Show simple item record

dc.contributor.advisorNoley, Grayson,en_US
dc.contributor.authorSeright, Jeffrey M.en_US
dc.date.accessioned2013-08-16T12:20:51Z
dc.date.available2013-08-16T12:20:51Z
dc.date.issued2007en_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/11244/1236
dc.description.abstractStudent achievement indicators in the two schools were compared. The schools were similar in enrollment, community type, percent low-income students, and percent minority students. Data gathered from the schools was retrieved from each school's State Department of Education website report card database.en_US
dc.description.abstractA t-test was used to compare data between the schools. A difference was significant when p< 0.05. In all the areas tested, the null hypothesis was rejected. The null hypothesis was rejected due to a significant difference in academic achievement between the two schools understudy. The differences in student achievement indicators were explained primarily as differences in the characteristics of student groups in the two schools. An implication of the study is that implementation of the full-service school model does not necessarily contribute to improved student achievement.en_US
dc.description.abstractThe purpose of this study was to examine differences in student achievement indicators in a full-service school and at a demographically similar, non-full-service school. A full-service school integrates the delivery of quality educational services with needed health and social services. Evaluation of student learning outcomes in full-service schools is important to policy level support for coordination of services for children.en_US
dc.description.abstractThe student achievement indicators compared were proficiency levels attained on the individual state's proficiency exams in the areas of English (Reading) over a four-year period for tenth grade students, and a three-year period for all ninth grade students in the area of Algebra I. Additionally, dropout rates and graduation rates were compared over a four-year period. These were considered achievement related factors.en_US
dc.format.extentxiii, 132 leaves :en_US
dc.subjectAcademic achievement Case studies.en_US
dc.subjectSchool children Services for Case studies.en_US
dc.subjectSocial service Oklahoma.en_US
dc.subjectSchool facilities Extended use Oklahoma.en_US
dc.subjectCommunity and school Florida.en_US
dc.subjectSchool facilities Extended use Case studies.en_US
dc.subjectSchool facilities Extended use Florida.en_US
dc.subjectSocial service Florida.en_US
dc.subjectCommunity and school Case studies.en_US
dc.subjectFamily services Case studies.en_US
dc.subjectAcademic achievement Florida.en_US
dc.subjectFamily services Oklahoma.en_US
dc.subjectSchool children Services for Florida.en_US
dc.subjectSocial service Case studies.en_US
dc.subjectEducation, Curriculum and Instruction.en_US
dc.subjectCommunity and school Oklahoma.en_US
dc.subjectSchool children Services for Oklahoma.en_US
dc.subjectFamily services Florida.en_US
dc.subjectAcademic achievement Oklahoma.en_US
dc.titleA study comparing student achievement in a full-service school and a non-full-service school.en_US
dc.typeThesisen_US
dc.thesis.degreeEd.D.en_US
dc.thesis.degreeDisciplineDepartment of Educational Leadership and Policy Studiesen_US
dc.noteSource: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 68-06, Section: A, page: 2307.en_US
dc.noteAdviser: Grayson Noley.en_US
ou.identifier(UMI)AAI3271220en_US
ou.groupJeannine Rainbolt College of Education::Department of Educational Leadership and Policy Studies


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record