Goal setting in Missouri's model evaluation system

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
◽  
Kimberly Burger
Keyword(s):  
Public Schools ◽  
No Child Left Behind ◽  
Goal Setting ◽  
Model Evaluation ◽  
Professional Growth ◽  
Evaluation System ◽  
Goal Commitment ◽  
Elementary And Secondary Education ◽  
Effective Evaluation ◽  
Seven Principles

[ACCESS RESTRICTED TO THE UNIVERSITY OF MISSOURI AT REQUEST OF AUTHOR.] Goal setting in Missouri's Model Evaluation is the central focus of this research. Years of legislation increased the federal presence in public education and made accountability a household term for educators. The direct piece of policy that connects this research to is Missouri's ESEA Flexibility Waiver. The waiver established goals that would bypass the rigorous mandates of No Child Left Behind but would still ensure high-quality programs within Missouri schools. Effective leadership and instruction were a core goal of the waiver and established the seven principles of effective evaluation for Missouri public schools. The seven principles of effective evaluation were to serve as the guiding principles for educator evaluation in Missouri by the 2014-15 academic year. Missouri's Department of Elementary and Secondary Education created the Missouri Model Evaluation System, offering districts a premade evaluation system. The model system utilizes goal setting within growth guides to provide evaluation participants a focus for both evaluation and professional growth. The four moderators of Locke and Latham's Goal Setting Theory serve as the conceptual framing of this research. These moderators, or variables, are goal specificity, goal commitment, goal difficulty, and goal feedback. The likelihood of goal achievement increases when the moderators are considered during implementation.

Getting Ruby a Quality Public Education: Forty-Two Years of Building the Demand for Quality Public Schools through Parental and Public Involvement

2006 ◽  
Vol 76 (4) ◽  
pp. 570-586 ◽  
Author(s):  
ARNOLD FEGE
Keyword(s):  
Public Schools ◽  
No Child Left Behind ◽  
Public Education ◽  
School Improvement ◽  
Public Involvement ◽  
Elementary And Secondary Education ◽  
Left Behind ◽  
History Of ◽  
Education Act ◽  
Access To Data

In this article, Arnold Fege identifies parental and public engagement as critical to sustaining equity in public education. He traces the history of this engagement from the integration of schools after Brown v. Board of Education in 1954 and the implementation in 1965 of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act through the provisions of No Child Left Behind (NCLB). He finds that while NCLB gives parents access to data, it does not foster use of that information to mobilize the public to get involved in school improvement. Fege concludes with historical lessons applicable to the reauthorization of NCLB, emphasizing enforcement of provisions for both parental and community-based involvement in decisionmaking, resource allocation, and assurance of quality and equity.

No Child Left Behind

2011 ◽  
pp. 634-640 ◽  
Author(s):  
Junko Yamamoto
Keyword(s):  
Public Schools ◽  
No Child Left Behind ◽  
Title I ◽  
Federal Government ◽  
Federal Funding ◽  
Department Of Education ◽  
Elementary And Secondary Education ◽  
Left Behind ◽  
Education Association ◽  
Education Act

The Federal Government passed the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) in 1965 to enable the federal government to finance public schools (Paige, 2004). This law was signed by President Johnson and has been revised every 5 years since then (Wisconsin Education Association Council, n.d.). ESEA started the provision of Title I funding, the federal money given to a school district to assist students who are falling behind academically (Public Schools of North Carolina, n.d.). President George W. Bush signed the ESEA, No Child Left Behind Act of 2001(NCLB) (P.L.107-110), on January 8, 2002 (U.S. Department of Education, n.d.). This provision designated that total federal funding of $116,250 million was to be dispensed between 2002 and 2007. The Act was strongly supported by both parties: the final vote was 87 to 10 in the Senate and 381 to 41 in the House (Paige, 2004). This article will address the necessity for teacher training caused by the educational institution’s accountability imposed by No Child Left Behind, and the stronger need to assist disabled learners affirmed by the law.

Undesirable Effects of Goal Setting on Perceived Fairness, Commitment, and Unethical Behavior

2018 ◽  
Vol 62 (2) ◽  
pp. 97-107 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nina Keith
Keyword(s):  
Goal Setting ◽  
Unethical Behavior ◽  
The United States ◽  
Goal Commitment ◽  
Management Technique ◽  
Long Term Effects ◽  
Perceived Fairness ◽  
Negative Effects ◽  
Positive Effects ◽  
And Performance

Abstract. The positive effects of goal setting on motivation and performance are among the most established findings of industrial–organizational psychology. Accordingly, goal setting is a common management technique. Lately, however, potential negative effects of goal-setting, for example, on unethical behavior, are increasingly being discussed. This research replicates and extends a laboratory experiment conducted in the United States. In one of three goal conditions (do-your-best goals, consistently high goals, increasingly high goals), 101 participants worked on a search task in five rounds. Half of them (transparency yes/no) were informed at the outset about goal development. We did not find the expected effects on unethical behavior but medium-to-large effects on subjective variables: Perceived fairness of goals and goal commitment were least favorable in the increasing-goal condition, particularly in later goal rounds. Results indicate that when designing goal-setting interventions, organizations may consider potential undesirable long-term effects.

The Integrated Model Evaluation System (IMES): A Database for Evaluation of Exposure Assessment Models

1991 ◽  
Vol 24 (6) ◽  
pp. 315-322 ◽  
Author(s):  
S. P. Schreiner ◽  
M. Gaughan ◽  
H. L. Schultz ◽  
R. Walentowicz
Keyword(s):  
Surface Water ◽  
Exposure Assessment ◽  
Model Evaluation ◽  
Evaluation System ◽  
Chemical Exposure ◽  
Integrated Model ◽  
Assessment Model ◽  
Other Information ◽  
Access Information ◽  
Query Systems

The USEPA Office of Health and Environmental Assessment develops methodologies for conducting exposure and risk assessments. Protocols appropriate for specific analyses have been developed to aid in the selection of an exposure assessment model and to assess the validation and uncertainties associated with models used for toxic chemical exposure assessments in surface water, groundwater, and air. A software package has been developed to provide users with a quick and intuitive tool to access information for selected models and applications based on these protocols. The Integrated Model Evaluation System (IMES) is composed of three modules: 1) Selection, query systems for selecting a model based on technical criteria (currently for surface water, non-point source, and groundwater models); 2) Validation, a database containing validation and other information on over 50 models in various media; and 3) Uncertainty, a database demonstrating uncertainty simulations for several surface water models applied to exposure assessments of several chemicals. The selection modules are linked to the uncertainty and validation modules to access information for chosen models. The PC-based software system employs pull-down menus, help screens, and graphics to display its information.

No Child Left Behind: The Ongoing Movement for Public Education Reform

2006 ◽  
Vol 76 (4) ◽  
pp. 461-473 ◽  
Author(s):  
ROD PAIGE
Keyword(s):  
Public Schools ◽  
No Child Left Behind ◽  
Public Education ◽  
Education Reform ◽  
Education System ◽  
Academic Skills ◽  
Public Education System ◽  
Left Behind ◽  
Public Education Reform ◽  
Original Goal

In this essay, former secretary of education Rod Paige depicts the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) as the culmination of more than half a century of urgent but largely unheeded calls for reform of the nation's public education system. He explains the rationale for the design of NCLB and responds to several criticisms of the legislation, including the notion that it is a one-size-fits-all mandate and that its improvement targets are unrealistic. He further argues that the nation's public schools must become more responsive to the needs of students and their families in order to remain viable. Finally, he contends that subsequent reauthorizations should stay true to NCLB's original goal of holding school systems accountable for equipping all students with the academic skills on which America's future depends.

The Effects of Reward Type on Employee Goal Setting, Goal Commitment and Performance

2011 ◽  
Author(s):  
Adam Presslee ◽  
Thomas W. Vance ◽  
Alan Webb ◽  
Scott Jeffrey
Keyword(s):  
Goal Setting ◽  
Goal Commitment ◽  
And Performance
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document