Page 154 |
Save page Remove page | Previous | 154 of 175 | Next |
|
small (250x250 max)
medium (500x500 max)
Large (1000x1000 max)
Extra Large
large ( > 500x500)
Full Resolution
All (PDF)
|
This page
All
|
148
Bronson, Po. (2007). How not to talk to your kids: the inverse power of praise. New
York Magazine, February 12, 2007.
Burch, P. (2007). Supplemental education services under NCLB: Emerging evidence
and policy issues. University of Wisconsin-Madison. Education Policy
Research Unit (EPRU). Retrieved May 7, 2007 from http://epsl.asu.edu/
epru/documents/EPSL-0705-232-EPRU.pdf.
Caro, R. (2006). Different voice lessons in power: Lyndon Johnson revealed.
Harvard Business Review. April 2006, pp.47-52
Center on Education Policy. (2007). Moving beyond identification: assisting schools
in improvement. A Report in the series from capital to the classroom: year 5
of the No Child Left Behind Act. July 2007.
Crandall, D., Datnow, A., Lieberman, A. Supovitz, J. & Wohlstetter, P. (2006).
Organising Success: Dimensions of creative operationalism in networked
learning communities. International perspectives on networked learning.
National College for School Leadership. Cranfield, England.
Christensen, C. (1997). The innovators dilemma: when new technologies cause great
firms to fail. Harvard Business School Press.
Clark, R. & Estes, F. (2002), Turning research into results: a guide to selecting the
right performance solutions. CEP Press.
Cohen, J. (2003, May/June). Supplemental education: six essential components.
Principal, 82(5), 34-7.
Cohen, Rebecca. (2007). Personal electronic mail communication on survey
methods.
Council of Chief State School Officers (CCSSO). (January 2006). Extended
Learning Opportunities: Policy Statement Executive Summary. Retrieved
February 17, 2007 from http://www.ccsso.org/publications/index.cfm.
Council of Chief State School Officers (CCSSO). (May 2000). Extended Learning
Initiatives: Opportunities and Implementation Challenges – Profiles of Six
Selected State Sponsored Initiatives. Retrieved February 17, 2007 from
http://www.ccsso.org/publications/index.cfm.
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 154 |
| Contributing entity | University of Southern California |
| Repository email | cisadmin@lib.usc.edu |
| Full text | 148 Bronson, Po. (2007). How not to talk to your kids: the inverse power of praise. New York Magazine, February 12, 2007. Burch, P. (2007). Supplemental education services under NCLB: Emerging evidence and policy issues. University of Wisconsin-Madison. Education Policy Research Unit (EPRU). Retrieved May 7, 2007 from http://epsl.asu.edu/ epru/documents/EPSL-0705-232-EPRU.pdf. Caro, R. (2006). Different voice lessons in power: Lyndon Johnson revealed. Harvard Business Review. April 2006, pp.47-52 Center on Education Policy. (2007). Moving beyond identification: assisting schools in improvement. A Report in the series from capital to the classroom: year 5 of the No Child Left Behind Act. July 2007. Crandall, D., Datnow, A., Lieberman, A. Supovitz, J. & Wohlstetter, P. (2006). Organising Success: Dimensions of creative operationalism in networked learning communities. International perspectives on networked learning. National College for School Leadership. Cranfield, England. Christensen, C. (1997). The innovators dilemma: when new technologies cause great firms to fail. Harvard Business School Press. Clark, R. & Estes, F. (2002), Turning research into results: a guide to selecting the right performance solutions. CEP Press. Cohen, J. (2003, May/June). Supplemental education: six essential components. Principal, 82(5), 34-7. Cohen, Rebecca. (2007). Personal electronic mail communication on survey methods. Council of Chief State School Officers (CCSSO). (January 2006). Extended Learning Opportunities: Policy Statement Executive Summary. Retrieved February 17, 2007 from http://www.ccsso.org/publications/index.cfm. Council of Chief State School Officers (CCSSO). (May 2000). Extended Learning Initiatives: Opportunities and Implementation Challenges – Profiles of Six Selected State Sponsored Initiatives. Retrieved February 17, 2007 from http://www.ccsso.org/publications/index.cfm. |
