Page 123 |
Save page Remove page | Previous | 123 of 175 | Next |
|
small (250x250 max)
medium (500x500 max)
Large (1000x1000 max)
Extra Large
large ( > 500x500)
Full Resolution
All (PDF)
|
This page
All
|
117
Parent-Tutor Relationships in SES vs. SES-type Programs
Compared to tutoring in SES-type schools, SES after school tutoring was
found to be more dependent on the SES tutor-student relationship and the SES
provider-tutor relationship with the parents (Finding 6). This difference in behavior
can be accounted for by the principal-agent relationship between parent and SES
provider. In SES-type schools, the role of the parent is removed from the tutoring
process. Parent participation is limited to the granting of permission for their student
to attend SES-type school tutoring. Parents did not have the opportunity to select the
SES-type tutor or view the SES-type tutoring process. The opposite was found when
studying the SES tutoring process and relationship between the parent (principal) and
SES providers (agents).
The role of parents in the after school tutoring process of SES schools varied
in two areas when compared with that of SES-type schools. The first area is that
parents in SES schools had the authority to select among multiple outside SES
providers. As found in this study, parents sometimes exercised this authority to
change tutors or even providers who did not meet their needs. Parents in SES
schools were encouraged to, and often informally shared, their experiences with SES
providers. Not only must SES providers concern themselves with the improving
student learning through tutoring, but they must also have the goal of managing the
expectations of parents.
The second area is the role parents could play in the SES tutoring process.
Since SES tutoring in this study took place mostly in the home, parents had a front
Object Description
| Title | Organizational relationships in supplemental educational services (SES) and SES-type programs |
| Author | Tan, Thomas Anthony |
| Author email | diandtom@sbcglobal.net; thomas_tan@jusd.k12.ca.us |
| Degree | Doctor of Education |
| Document type | Dissertation |
| Degree program | Education (Leadership) |
| School | Rossier School of Education |
| Date defended/completed | 2008-08-07 |
| Date submitted | 2008 |
| Restricted until | Unrestricted |
| Date published | 2008-10-08 |
| Advisor (committee chair) | Hentschke, Guilbert C. |
| Advisor (committee member) |
Datnow, Amanda Mafi, Gabriela |
| Abstract | The Center for Education Policy (CEP, 2007) released a July 2007 NCLB report examining the effectiveness of assistance to schools that have been unable to achieve state defined student Proficiency goals for two consecutive years. This academic tutoring assistance known as Supplemental Educational Services (SES) was deemed to be important or very important by less than 10% of the districts surveyed.; How can we explain differences in outside of the school day academic tutoring programs that are mandated (SES programs under NCLB) and those that are willingly provided (SES-type programs by schools)? These differences in programs can be studied and understood through what economists call "principal-agent" theory to study the relationships among the participants. The principal-agent (P-A) theory had its origins in the study of the problems that arise when objectives of a principal and agent diverge. The purpose of the study is to understand the P-A related performance problems among the participants in Supplemental Educational Services (SES). This study will examine the P-A organizational relationships within the three primary SES and SES-type school program elements – individualized instruction, provider accountability, and student participation. The three research questions that were developed to guide this study are: 1. How does the principal-agent relationship explain what instructional strategies and practices are used by SES and SES-type providers in out of school hours programs? 2. How does the principal-agent relationship explain how SES and SES-type providers are accountable for student learning? 3. How does the principal-agent relationship explain how SES and SES-type providers manage student participation?; In comparing SES and SES-type after school tutoring organizations, data analysis revealed that principal-agent problems in Title I schools required to provide SES were greater than those Title I SES-type schools that willingly provided after school tutoring. The six major findings of this study found principal-agent problems in the areas of SES organizational barriers, beliefs in tutoring effectiveness, sub optimization of SES, non-performance based competition among SES providers, and relationships among parents, tutors, and educators.; Recommendations for successful SES implementation and improvement of current practice to address these principal-agent problems included increasing the outreach to parents, using an SES provider report card to rank provider performance, improved sharing of existing student data between school districts and SES providers, expanding the pool of students who could benefit from SES tutoring, and improving communications and coordination through an SES provider-school district advisory council. Suggestions for future research include comparing SES implementations in coastal vs. inland California school districts, study of student motivation in after school tutoring, greater cooperation between SES providers and school districts, and the effectiveness of comprehensive vs. academic after school tutoring. |
| Keyword | principal; agent; education; elementary; k12; nclb; supplemental; educational; services; SES; tutoring |
| Geographic subject (state) | California |
| Coverage date | 2007/2008 |
| Language | English |
| Part of collection | University of Southern California dissertations and theses |
| Publisher (of the original version) | University of Southern California |
| Place of publication (of the original version) | Los Angeles, California |
| Publisher (of the digital version) | University of Southern California. Libraries |
| Provenance | Electronically uploaded by the author |
| Type | texts |
| Legacy record ID | usctheses-m1643 |
| Contributing entity | University of Southern California |
| Rights | Tan, Thomas Anthony |
| Repository name | Libraries, University of Southern California |
| Repository address | Los Angeles, California |
| Repository email | cisadmin@lib.usc.edu |
| Filename | etd-Tan-2371 |
| Archival file | uscthesesreloadpub_Volume26/etd-Tan-2371.pdf |
Description
| Title | Page 123 |
| Contributing entity | University of Southern California |
| Repository email | cisadmin@lib.usc.edu |
| Full text | 117 Parent-Tutor Relationships in SES vs. SES-type Programs Compared to tutoring in SES-type schools, SES after school tutoring was found to be more dependent on the SES tutor-student relationship and the SES provider-tutor relationship with the parents (Finding 6). This difference in behavior can be accounted for by the principal-agent relationship between parent and SES provider. In SES-type schools, the role of the parent is removed from the tutoring process. Parent participation is limited to the granting of permission for their student to attend SES-type school tutoring. Parents did not have the opportunity to select the SES-type tutor or view the SES-type tutoring process. The opposite was found when studying the SES tutoring process and relationship between the parent (principal) and SES providers (agents). The role of parents in the after school tutoring process of SES schools varied in two areas when compared with that of SES-type schools. The first area is that parents in SES schools had the authority to select among multiple outside SES providers. As found in this study, parents sometimes exercised this authority to change tutors or even providers who did not meet their needs. Parents in SES schools were encouraged to, and often informally shared, their experiences with SES providers. Not only must SES providers concern themselves with the improving student learning through tutoring, but they must also have the goal of managing the expectations of parents. The second area is the role parents could play in the SES tutoring process. Since SES tutoring in this study took place mostly in the home, parents had a front |
