期刊文献+

如何看待对《不让一个孩子掉队》的质疑与批评 被引量:7

How to Evaluate the Criticism on NCLB in the United States
原文传递
导出
摘要 在美国,自《不让一个孩子掉队》法案出台以来,对其理论框架、政策原则、实施策略到实践效果,始终都存在着许多质疑与批评。《不让一个孩子掉队》的核心目标是"提高成绩"、"缩小差距",为此《不让一个孩子掉队》提出"成绩问责"、"黄牌警告"等举措,强调重点支持处境不利学生的学习。因此,对《不让一个孩子掉队》的质疑与争议首先也主要集中在这些方面。批评人士认为,这些举措导致了实践中过分看重考试分数、忽视优尖学生的培养等问题。但辩证地分析可以发现,《不让一个孩子掉队》总体上对美国基础教育的发展还是利大于弊,值得肯定。 In the United State, since NCLB was passed by the Congress, it has been always being criticized.The main purpose of NCLB was to improve the academic performance of US students, especially the performance of the disadvantaged students. Some critics on NCLB argued that it has caused schools and teachers pay too much attention to scores and pay less attention to gifted and talented students. How to evaluate these criticisms? In fact,NCLB still has some benefits to US elementary education in the end.
作者 任长松
出处 《比较教育研究》 CSSCI 北大核心 2009年第2期40-43,共4页 International and Comparative Education
关键词 美国 《不让一个孩子掉队》 成绩问责 处境不利学生 No Child Left Behind Act NCLB accountability disadvantaged students
  • 相关文献

参考文献4

  • 1Andy Hargreaves & Dennis Shirley. The Coming Age of PostStandardization [ EB/OL ]. http ://www.edweek.org/ew/articles/ 2007/12/21/17hargreaves_web.h27.html, 2007-12-01. 被引量:1
  • 2Andrew Trotter. Film Depicts China, India Besting U.S. in Schooling: Election-year Message Tied to Use of High School Years[EB/OL]. http://www.edweek.org/ew/articles/2008/O1/ 09/17video.h27.html. 2008-01-09. 被引量:1
  • 3Matthew K. Tabor. Two Million Minutes: A Global Examination [ EB/OL ]. http ://www. matthewktabor, com/2007/11/06/ two-million-minutes-a-global-examination/. 2007-11-06. 被引量:1
  • 4Sean Cavanagh. Poverty's Effect on U.S. Scores Greater Than for Other Nations [ EB/OL ]. http://www.edweek.org/ew/articles/2007 /12/12/15pisa.h2 7.html. 2007-12-12. 被引量:1

同被引文献62

  • 1余强.美国《不让一个孩子掉队法》的实施近况和问题[J].世界教育信息,2004,17(11):15-19. 被引量:13
  • 2李广,姜英杰.个性化学习的理论建构与特征分析[J].东北师大学报(哲学社会科学版),2005(3):152-156. 被引量:154
  • 3吉纳·E.霍尔,雪莱·E.霍德.实施变革、原则与困境[M].杭州:浙江教育出版社,2004.6. 被引量:1
  • 4Daniel Tanner & Laurel Tanner.History of the School Curriculum[M].New York:Macmillan Publishing Company.1990. 被引量:1
  • 5Kenneth T.Henson.Curriculum Planning:Integrating Multiculturalism,Constructivism and Education Reform[M].Long Grove,Illinois:Waveland Press,Inc.,2006.16-20. 被引量:1
  • 6U.S.Department of Education.A Nation Accountable:Twenty-five Years After A Nation at Risk[EB/OL].http://www.ed.gov/rschstat/research/pubs/risk25.html. 被引量:1
  • 7William J.Mathis.NCLB and High-Stake Accountability:A Cure? Or a Symptom of the Disease?[J].Educational Horizons,2004,82(2):144-151. 被引量:1
  • 8Martha Foote.Keeping Accountabilty System Accountable[J].Phi Delta Kappan,2007,88(5):363. 被引量:1
  • 9Nancy Zuckerbrod.National Education Standards under Review[J].Contra Costa Times,2007,(Jan.14). 被引量:1
  • 10Vaishali Honawar.Curriculum-Development Group Urges Focus Shift to Whole Child[EB/OL].http://www.edweek.org/ew/articles/2007/03/26/29ascd.h26.html. 被引量:1

引证文献7

二级引证文献11

相关作者

内容加载中请稍等...

相关机构

内容加载中请稍等...

相关主题

内容加载中请稍等...

浏览历史

内容加载中请稍等...
;
使用帮助 返回顶部