Literaturnachweis - Detailanzeige
Autor/in | Askov, Eunice N. |
---|---|
Institution | Pennsylvania State Univ., University Park. |
Titel | Family Literacy: A Research Agenda to Build the Future. Report from Penn State's Goodling Institute for Research in Family Literacy Think Tank. |
Quelle | (2002), (19 Seiten)
PDF als Volltext |
Sprache | englisch |
Dokumenttyp | gedruckt; online; Monographie |
Schlagwörter | Stellungnahme; Adult Basic Education; Brainstorming; Educational Planning; Educational Policy; Educational Research; Family Literacy; Focus Groups; Futures (of Society); Integrated Curriculum; Intergenerational Programs; Literacy Education; National Programs; Needs Assessment; Organizational Objectives; Parent Child Relationship; Participant Characteristics; Professional Development; Research Methodology; Research Needs; Research Problems; Student Evaluation; Tests Adult; Adults; Education; Adult education; Erwachsenenbildung; Bildungsplanung; Politics of education; Bildungspolitik; Bildungsforschung; Pädagogische Forschung; Future; Society; Zukunft; nicht übertragen; Bedarfsermittlung; Business goal; Unternehmensziel; Parents-child relationship; Parent-child-relation; Parent-child relationship; Eltern-Kind-Beziehung; Research method; Forschungsmethode; Forschungsbedarf; Forschungskritik; Schulnote; Studentische Bewertung; Examination; Prüfung; Examen |
Abstract | A think tank on researching family literacy was held to brainstorm a national research agenda for family literacy. The think tank brought together 12 researchers, policymakers, and practitioners involved in family literacy. Key themes emerging during the think tank were as follows: (1) family literacy is difficult to research because it is essentially a "black box"; (2) integration of four components--adult education, early childhood education, parent education, and parent-and-child together (PACT) time--is a hallmark of family literacy; (3) curricula in PACT time are especially lacking; (4) the selection of appropriate assessment instruments in family literacy is limited; and (5) determination of those who are best served by family literacy programs is critical. The following were among the items identified as belonging on the research agenda: (1) good measures of the components with demonstrated validity and reliability to assess the components' impact; (2) a multidisciplinary team approach using multiple research methods; (3) longitudinal research with cross-sectional data collection and multiple time frames for data collection; (4) research focusing on the differential impact of the four components for various subpopulations; and (5) quantitative measures to track program effects over time. Lists of 12 references and the think tank attendees are appended along with the Gooding Institute's goals. (MN) |
Anmerkungen | For full text: http://www.ed.psu.edu/goodlinginstitute/images/research.pdf. Publication is available on alternative media on request. |
Erfasst von | ERIC (Education Resources Information Center), Washington, DC |