No description available.

Institutions have implemented many campus interventions to address student persistence/retention, one of which is Early Warning Systems (EWS). However, few research studies show evidence of interventions that incorporate noncognitive factors/skills, and psychotherapy/psycho-educational processes in the EWS. A qualitative study (phenomenological interview and document analysis) of EWS at both a public and private 4-year Florida university was conducted to explore EWS through the eyes of the administrators of the ways administrators make sense of students’ experiences and the services they provide and do not provide to assist students. Administrators’ understanding of noncognitive factors and the executive skills subset and their contribution to retention and the executive skills development of at-risk students were also explored. Hossler and Bean’s multiple retention lenses theory/paradigms and Perez’s retention strategies were used to guide the study. Six administrators from each institution who oversee and/or assist with EWS for first time in college undergraduate students considered academically at-risk for attrition were interviewed. Among numerous findings, at Institution X: EWS was infrequently identified as a service, EWS training was not conducted, numerous cognitive and noncognitive issues/deficits were identified for students, and services/critical departments such as EWS did not work together to share students’ information to benefit students. Assessment measures were used to identify students’ issues/deficits; however, they were not used to assess, track, and monitor students’ issues/deficits. Additionally, the institution’s EWS did address students’ executive skills function beyond time management and organizational skills, but did not address students’ psychotherapy/psycho-educational processes. Among numerous findings, at Institution Y: EWS was frequently identified as a service, EWS training was not conducted, numerous cognitive and noncognitive issues/deficits were identified for students, and services/critical departments such as EWS worked together to share students’ information to benefit students. Assessment measures were used to identify, track, and monitor students’ issues/deficits; however, they were not used to assess students’ issues/deficits. Additionally, the institution’s EWS addressed students’ executive skills function beyond time management and organizational skills, and psychotherapy/psycho-educational processes. Based on the findings, Perez’s retention strategies were not utilized in EWS at Institution X, yet were collectively utilized in EWS at Institution Y, to achieve Hossler and Bean’s retention paradigms. Future research could be designed to test the link between engaging in the specific promising activities identified in this research (one-to-one coaching, participation in student success workshops, academic contracts, and tutoring) and student success (e.g., higher GPA, retention). Further, because this research uncovered some concern with how to best handle students with physical and psychological disabilities, future research could link these same promising strategies for improving student performance for example among ADHD students or those with clinical depression.

No description available.

The purpose of this study was to assess the impact of the high-stakes standardized test movement in Texas secondary schools. The method to accomplish this task was to compare the perceptions between Texas secondary school administrators and supporters, critics, and researchers of high-stakes testing. Out of 400 potential respondents randomly selected from 2005-2006 membership list of Texas Association of Secondary School Principals, 178 administrators participated in an electronic survey to rate the extent to which 31 statements derived from supporters, critics, and the unintended consequences of high-stakes testing as reported by researchers in current literature. Means, standard deviations, and frequencies were used to make assumptions about perceptions of secondary administrators. Independent t-tests were conducted to test for possible perception differences between groups identified in the study. Independent groups examined in this study included: Gender (Male and Female), Years of Administrative Experience (1-4 years vs. 15 or More Years), Campus Classification (Large vs. Small), and Current Campus Rating (Exemplary and Recognized vs. Academically Acceptable). Using an alpha level of .05 to establish significance, t-tests suggest that significant differences exist between large and small school administrators on statements 5 and 7. Further, significant differences exist between male and female administrators on statements 4 and 5. The findings of this study seem to suggest that Texas secondary principals strongly support the following statements: 1. No high-stakes decision such as grade retention or graduation should be based on the results of a single test. 2. Educators are making use of student performance data generated by highstakes tests to help them refine programs, channel funding, and identify roots of success. 3. High-stakes tests have helped focus public attention on schools with lowachieving students. 4. The public display of high-stakes test scores motivates administrators. 5. High-stakes testing has resulted in a loss of local control of curricula. 6. The implementation of high-stakes testing has been a catalyst for increased attention to students with special needs. 7. Doing poorly on high-stakes tests does not lead to increased student effort to learn.