NOTE :: Various file formats are used on this page that may require download. If larger than 1mb, it will take longer to download. For instructions or more information, please visit our download page.
The abstracts used in this resource were taken from the websites of organizations supplying the referenced documents.
Anderson, K., Harrison, T., & Lewis, K. (2012). Plans to adopt and implement Common Core State Standards in the Southeast Region states (Issues & Answers Report, REL 2012--No. 136). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance, Regional Educational Laboratory Southeast.
This study describes state processes for adopting the Common Core State Standards (a common set of expectations across states for what students are expected to know in English language arts and math) and plans for implementing the common standards and aligning state assessment systems to them.
Council of Chief State School Officers. (2010). Model core teaching standards: A resource for state dialogue. Washington, DC: Author.
This document contains a set of model core teaching standards that outline what teachers should know and be able to do to help all students reach the goal of being college and career ready in today's world. These standards are an update of the 1992 Interstate New Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (INTASC). CCSSO has provided this draft for public comment and dialogue.
Education Commission of the States. (2008). From competing to leading: An international benchmarking blueprint. Denver, CO: Author.
From Competing to Leading: An International Benchmarking Blueprint discusses the alignment of standards, instruction, professional development and assessment to those of the highest--performing countries. [It] presents the rationale why states should consider benchmarking to international standards as well as describing policy recommendations for policymakers and education leaders. This is the first action guide of its kind to enable states, districts and schools to craft new policies and adjust existing policies proven to demonstrate world--class performance.
Gersten, R., Beckmann, S., Clarke, B., Foegen, A., Marsh, L., Star, J. R., & Witzel, B. (2009). Assisting students struggling with mathematics: Response to Intervention (RtI) for elementary and middle schools (NCEE 2009--4060). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance.
This guide provides eight specific recommendations intended to help teachers, principals, and school administrators use Response to Intervention (RtI) to identify students who need assistance in mathematics and to address the needs of these students through focused interventions. The guide provides suggestions on how to carry out each recommendation and explains how educators can overcome potential roadblocks to implementing the recommendations.
Gersten, R., Compton, D., Connor, C. M., Dimino, J., Santoro, L., Linan--Thompson, et al. (2008). Assisting students struggling with reading: Response to Intervention and multi--tier intervention for reading in the primary grades. A practice guide. (NCEE 2009--4045). Washington, DC: National Center on Response to Intervention. Retrieved from http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/ publications/practiceguides/.
This guide offers five specific recommendations to help educators identify struggling readers and implement evidence--based strategies to promote their reading achievement. Teachers and reading specialists can utilize these strategies to implement RtI and multi--tier intervention methods and frameworks at the classroom or school level. Recommendations cover how to screen students for reading problems, design a multi--tier intervention program, adjust instruction to help struggling readers, and monitor student progress.
Kashima, Y., Schleich, B., & Spradlin, T. (2009). The core components of RTI: A closer look at evidence--based core curriculum, assessment and progress monitoring, and data--based decision making. Denver, CO: Education Commission of the States.
Second in a three--part series aimed to build a fundamental understanding of a Response--to--Intervention (RTI) framework in Indiana's schools to aid in the prevention and intervention of both academic and behavioral problems for all students. This report examines the first three essential components of the RTI framework: evidence--based curriculum, assessment and progress monitoring, and data--based decision making. (Abstract from ECS)
Marzano, R., Gaddy, B., & Dean, C. (2000). What works in classroom instruction. Aurora, CO: Mid--continent Research for Education and Learning
[This is a ] Publication detailing instructional strategies that research shows have the greatest likelihood of positively affecting student learning.
Rallis, S. F. (1995). Creating learner centered schools: Dreams and practices. Theory into Practice, 34(4), 224--229.
This article discusses the learner centered schools approach in educational reform. It characterizes the traditional approach to schooling as a barrier to reform, and discusses the purpose of learner centered schools, and the views of learners and learning from the perspective of this model.
Sawyer, R., Holland, D., & Detgen, A. (2008). State policies and procedures and selected local implementation practices in Response to Intervention in the six Southeast Region states (Issues & Answers Report, REL 2008--No. 063). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance, Regional Educational Laboratory Southeast. Again, dash shows as a diamond
This report describes how six state education agencies and three local education agencies in the Southeast Region are adopting and implementing Response to Intervention----an education approach designed to provide effective, evidence--based interventions for struggling learners. (Abstract from SERVE Center)
Slavin, R. (1991). Synthesis of research on cooperative learning. Educational Leadership, 48(5), 71--81.
This article synthesizes the findings of studies of cooperative learning in elementary and secondary schools that have compared cooperative learning to traditionally taught control groups studying the same subjects over a period of at least four weeks. A brief summary of the effects of cooperative learning on achievement and noncognitive outcomes is also presented.
What Works Clearinghouse. (2009, June10). Response to Intervention in early reading and mathematics: Moving evidence on what works into practice. [Event Transcript]. Institute of Education Sciences. Retrieved from http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/multimediaq/rti_files/assets/pdf/rti_math-reading_event.pdf.
This is a practice guide on RtI from the What Works Clearinghouse.