Educational Policy Issues for the 1990s

1990 ◽  
Vol 25 (1) ◽  
pp. 55-67 ◽  
Author(s):  
George A. Marcoulides ◽  
Ronald H. Heck
1990 ◽  
Vol 25 (3) ◽  
pp. 304-316 ◽  
Author(s):  
George A. Marcoulides ◽  
Ronald H. Heck

1982 ◽  
Vol 10 (4) ◽  
pp. 343-356 ◽  
Author(s):  
R. Wilburn Clouse ◽  
Edward M. Savage

This study investigated the major policy issues associated with computer literacy in rural school systems. The inquiry was directed toward ascertaining if educational disparity existed, related to computer education between rural and urban schools. The findings of the study indicated that a disparity of educational opportunity does exist among rural schools, particularly the ones with less than 500 pupils. The study also revealed that organizational description, enrollment size, and geographic location are interrelated factors regarding computer educational opportunity.


1996 ◽  
Vol 28 (2) ◽  
pp. 289-301 ◽  
Author(s):  
Judith Green ◽  
Carol Dixon ◽  
P. David Pearson ◽  
Sharon Quint ◽  
Donna E. Alvermann

For the remainder of Volume 23, the Critical Issues section of JLR will be devoted to a discussion of literacy and educational policy. A survey of our editorial advisory board indicated that this topic was one of the critical issues facing the field. Likewise, a survey of the entire membership of the NRC, JLR's sponsoring organization, indicated that members hold strong feelings about whether the organization should “become more proactive on policy issues” (NRC Newsletter, Sept., 1995, p. 10). To further a dialogue about literacy and educational policy, we began by inviting three literacy researchers with diverse perspectives to address the topic of literacy and educational policy (Judith Green, who writes here with her colleague Carol Dixon, P. David Pearson, and Sharon Quint). We asked them to comment on the ideas they believe to be most crucial for policymakers to know about literacy. We also invited Donna Alvermann to read and to react to the three responses. Those familiar with the field will immediately surmise that these individuals represent not only diverse perspectives on literacy research, but that they are imminently qualified to reflect on what implications their research perspectives have for educational policy. Their responses are published here as Part 1 of a three-part series. For the next two issues of JLR, we have invited several individuals who have played a key role in developing and implementing state and national agenda for educational policy to respond to the literacy researchers' views. In addition, because any discussion of literacy and educational policy must eventually attend to the issue of poverty and the socially disadvantaged, we have invited Patrick Shannon to comment on how this issue relates to literacy research. We hope that this series of “Critical Issues” pieces will stimulate increased dialogue about educational policy among researchers interested in literacy and between researchers and policymakers. Toward that end, we encourage readers to ponder the perspectives and ideas presented in this series and to add their own insights by submitting letters to the editor, which will be considered for future publication.


Author(s):  
Robert W. Sweeny

This chapter considers broad issues related to videogame design and art educational policy issues. Discussed are Science, Technology Engineering, and Math (STEM) funding proposals, and recent moves to add the arts to this equation. Following this is a discussion of Quest to Learn, and their curricular structure, which incorporates complexity thinking, and relates to STEM, but deals more with game design as opposed to specifically being about videogames. The paper closes with recent statistics on videogame sales, and youth media use, making the argument that videogames are becoming part of a larger network of gaming experiences, and are not limited to one particular mode of delivery.


1996 ◽  
Vol 28 (3) ◽  
pp. 429-449 ◽  
Author(s):  
Patrick Shannon

The following article by Patrick Shannon is the second installment of a three-part series on literacy and educational policy in jlr's Critical Issues section. Previously (Volume 23, Number 2), Judith Green with Carol Dixon, David Pearson, and Sharon Quint commented respectively on the ideas they believed to be crucial for policymakers to know about literacy, from their view as literacy researchers. At the same time, we published Donna Alvermann's reaction to the views of the three researchers. Patrick Shannon now addresses how poverty and social disadvantages relate to literacy research and policy issues. In the next issue of jlr (Volume 23, Number 4), we will publish the comments of several high-ranking policymakers who have been asked to respond to the literacy researchers' views on literacy and educational policy. We hope that this series of “Critical Issues” pieces will stimulate increased dialogue about educational policy among researchers interested in literacy and between researchers and policymakers. Toward that end, we encourage readers to ponder the perspectives and ideas presented in this series and to consider adding their own insights by submitting letters to the editor, which will be considered for publication.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document