NotesFAQContact Us
Collection
Advanced
Search Tips
Showing all 5 results Save | Export
Peer reviewed Peer reviewed
Mojkowski, Charles – NASSP Bulletin, 2000
A curriculum implementation monitoring system should be relatively inexpensive, unburdensome for faculty, and improvement oriented; produce information to guide staff development; and refrain from covertly evaluating teachers. A self-assessment checklist should report teachers' perceptions about degree of implementation, difficulty level, and…
Descriptors: Administrator Role, Check Lists, Committees, Curriculum Development
Peer reviewed Peer reviewed
Iwanicki, Edward F. – NASSP Bulletin, 1976
Evaluation continues to be a common concern at the secondary school level. Administrators and teachers are interested in the skill and ability levels of their students. Takes a careful look at the evaluation process. (Editor/RK)
Descriptors: Check Lists, Educational Objectives, Evaluation Criteria, Evaluation Methods
Peer reviewed Peer reviewed
Weber, Ellen – NASSP Bulletin, 1998
Only by exploring practical questions with teachers and considering their wisdom concerning brain-based resources can we accommodate multiple ways of knowing, while honoring the demands of curriculum mandates, state requirements, and college entrance expectations. A checklist enables teachers to survey specific approaches (collaboration, cultural…
Descriptors: Brain, Check Lists, Cognitive Style, Evaluation Methods
Peer reviewed Peer reviewed
Wilson, Thomas F. – NASSP Bulletin, 1999
Y2K problems include software programming issues involving chronology and microchips embedded in every conceivable piece of electronic equipment. Procrastination is not in schools' best interest. Administrators should initiate five conversion stages: awareness, assessment, renovation, validation, and implementation. A sample equipment checklist…
Descriptors: Administrator Responsibility, Check Lists, Computer Software, Elementary Secondary Education
Peer reviewed Peer reviewed
Johnson, Lewis R. – NASSP Bulletin, 1998
Discusses characteristics of four common administrator evaluation procedures: management by objectives, traditional rating scales, self-evaluation, and administrator outcomes models. Outlines three broad responsibility areas for special-education administrators that warrant evaluation. Introduces a comprehensive, team-based model that begins with…
Descriptors: Administrator Evaluation, Check Lists, Elementary Secondary Education, Evaluation Methods