東華大學圖書館 |

語系: 繁體中文

說明(常見問題)

回圖書館首頁

手機版館藏查詢

登入

回首頁

切換: 標籤 | MARC模式 | ISBD

Collective sensemaking about the imp...

Hampshire, Ellen M.

FindBook

Google Book

Amazon

博客來

Collective sensemaking about the implementation of the multi-tiered systems of support: A comparative case study of two selected elementary school teams.

紀錄類型:	書目-電子資源 : Monograph/item
正題名/作者:	Collective sensemaking about the implementation of the multi-tiered systems of support: A comparative case study of two selected elementary school teams./
作者:	Hampshire, Ellen M.
面頁冊數:	231 p.
附註:	Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 77-10(E), Section: A.
Contained By:	Dissertation Abstracts International77-10A(E).
標題:	Education policy. -
電子資源:	http://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoapp/servlet/advanced?query=10119402
ISBN:	9781339806365

Collective sensemaking about the implementation of the multi-tiered systems of support: A comparative case study of two selected elementary school teams.
Hampshire, Ellen M.

Collective sensemaking about the implementation of the multi-tiered systems of support: A comparative case study of two selected elementary school teams. - 231 p.

Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 77-10(E), Section: A.

Thesis (Ph.D.)--Clemson University, 2016.

Positive Behavior Interventions and Supports (PBIS) and Response to Intervention (RTI) provide two examples of multi-tiered systems of support (MTSS). Over several decades, MTSS developed as policy-based initiatives intended to increase equity, access, and quality of education. These initiatives integrate school and classroom practices for improving academic and social/behavioral development for all students. However, studies indicate continued implementation problems within each system across all levels of intervention. Such results signal concerns about implementation capacity for the intent of both MTSS policies' regarding educational access, equity and quality.

ISBN: 9781339806365Subjects--Topical Terms:

2191387
Education policy.

Collective sensemaking about the implementation of the multi-tiered systems of support: A comparative case study of two selected elementary school teams.
LDR:02742nmm a2200301 4500 001 2071600
005 20160708102953.5
008 170521s2016 ||||||||||||||||| ||eng d
020 $a 9781339806365
035 $a (MiAaPQ)AAI10119402
035 $a AAI10119402
040 $a MiAaPQ $c MiAaPQ
100 1 $a Hampshire, Ellen M. $3 3186750
245 1 0 $a Collective sensemaking about the implementation of the multi-tiered systems of support: A comparative case study of two selected elementary school teams.
300 $a 231 p.
500 $a Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 77-10(E), Section: A.
500 $a Adviser: Jane Clark Lindle.
502 $a Thesis (Ph.D.)--Clemson University, 2016.
520 $a Positive Behavior Interventions and Supports (PBIS) and Response to Intervention (RTI) provide two examples of multi-tiered systems of support (MTSS). Over several decades, MTSS developed as policy-based initiatives intended to increase equity, access, and quality of education. These initiatives integrate school and classroom practices for improving academic and social/behavioral development for all students. However, studies indicate continued implementation problems within each system across all levels of intervention. Such results signal concerns about implementation capacity for the intent of both MTSS policies' regarding educational access, equity and quality.
520 $a Literature indicates that policy intent is converted at the micro, or school, level into models and practices. As school teams are charged with implementing RTI and PBIS, questions arise concerning how these teams make sense of the two initiatives. This study utilized a multiple case study method to examine the collective sensemaking of RTI and PBIS team members within two selected elementary schools. Both schools' faculty defined RTI and PBIS only through Tiers 1 and 2, likely as a result of district structures and resources. The two cases provide similar interpretations of multiple, disparate teams for addressing academic versus behavioral needs. Thus, each school implemented two separate teams. One school's RTI and PBIS teams employed frequent opportunities for distributed cognition and leadership through communities of practice, further supporting a continuum of student needs in Tiers 1 and 2. This school's teams supported a databased decision-making approach, but only one of the other school's teams espoused and demonstrated data literacy for making decisions.
590 $a School code: 0050.
650 4 $a Education policy. $3 2191387
650 4 $a Educational leadership. $3 529436
650 4 $a Education. $3 516579
690 $a 0458
690 $a 0449
690 $a 0515
710 2 $a Clemson University. $b College of Health, Education and Human Development. $3 3186751
773 0 $t Dissertation Abstracts International $g 77-10A(E).
790 $a 0050
791 $a Ph.D.
792 $a 2016
793 $a English
856 4 0 $u http://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoapp/servlet/advanced?query=10119402