Student mathematical achievement test scores, dropout rates and teacher characteristics. Teacher Education Quarterly, 28(1), 151-168. 16. Greenberg, M., Weissberg, R., O Brien, M., Zins, J., Fredericks, L., &Resnik, H., (2003). Enhancing school-based prevention and youth development through coordinated social, emotional, and academic learning.
Lighbown, P. M., & Spada, N. (2001). Factors affecting second language learning. English Language Teaching In Its Social Context: A Reader, 34-42, London: Routledge. Dulay, H., Burt, M. & Krashen, S. (1982). Language two.
5. Hong, C. E., & Lawrence, S. (2011). Action research in teacher education: Classroom inquiry, reflection, and data-driven decision making. Journal of Inquiry and Action in Education, 4(2), 1. 6.
(2009). Native and non-Native English Speaking Teachers’ Beliefs and Their Influence on Their Practice: A Case Study of Elementary Team-Teaching in Hsin Chu City. Taiwan Journal of TESOL, 6(2), 93-120. Yook, Cheong Min. (2010).
Vygotsky’s Educational Theory In Cultural Context. Cambridge : Cambridge University Press Miller, R. (2011) Vygotsky in Perspective. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press Van der Veer, R. (1998). From Concept Attainment to Knowledge Formation. Mind, Culture, and Activity, 5(2), 89-94 Van der Veer, R. (2007).
New York: Macmillan. Stein, M.K., Grover, B.W. & Henningsen, M. (1996). Building Student Capacity for Mathematical Thinking and Reasoning: An Analysis of Mathematical Tasks Used in Reform Classrooms. American Educational Research Journal, 33,
& Krumboltz, J. (1996). Learning theory of career choice and counseling. In Brown, D. and Brooks, L. Career choice and development: Applying contemporary theory to practice.3rd ed. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Belmont, CA: Wadsworth/ Cengage Learning. Tse, L. (2001). Resisting and Reversing Language Shift: Heritage-Language Resilience among U.S. native biliterates. Harvard Educational Review, 71(4), 676-709. doi:10.17763/haer.71.4.ku752mj536413336 Valdés, G. (2001). Heritage language students: Profiles and possibilities.
SBM is the decentralization of the authority from the central government to the school level (Caldwell, 2005). In the words of Malen et al (1990), “School-based management can be viewed conceptually as a formal alternation of governance structures, as a form of decentralization that identifies the individual school as the primary unit of improvement and relies on the redistribution of decision-making authority as the primary means through which improvement might be stimulated and sustained.” (http://www.wlss.edu.bt/?page_id=315) This study anchored to the decentralization of decision making authority to school heads. This study focuses on the attainment of desirable learning outcome for the students, providing satisfying conditions for the teachers and engaging stakeholders in shared decision
The recommendations of this commission formed the basis for the National Policy on Education announced in 1968. From time to time, the national government formulates the National Policy on Education which includes broad guidelines regarding content and process of education at different stages. These guidelines are further elaborated by the National Council of Educational Research and Training (NCERT). Using as its foundation the NPEs of 1968 and 1986, NCERT launched two curriculum initiatives: (1) The Curriculum for the Ten-Year School—a framework (1975); and (2) The National Curriculum for Elementary and Secondary Education—a framework (1988). In 2000, NCERT brought out a National Curriculum Framework for School Education.