研究,2008,(2).
[46]顾云虎.应然与实然两种视角下的学力研究----学力模式比较和思考[J].上海教育,2001,(9).
[47]钟启泉.学力理论的历史发展[J].全球教育展望,2001.
[48]田中耕治.学力调查若干问题探析[J].教育研究,2006,(7).
[49]朱小蔓.素质教育评价:理念与思路[J].人民教育,2007,(9)
[50]彭贤智.对学习品质的结构与培养策略的研究[J].唐山师范学院学报,2004,(1).
[51]胡永梅.校本评估理论初探[J].教育理论与实践,2004,(10).
[1]汤林春.学校效能评价研究[D].上海:华东师范大学博士学位论文,2005.
[2]谷珊.学校效能评价:对某市高中的实证研究[D].天津:天津师范大学硕士学位论文,2007.
[3]赵晖.普通初级中学学校效能评价研究初探[D].上海:上海师范大学硕士学位论文,2005.
[4]楮福靖.枣庄市重点高中组织文化与组织效能关系的研究[D].济南:山东师范大学教育硕士学位论文,2003.
[5]王凯.发展性校本学生评价[D].上海:华东师范大学博士学位论文,2004.
[6]俎媛媛.真实性学生评价研究[D].上海:华东师范大学博士学位论文,2007.
[7]周文叶.学生表现性评价研究[D].上海:华东师范大学博士学位论文,2009.
[8]邓晶.学校效能提升的框架分析[D].北京:首都师范大学硕士学位论文,2005.
[1]Fred C. Lunenburg(America), Allan C. Ornstein(America). Educational Administration Concepts and Practice.北京:外语教学与研究出版社,2004.
[2]赵勇,杨文中.当代教育科学前沿报告(美国教育文选2006-2007)[M].上海:华东师范大学出版社,2007.
[3]R.H.Hall. Organizations: Structures, Processes, and Outcomes( 8th ed.), Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.2002.
[4]P. Mortimore. The Road to Improvement: Reflections on School Effectiveness[M]. Lisse, Netherlands: Swets & Zeitlinger,1998.
[5]J. Scheerens, R. Bosker. The Foundations of Educational Effectiveness, Oxford:Permagon.1997.
[6]Earl Babbie. The Basics of Social Research.北京:外语教学与研究出版社,2005.
[1]Jim Spinks. Resources and School Effectiveness and Improvement. T. Townsend (Ed.), International Handbook of School Effectiveness and Improvement, 451–468.? 2007 Springer.
[2]William L. Sanders. Value-Added Assessment from Student Achievement Data: Opportunities and HurdlesJournal of Personnel Evaluation in Education 14:4, 329-339, 2000.? 2000 Kluwer Academic Publishers. Manufactured in The Netherlands.
[3]Ronald H. Heck. Assessing School Achievement Progress: Comparing Alternative Approaches. Educational Administration Quarterly, Vol. 42, No. 5,December 2006,pp.667-699.
[4] Robert L. Linn. Assessments and Accountability.Educational Researcher, March 2000, Volume 29,No. 2, pp. 4-16.
[5]Daniel Fallon. The Buffalo upon the Chimneypiece the Value of Evidence. Journal of Teacher Education, Vol. 57, No. 2, March/April 2006,pp.139-154.DOI: 10.1177/0022487105285675? 2006 by the American Association of Colleges for Teacher Education.
[6]Audrey Amrein-Beardsley. Methodological Concerns about the Education Value-Added Assessment System. Educational Researcher, Vol. 37, No. 2, pp. 65-75 DOI: 10.3102/0013189X08316420 ? 2008 AERA. http://er.aera.net
[7]George H. Noell, Jeanne L. Burns. Value-Added Assessment of Teacher Preparation an Illustration of Emerging Technonogy.Journal of Teacher Education, Vol. 57, No. 1,January/February2006,pp.37-50.DOI: 10.1177/0022487105284466 ? 2006 by the American Association of Colleges for Teacher Education
[8] Carmen D. Tekwe, Randy L. Carter, Chang-Xing Ma, James Algina, Maurice E. Lucas, Jeffrey Roth, Mario Ariet, Thomas Fisher, Michael B. Resnick . An Empirical Comparison of Statistical Models for Value-Added Assessment of School Performance. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics ,Spring2004, Vol. 29, No. 1, pp. 11-36.
[9] Joseph A. Martineau. Distorting Value Added: The Use of Longitudinal, Vertically Scaled Student Achievement Data for Growth-Based, Value-Added Accountability. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, Spring 2006, Vol. 31, No. 1, pp.35-62.
[10]Susan Kochan. Evolution of School Performance Research in the USA: From School Effectiveness to School Accountability and Back. T. Townsend (Ed.), International Handbook of School Effectiveness and Improvement,485–502.? 2007 Springer.
[11] Eric A. Hanushek. The Failure of Input-Based Schooling Policies. Economic Journal, 2003, pp. 64-98.
[12] Joel K. Kiboss, Mwangi Ndirangu, Eric W. Wekesa1. Effectiveness of a Computer-Mediated Simulations Program in School Biology on Pupils’Learning Outcomes in Cell Theory. Journal of Science Education and Technology, Vol. 13, No. 2, June 2004 .
[13] Hedley Beare. Four Decades of Body-Surfing The Breakers of School Reform: Just Waving, not Drowning. T. Townsend (Ed.), International Handbook of School Effectiveness and Improvement, 27–40. ? 2007 Springer.
[14] David Grissmer. Class Size Effects: Assessing the Evidence, its Policy Implications, and Future Research Agenda. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, Summer 1999, Vol. 21. No. 2. pp. 231-248.
[15] R.G. Ehrenberg et al.. Class Size and Student Achievement .Psychology Science in the Public Interest, 2001, 2:pp.1-30.
[16] B. Nye, L. V. Hedges. The Effects of Small Classes on Academic Achievement: the Results of the Tennessee Class Size Experiment. American Educational Research Journal, 2000, 37: pp.123-151.
[17] H. Goldstein.et al. Meta-Analysis Using Multilevel Models with an Application to the Study of Class Size Effects. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, 2000,49,pp.399-412.
[18] Debbi C. Harris. Lowering the Bar or Moving the Target: A WageDecomposition of Michigan’s Charter and Traditional Public School Teachers. Educational Administration Quarterly, Vol. 42, No. 3,August 2006, pp.424-460.
[19] Bruce R. Thompson. Equitable Measurement of School Effectiveness. Urban Education,Vol.39,No. 2, March 2004, pp.200-229.DOI: 10.1177/0042085903261325? 2004 Corwin Press, Inc.
[20]Ronald H. Heck. Examining the Relationship Between Teacher Quality as an Organizational Property of Schools and Students’Achievement and Growth Rates. Educational Administration Quarterly, Vol. 43, No. 4 ,October 2007,pp.399-432.
[21] James Griffith. The Relation of Organizational Process Orientation to School Effectiveness and Efficiency in Elementory Public Schools. Social Psychology of Education, 1:297-321,1998. 1998Kluwer Academic Publishers Printed in the Netherlands.
[22] Allan Walker, Philip Hallinger, and Haiyan Qian. Leadership Development for School Effectiveness and Improvement in East Asia. T. Townsend (Ed.), International Handbook of School Effectiveness and Improvement, 659–678. ? 2007 Springer.
[23]R. H. Heck. Examining the Impact of School Quality on School Outcomes and Improvement: A Value-Added Approach. Educational Administration Quarterly, 36(4), 2000, pp.513-552.
[24] Vincent A. Anfara Jr., Faye Patterson, Alison Buehler, Brian Gearity. School Improvement Planning in East Tennessee Middle Schools: A Content Analysis and Perceptions Study. NASSP Bulletin, Vol. 90, No. 4, December 2006, pp.277-300 DOI: 10.1177/0192636506294848 ? 2006 by the National Association of Secondary School Principals http://bul.sagepub.com hosted at http://online.sagepub.com
[25]B. Rowan, R. Correnti, R. J. Miller. What Large-Scale Survey Research Tells Us about Teacher Effects on Student Achievement:Insights from the Prospects Study of Elementary Schools. Teachers College Record,104(8), 2002,pp. 1525-1567.
[26] P. Hallinger, R. H. Heck. Exploring the Principal’s Contribution to SchoolEffectiveness,1980-1985 School Effectiveness and School Improvement,9(2),1998,pp.157-191.
[27] S. H. Fuhrman. Challenges in Systemic Education Reform. CPRE Policy Brief No. RB-14.Phyladelphia,PA: University of Pennsylvania, Consortiumn for Policy Research in Education,1994.
[28] R. F. Elmore. Bridging the Gap between Standards and Achievement. Washington, DC: Albert Shanker Institute, 2002a.
[29] Janet H. Chrispeels, Carrie A. Andrews with Margarita González. System Supports for Teacher Learning and School Improvement. T. Townsend (Ed.), International Handbook of School Effectiveness and Improvement, 787–806. ? 2007 Springer.
[30] Knight Jim. Do schools Have Learning Disabilities? Focus on Exceptional Children. V.30 ,May 1998.
[31] Thomas J. Lasley, Dary Siedentop, Robert Yinger. A Systemic Approach to Enhancing Teacher Quality the Ohio Model. Journal of Teacher Education, Vol. 57, No. 1, January/February 2006, 13-21.DOI: 10.1177/0022487105284455? 2006 by the American Association of Colleges for Teacher Education.
[32] Tim Konold, Brian Jablonski, Anthony Nottingham, Lara Kessler, Stephen Byrd, Scott Imig ,Robert Berry, Robert McNergney . Adding Value to Public Schools Investigating Teacher Education, Teaching, and Pupil Learning. Journal of Teacher Education, Volume 59 Number 4 September/October 2008,pp. 300-312 ? 2008 Sage Publications 10.1177/0022487108321378 http://jte.sagepub.com hosted at http://online.sagepub.com.
[33] Heather C. Hill, Sarah Theule Lubienski. Teachers’Mathematics Knowledge for Teaching and School Context A Study of California TeachersEducational Policy,Volume 21 Number 5 November 2007,pp. 747-768 ? 2007 Corwin Press 10.1177/0895904807307061 http://epx.sagepub.com hosted at http://online.sagepub.com.
[34] Andrew J. Rotherham, Julie Mikuta, Julia Freeland. Letter to the Next President. Journal of Teacher Education, Vol. 59, No. 3, May/June 2008,pp.242-251 DOI: 10.1177/0022487108317021 ? 2008 by the American Association of Colleges for Teacher Education.
[35]H. Del Schalock, Mark D. Schalock, Robert Ayres. Scaling up Research in Teacher Education New Demands on Theory, Measurement, and Design. Journal of Teacher Education, Vol. 57, No. 2, March/April 2006,pp. 102-119. DOI: 10.1177/0022487105285615 ? 2006 by the American Association of Colleges for Teacher Education.
[36] Michael D. Andrew, Casey D. Cobb, Peter J. Giampietro. Verbal Ability and Teacher Effectiveness. Journal of Teacher Education, Vol. 56, No. 4, September/October 2005,pp. 343-354.
[37] Gregory J. Palardy, Russell W. Rumberger. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis. June 2008, Vol. 30, No. 2, pp. 111–140 DOI: 10.3102/0162373708317680 ? 2008 AERA. http://eepa.aera.net .
[38] Christopher Day, Pam Sammons, and Qing Gu. Combining Qualitative and Quantitative Methodologies in Research on Teachers’Lives,Work, and Effectiveness: From Integration to Synergy. Educational Researcher, Vol. 37, No. 6, pp. 330–342.DOI: 10.3102/0013189X08324091 ? 2008 AERA. http://er.aera.net.
[39] D.K. Cohen, S.W. Raudenbush, and D.L. Ball. Resources, Instruction, and Research. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis,25(2), 2003,pp.119-142.
[40]David Reynolds. School Effectiveness and School Improvement (SESI): Links with the International Standards/Accountability Agenda.T. Townsend (Ed.), International Handbook of School Effectiveness and Improvement, 471–484 ? 2007 Springer.
[41]William F. Tate IV. The Political Economy of Teacher Quality in School Mathematics African American Males, Opportunity Structures, Politics, and Method. American Behavioral Scientist, Volume 51 Number 7 March 2008,pp. 953-971 ? 2008 Sage Publications 10.1177/0002764207311999 http://abs.sagepub.com hosted at http://online.sagepub.com.
[42]Dale Ballou, William Sanders, Paul Wright. Controlling for Student Backgroundin Value-Added Assessment of Teachers. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, Spring 2004, Vol. 29, No. 1, pp. 37–65.
[43]V. Battistich, et al. Beyond the Three R’s: a Broader Agenda for School Reform. The elementary school Journal,1999,99:pp.415-431.
[44]Marilyn Cochran-Smith, Mary Kim Fries. Sticks, Stones, and Ideology: The Discourse of Reform in Teacher Education. Educational Researcher, November 2001, Vol. 30. No. 8, pp. 3–15.
[45]L.M. Desimone, A.C. Porter, M.S. Garet, K.S. Yoon, and B.F. Briman. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 2002,24(2),pp.81-112.
[46] Mark Girod , Gerald Girod. Exploring the Efficacy of the Cook School District Simulation. Journal of Teacher Education, Vol. 57, No. 5, November/December 2006,pp.481-497.DOI: 10.1177/0022487106293742? 2006 by the American Association of Colleges for Teacher Education
[47] Harold C. Doran,J. R. Lockwood. Fitting Value-Added Models in R. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, Summer 2006, Vol. 31, No. 2, pp. 205–230.
[48] C. Miskel, R. Fevurly, and J. Stewart. Organizational Structures and Processes, Perceived School Effectiveness, Loyalty and Job Satisfaction. Educational Administration Quarterly,1979,15, pp.97-118.
[49]J. R. Hackman, G..R. Oldham. Work Redesign. Reading, MA: Addison Wesley; C. Miskel, J. DeFrain, and K. Wilfox. A Test of Expectancy Work Motivation Theory in Educational Organizations. Educational Administration Quarterly,1980,16,pp.70-92.
[50]C. Miskel, D. McDonald, S. Bloom. Structural and Expectancy Linkages within Schools and Organizational Effectiveness. Educational Administration Quarterly, 1983,19,pp. 49-82.
[52] D. P. Thompson, J. F. McNamara, J.R. Hoyle. Job Satisfaction in Educational Organizations: A Synthesis of Research Findings. Educational Administration Quarterly, 1997,33(1).pp.7-37.
[53] Frankie Denise Powell,Larry D. Fieldes, Edwin D. Bell, Gwendolyn S. Johnson. Manhood, Scholarship, Perseverance, Uplift, and Elementary Students An Example of School and Community Collaboration. Urban Education, Volume 42 Number 4 July 2007,pp. 296-312 ? 2007 Corwin Press 10.1177/0042085907302727 http://uex.sagepub.com hosted at http://online.sagepub.com.
[54] G. D Bolman, G. M. Hews, L. T. Overman, and S. Brown. Comprehensive School Reform and Student Achievement Report. 2002,No. 59. Baltimore, MD: CRESPA. Awailable at www. csos.jhu. edu/crespar.
[55] Marilyn Cochran-Smith. Studying Teacher Education What we Know and Need to Know. Journal of Teacher Education, Vol. 56, No. 4, September/October 2005 301-306.DOI: 10.1177/0022487105280116 ? 2005 by the American Association of Colleges for Teacher Education.
[56] Lisa Andrejko. Value-Added Assessment: A View from a Practitioner. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, Spring 2004, Vol. 29, No. 1, pp. 7–9.
[57] Mona S. Wineburg. Evidence in Teacher Preparation Establishing a Frmework for Accountability. Journal of Teacher Education, Vol. 57, No. 1, January/February 2006,pp.51-64.DOI: 10.1177/0022487105284475? 2006 by the American Association of Colleges for Teacher Education.
[58]S.C. Purkey, M.S.Smith. Effective Schools: A Rewiew. Elementary School Journal, 1983,83, pp.427-452.
[59]R.D.,Goddard, M.Tschannen-Moran, W. K. Hoy. Teacher Trust in Students and Parents: A Multilevel Examination of the Disrtibution and Effects of Teacher Trust in Urban Elementary Schools. Elementary School Journal,2001, 102, pp.3-7.
[60] R.D.Goddard, S. R. Sweetland, W. K. Hoy. Academic Emphasis of Urban Elementary Schools and Student Achievement: A Multi-level Analysis. Educational Administration Quarterly, 2000,Vol. 5, pp.683-702.
[61] R.D.Goddard, W. D.Hoy, L. LoGerfo. Collective Efficacy and Student Achievement in Public High School: A Path Analysis. Paper Presented at theAnnual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Chicage, II.2003.
[62] Bert P. M. Creemers, Louise Stoll, Gerry Reezigt, and the ESI Team. Effective School Improvement Ingredients for Success: The Results of an International Comparative Study of Best Practice Case Studies. T. Townsend (Ed.) International Handbook of School Effectiveness and Improvement, 825–838. ? 2007 Springer.
[63]J. R. Lockwood, Daniel F. McCaffrey, Louis T. Mariano, Claude Setodji. Bayesian Methods for Scalable Multivariate Value-Added Assessment. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, June 2007, Vol. 32, No. 2, pp. 125–150 DOI: 10.3102/1076998606298039? AERA and ASA. http://jebs.aera.net
[64]Robert Lissitz. Value Added Models in Education: Theory and Practice. Applied Psychological Measurement, Vol. 30 No. 3, May 2006, p.250.
[65]Dan Liston, Jennie Whitcomb, Hilda Borko. NCLB and SCcientifically-Based Research Opportunities Lost and Found. Journal of Teacher Education, Vol. 58, No. 2, March/April 2007,pp.99-107 DOI: 10.1177/0022487107299980 ? 2007 by the American Association of Colleges for Teacher Education.
[66]Mohr Nancy, Dichter Alan. Building a Learning Organization. Phi Delta Kappan, Vol.82 No.10,June 2001.
[67]Howard Wainer.Introduction to a Special Issue of the Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics on Value-Added Assessment.National Board of Medical Examiners Editor, Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics Spring 2004, Vol. 29, No. 1, pp. 1–3.
[68]Donald B. Rubin, Elizabeth A. Stuart, Elaine L. Zanutto. A Potential Outcomes View of Value-Added Assessment in Education. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics Spring 2004, Vol. 29, No. 1, pp. 103–116.
[69]Daniel F. McCaffrey, J. R. Lockwood, Daniel Koretz,Thomas A. Louis,Laura Hamilton. Models for Value-Added Modeling of Teacher Effects. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics Spring 2004, Vol. 29, No. 1, pp. 67–101.
[70]Michael Seltzer,Kilchan Choi,Yeow Meng Thum. Examining RelationshipsBetween Where Students Start and how Rapidly they Progress: Using New Developments in Growth Modeling to Gain Insight into the Distribution of Achievement Within Schools.Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, Fall 2003, Vol. 25, No. 3, pp. 263–286.
[71]Haggai Kupermintz. Teacher Effects and Teacher Effectiveness: A Validity Investigation of the Tennessee Value Added Assessment System.Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis , Fall 2003, Vol. 25, No. 3, pp. 287–298.
[72]Madhabi Chatterji. Models and Methods for Examining Standards-Based Reforms and Accountability Initiatives: Have the Tools of Inquiry Answered Pressing Questions on Improving Schools? Review of Educational Research, Fall 2002, Vol. 72, No. 3, pp. 345–386.
[73]J. R. Lockwood,Thomas A. Louis,Daniel F. McCaffrey.Uncertainty in Rank Estimation: Implications for Value-Added Modeling Accountability Systems.Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, Fall 2002, Vol. 27, No. 3, pp. 255–270.
[74]Laura Desimone. How Can Comprehensive School Reform Models Be Successfully Implemented?Review of Educational Research, Fall 2002, Vol. 72, No. 3, pp. 433–479.
[75]Richard Correnti, Brian Rowan. Opening Up the Black Box: Literacy Instruction in Schools Participating in Three Comprehensive School Reform Programs. American Educational Research Journal June 2007, Vol. 44, No. 2, pp. 298–338 DOI: 10.3102/0002831207302501 ? 2007 AERA. http://aerj.aera.net.
[76]Eric A. Hanushek. Some Findings From an Independent Investigation of the Tennessee STAR Experiment and From Other Investigations of Class Size Effects. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, Summerl999, Vol. 21, No. 2, pp. 143-163.
[77]Sue Lasky, Amanda Datnow, Sam Stringfield, and Kirsten Sundell. Diverse Populations and School Effectiveness and Improvement in the USA. T. Townsend (Ed.) International Handbook of School Effectiveness and Improvement, 557–576. ? 2007 Springer.
[78] Charles Ungerleider, Ben Levin. Accountability, Funding and School Improvement in Canada. T. Townsend (Ed.) International Handbook of School Effectiveness and Improvement, 411–424. ? 2007 Springer.