Implementing State Standards and Assessment Programs Successfully--A Model for State Governments, Departments of Education and Local School Districts.

Autor/in	Wilson, James L.
Titel	Implementing State Standards and Assessment Programs Successfully--A Model for State Governments, Departments of Education and Local School Districts.
Quelle	(1986), (12 Seiten)Verfügbarkeit
Beigaben	Tabellen
Sprache	englisch
Dokumenttyp	gedruckt; Monographie
Schlagwörter	Tagungsbericht; Accountability; Administrator Responsibility; Board of Education Role; Cooperative Planning; Cooperative Programs; Educational Assessment; Educational Quality; Elementary Secondary Education; Governance; Government School Relationship; Program Development; Program Effectiveness; Program Implementation; School District Autonomy; State Legislation; State Programs; State Standards + Suchen Sie Ihr Suchwort? Verantwortung; Education; assessment; Bewertungssystem; Quality of education; Bildungsqualität; Educational policy; Financing; Steuerung; Bildung; Erziehung; Bildungspolitik; Finanzierung; Programmplanung; School district; School districts; Autonomy; School autonomy; Schulautonomie; Landesrecht; Regierungsprogramm
Abstract	This report describes how successful statewide programs of educational standards and assessment are established and briefly discusses causes of program failure. Four key stages characterize effective program establishment: (1) planning, (2) development, (3) implementation, and (4) monitoring. Planning involves interaction among all parties, for example, state government, state departments of education, and school districts. As many concerns as possible should be identified before development begins. Development follows the decision to create a program, standard, or test. The state departments of education should assume leadership at this time, though the origin of program mandate determines the level of state involvement. Local educational agencies must also be primary developers. Implementation rests with school districts, which are ultimately accountable for program success. If districts are unwilling to assume the major role or if the state is unwilling to allow them, resistance will plague the implementation stage. Monitoring is perhaps the most important program stage. The state educational department, not local districts, should monitor such frequently complex programs. Inconsistencies emerge with district monitoring, and districts are too involved to evaluate objectively; outside monitoring establishes credibility. Four figures illustrating program establishment stages are appended. (CJH)
Erfasst von	ERIC (Education Resources Information Center), Washington, DC
Update	2004/1/01