Learner-Centered Instruction: Building Relationships for Student Success

Books

Jeffrey H. D. Cornelius-White & Adam P. Harbaugh

  • Citations
  • Add to My List
  • Text Size

  • Chapters
  • Front Matter
  • Back Matter
  • Subject Index
  • Dedication

    To Avery, Evan, Jackson, and Sarah

    Copyright

    View Copyright Page

    Foreword

    In my lifetime and clearly in this new century, there has not been a more urgent need for a new educational paradigm. This new paradigm must be one that focuses on the learner—of any age or stage of development. The reason for this need is also clear: We are losing too many qualified teachers, administrators, and particularly students because of an outdated model of instruction. This outdated paradigm is based on the wrong set of assumptions about learning, motivation to learn, human development, and individual differences. The old paradigm, and sadly the current paradigm of instruction for too many learners, was borrowed from mechanical systems and a factory model of learning and schooling begun in the late 19th century and continued throughout the 20th century. Now that we have arrived at a new millennium, the time for this new paradigm and this new model of instruction is now.

    What Jef Cornelius-White and Adam Harbaugh have done in their book is revolutionary. They have taken the best of the theories of learner-centered instruction and made them practical and real for teachers and other educators as well as researchers. And even more than that, Jef and Adam have put a lot of warmth, concern, and gentle urgings for readers to focus on the heart of learner-centered instruction—the personal relationships that are built between learners and their teachers. They have learned through research—their own, mine, and others'—that without a central focus on those individually and personally caring and respectful relationships, the foundation for learning and motivation is not present. Without that foundation, the research and the reality clearly show that learners suffer. Learners suffer because they become unsure of their competencies and abilities to be successful, and they begin to feel disconnected and alienated from learning and schooling. This is happening all too frequently in our nation's schools for students and their teachers and administrators. It is particularly happening for poor and urban school students and staff.

    There are many things to say that will recommend this book to a wide variety of readers—even parents and the students themselves. Most noteworthy to me is the careful building of the case for learner-centered instruction. The model is first introduced, and then the research and theoretical support is presented. With this base, Jef and Adam move to a careful explanation of what follows in terms of the practice of learner-centered instruction. Teaching is rightly seen as facilitation, and instruction is engagement focused. Classroom management becomes less about control and more about empowerment and student voice and choice. The focus on learning and achievement is redefined as an ongoing lifelong learning process where the learner plays an active role in regulating his or her own learning and achievement. Learning is seen as a true partnership between teachers and their students, with roles that can interchange depending on who knows the most about a topic at any given time.

    Also noteworthy and compelling, Jef and Adam systematically deepen the concept of teaching for the reader so that a true appreciation for the role of inquiry and authentic learning is built. In much the same way, they redefine what role cooperative learning plays in building those powerful learner–learner and learner–teacher relationships in the classroom. The reader understands that cooperative learning is not just about getting more students involved in the learning process—or even developing emotional intelligence, social skills, or motivating those students who are bored, disenfranchised, or scared. What it is really about is understanding our interdependencies and need for personal connections in the tradition of Meg Wheatley, Otto Scharmer, Peter Senge and other systems thinkers. The reader “gets” this by the time they reach the final chapter and understand that all learning contexts are ecological and map onto human learning principles—not mechanical and robotic or mechanistic and reductionistic principles so common in our current legislation on testing and standards-based instruction.

    The structure and format of this book makes it an easy and motivational read. Every chapter follows sound principles of learning, motivation, development, and individual differences. Readers are provided with an advance organizer that helps them visualize the learning journey of each chapter. They continually are asked to reflect on their own experience as they read various sections throughout the book. They are also provided with things to think, talk, or write about. There are lots of case studies to reflect on and helpful resources for educators in every chapter. All in all, this book makes me proud that I have persevered in arguing for learner-centered instruction and that it has the power and research support verified so well by Jef and Adam.

    As with any book, it will be a beacon for change for many and something to argue against for the doubters. We live in a world of opposites; part of the joy of learning is the debate between those at opposite poles of any issue. My hope is that many see the urgency to put into practice what Jef and Adam are arguing for: a new model and a new paradigm for teaching and learning. The new model must focus on learners or we will continue to lose too many of our best and brightest to alternative forms of schooling and learning. For me, this book is a “must read.” Hope it is for you as well.

    Barbara L.McCombs

    Dr. McCombs is the author of many books, including The School Leader's Guide to Learner-Centered Education: From Complexity to Simplicity just published by Corwin Press in July 2008. Her coauthor is Lynda Miller, the same coauthor as on her first book with Corwin Press published in 2007, entitled Learner-Centered Classroom Practices and Assessments: Maximizing Student Motivation, Learning, and Achievement.

    Preface

    Welcome to Learner-Centered Instruction: Building Relationships for Student Success. The purpose of this book is to help readers explore how learner-centered interpersonal relationships, principles, and methods can improve their instructional practices. This book's primary audience is pre-service and in-service teachers, especially graduate students. For courses in which teacher–student relationships or learner-centered methods are a central topic, this book may serve as a core text. It is also well situated as a supplemental text in many courses, especially introduction to education and special education, elementary and secondary methods, theories of learning, the person and school in society, foundations, and its classroom assessment, reflection, and management courses.

    Learner-Centered Instruction fills a gap to address the ethical, relational realities of human development within school settings. It endeavors to help return a sense of compassionate control to classroom teachers and self-control to learners. Many graduate instructors may find its review of recent research (e.g., Cornelius-White, 2007) using the Assessment of Learner-Centered Practices (McCombs, 1999) and its consideration of school reform topics useful for examining current trends and future questions for additional research. This book is also applicable in courses on multicultural and disability education and school counseling consultation due to its prioritization of positive emotional and behavioral outcomes for all learners. Learner-Centered Instruction contains a variety of pedagogical aids to engage learners and deepen learning.

    Most discussions of instruction tend to undervalue caring, facilitative teacher–student relationships as major contributors to learner success. On the contrary, we believe fundamental ways that teachers are warm and curious and daringly empathic, yet transparently influential, are central to student success. However, we also honor the complexities that each unique teacher faces when trying to teach from this core. Teachers have to be flexible and serve many masters, all the while keeping a love of life and learning alive and thriving within their classrooms. Learner-centered instruction (LCI) is an approach to teaching and learning that prioritizes facilitative relationships, the uniqueness of every learner, and the best evidence on learning processes to promote comprehensive student success through engaged achievement. LCI is foremost an ethical and interpersonal endeavor, which is best pursued with an eye toward holistic learning goals and flexible use of a wide variety of instructional methods.

    Even though most educators believe it to be true on an intuitive level, a major teaching problem in pre-service and in-service teacher education is a lack of convincing research support to show how fostering successful teacher–student relationships is vital for students' comprehensive success. In contrast, a main learning problem for teachers is building the skills and attitudes, not just knowledge, necessary to actually foster those interpersonal relationships. Although the book is uniquely supported by quantitative and qualitative research, it also aims to bring to life the human dimensions of LCI so readers gain more than just knowledge. We believe every student, teacher, parent, and administrator is involved in a profound, shared enterprise. Listening to the valuable perspectives of all voices in schools can enrich teacher preparation, professional development, and practice. Throughout the book, we include enduring quotes from policy makers and education scholars alongside heartfelt statements and stories from everyday students, educators, and parents to highlight struggles and successes within today's classrooms. We hope readers will take from the book an understanding of the research support for LCI, an enhanced appreciation for listening to the voices within their schools, and a developing set of learner-centered attitudes, skills, and teaching methods that can be put to immediate practice in role plays or actual classrooms.

    Significant trends in ongoing educational discussions make LCI a relevant and enduring contributor to teacher development. The rising importance of multiculturalism and interconnectedness in the postmodern world and accountable, evidence-based practices, or scientifically supported teaching and learning strategies that bridge the research-to-practice gap, are perhaps the most important developments in education in recent years.

    Social responsibility and appreciation for diversity, disability, and opportunity are likely to become increasingly relevant. The future will likely bring more sophisticated research, theory integration, service-learning, and concern for social and ecological justice developing in the next 5 to 10 years. Humanistic, constructivist, care, and critical pedagogies, in which our approach is grounded, have been uniquely attuned to diversity issues. Diversity is best approached through listening and honoring student, parent, and community voices and adapting instruction to meet the needs at hand.

    In the past 15 years particularly, there has been an increased flurry of activity to discover evidence-based practices related to learner-centered instruction, explicitly integrating adaptation to individual and cultural differences as a major variable. Furthermore, developments in LCI continue to be well situated in terms of policy making for the near future given their importance to American Educational Research Association (http://aera.net) and American Psychological Association (http://www.apa.org) policies, projects, and leaders.

    The subfields of learner-centered instruction are instructional methods at all learner levels, social and philosophical issues in education, student actualization, classroom climate and management, and school reform. This book addresses, in depth, the field of teacher–student relationships, learner-centered principles, classroom management, inquiry, differentiated and cooperative learning and instruction, student engagement and achievement, and professional development, advocacy, and networking. There is significant need for works that address these major areas because of a disconnection between the challenges classroom teachers face and the topics emphasized in teacher preparation programs. We agree with the need to bridge the disconnect between the belief that relationships, classroom management, and engagement are central to teachers' success or failure and the emphases of many teacher preparation programs that do not significantly address these concerns. Throughout this book, we provide ways teachers can effectively balance theory, research, and practice in direct and facilitative instruction.

    Pedagogical Aids

    We appreciate that every student, like every teacher and every reader of this book, is a unique person, with her or his own story, distinctive environment, personal sufferings, and exceptional strengths. We include several pedagogical features in each chapter to facilitate your engagement with learner-centered instruction. We invite you to Reflect on Your Experiences and existing knowledge at the start of each chapter with the hopes of helping your journey through this book to be more engaged and relevant for you. We include Things to Talk, Think, and Write About, such as skill-building exercises, discussion questions, and visual aids. Many chapters include tables and figures to show the relative effectiveness of specific learner-centered elements at reaching engagement and achievement goals and to encourage critical evaluation and learning of theory and research. We have set in bold type selected words or phrases that highlight key words and concepts and appear again in the Glossary.

    In the second half of each chapter, we provide Case Studies from the classroom and related Reflections to help readers apply the content to and learn from real classroom experiences. Each chapter concludes with a Summary, including main themes and an introductory sentence for the next chapter to remind yourself of content when studying and prepare for what is to come, and a Suggested Resources list for further exploration. Critical engagement of the Internet is increasingly becoming a useful resource for both information and cooperation with other educators. The use of a journal or peer group who read this book together can help readers' enjoyment and consolidation of learning. We invite you to apply what you learn immediately to stories from the classroom, role plays, or real-life interactions.

    During their preparation, professional development, and beyond, we expect educators to discover and articulate their own evolving models of how they teach, learn, and develop. Many of the pedagogical aids in the book provide examples of instructional methods teachers can use and, in turn, encourage students to use in schools. LCI is an approach that endeavors to empower teachers toward their own unique styles of instruction and simultaneously encourages students to become their own teachers, or self-regulating learners. LCI is an approach that aims for people to discover how to learn more effectively, a process that inevitably influences others around them to do the same.

    We believe posing and reflecting on questions is more important than it may at first seem. To help educators develop their own models and self-regulating learning skills, this book invites readers to consider “big” questions to expose their own assumptions. Making assumptions explicit is important to testing them, so one can teach and learn with confidence when those assumptions appear true and adapt when they appear false. Although the book will explore research and results, theories and ideas, and spend much of the time offering suggestions of how to put this information to work in classrooms, we recognize that your own experiences and perspectives are influential and essential to what you will take away from this book. We think the best educational text in the world is only as good as the reflective, critical, flexible reader who engages with its content through deep personal inquiry. We provide below an overview of the book as an advance organizer, or preparation for learning, and map to browse around the book for relevant topics.

    Organization of the Text

    Chapter 1 examines empirical foundations of our LCI model, including an introduction to the meta-analysis of the core learner-centered relationships, the American Psychological Association's (APA Work Group of the Board of Educational Affairs, 1997) Learner-Centered Psychological Principles, and research on guided inquiry and cooperative learning. Chapter 2 describes the theories on which our model of LCI is based, beginning with the relational foundations of humanism and the active role for learners in constructivism and addressing related and supportive traditions. These foundations include critical pedagogy, care, and brain-compatible instruction, which are all balanced throughout the text with a healthy appreciation for the complex and fast-paced, practical decision-making practices teachers use.

    Chapter 3 outlines the foundational facilitative relationship based on warmth, trust, authenticity, and empathy, including the strong empirical associations of these relational variables with comprehensive student success. Chapter 4 examines how LCI fosters student engagement as seen in increases in student attendance, basic respect for others, participation, intrinsic motivation and satisfaction, social connections, and self-regulation. Chapter 5 outlines how instructional methods that share control and choice and are embedded in relationships built on attractive power and cooperative influence can lead to successful classroom management.

    Chapter 6 outlines how teacher encouragement, challenge, and adaptation are three core principles for the flexible use of a variety of instructional methods. Chapter 7 discusses how students cognitively benefit from learner-centered instructional methods and relationships with particular attention to critical and creative thinking. LCI values the whole person of the student and acknowledges the central role education plays in the maintenance and enhancement of our societies.

    Chapters 8 and 9 introduce fundamental instructional practices that may be used across all levels of education, such as inquiry-based methods, cooperative learning, and roles for traditional lecture and assessments. Chapters 8 and 9 also describe important ways teachers can include technology resources in their instructional practices. Chapter 8 focuses on authentic and inquiry-based instructional methods and strategies, including questioning, problem-based learning, service-learning, simulations, and performance-based assessments, while Chapter 9 deals with cooperative learning, including essential conditions for cooperative learning, description of structured approaches, the role of feedback and assessment, and the appropriate balancing of cooperative with competitive and individualistic methods.

    Chapter 10 concludes the main text with a discussion of the importance of a focus on building the broader relationships necessary to reform schools in more than superficial ways, including relationships with parents, school administrators, other teachers, professional and advocacy groups, and with teachers' own selves. After the main text, a glossary, bibliography, and index complete the book.

    Acknowledgments

    We would like to acknowledge many individuals who have been instrumental in helping us write this book. First and foremost, we would like to thank our spouses, Cecily and Rebecca, for their love and support throughout the journey of this project. Second, we would like to recognize the support of the following people:

    • Chuck R. Barké, University of Texas–Tyler
    • David Hough, Missouri State University
    • Lacey York, Missouri State University

    We would also like to thank our colleagues and expert reviewers who, through their insightful suggestions and comments, helped us write a better book than we could have on our own:

    • Robert Algozzine, University of North Carolina at Charlotte
    • Jerold D. Bozarth, University of Georgia
    • Robert Maribe Branch, University of Georgia
    • Randel D. Brown, Texas A&M International University
    • Susie Burroughs, Mississippi State University
    • Mary Margaret Capraro, Texas A&M University
    • Dorie Combs, Eastern Kentucky University
    • Deborah Cox, Missouri State University
    • Barbara K. Curry, University of Delaware
    • Jack Dimond, Missouri State University
    • Scott Gostchock, Brenau University
    • Marjorie Hall Haley, George Mason University
    • Jeanneine Jones, University of North Carolina at Charlotte
    • Steve Jones, Missouri State University
    • Dave Kommer, Ashland University
    • Hope Longwell-Grice, University of Wisconsin–Milwaukee
    • Barbara L. McCombs, University of Denver Research Institute Center for Motivation, Learning, and Development
    • Renate Motschnig-Pitrik, University of Vienna
    • David L. Netherton, Old Dominion University
    • Karen R. Nicholas, Florida State University
    • Marian J. Parker, Troy University
    • Lee R. Pearce, Black Hills State University
    • Jean W. Pierce, Northern Illinois University
    • Gerald J. Pine, Boston College
    • David Pugalee, University of North Carolina at Charlotte
    • William Watson Purkey, University of North Carolina–Greensboro
    • Gavin Reid, University of Edinburgh
    • Charles M. Reigeluth, Indiana University
    • Phillip Riner, University of North Florida
    • Kathy L. Schuh, University of Iowa
    • Binyomin G. Segal, National-Louis University
    • Roger Sell, Missouri State University
    • Eric Sheffield, Missouri State University
    • Kris Sloan, St. Edward's University
    • David Eddy Spicer, Harvard Graduate School of Education
    • David W. Stinson, Georgia State University
    • Rosemary Traore, University of North Carolina at Charlotte
    • Anete Vasquez, University of South Florida
    • Glee Whitsett, University of Montevallo
    • Trena L. Wilkerson, Baylor University
    • Shawn R. Woodhouse, University of Missouri–St. Louis
    • Theo Wubbels, Utrecht University

    Finally, we would like to thank the wonderful editorial team at SAGE Publications, especially Diane McDaniel, Ashley Plummer, Leah Mori, Sarah Quesenberry, and Teresa Wilson.

    Introduction: A Model of Learner-Centered Instruction

    Through others we become ourselves.

    —Lev Vygotsky
    Comprehensive Student Success

    Nine in ten American adults feel a failure to learn values, like honesty and respect, is a widespread problem, with a majority calling it very serious (Farkas & Johnson, 1997). Likewise, the majority of Black and Hispanic students feel there is a “very serious problem” with students' lack of respect for teachers (J. Johnson, Arumi, & Ott, 2006). Nearly 8 in 10 teachers attribute the lack of respect to a lack of family discipline requiring more management at school and to absorbing widespread cultural disrespect from the media and other outlets (Public Agenda Foundation, 2004). Perhaps more important, 95% of Americans feel schools should teach honesty and respect for all (J. Johnson & Immerwahr, 1994), and 93% of teachers and 88% of parents feel a school's mission should be to produce productive citizens in addition to teaching the three Rs (Public Agenda Foundation, 2004). Two-thirds of parents feel they have not been succeeding in helping their children develop adequate self-discipline, leaving an important gap for schools to fill (Public Agenda Foundation, 2004). In surveying nearly 1,000 teachers-in-training since 1999, Rubalcava (2005) found that they almost always hope their primary focus in teaching is to foster socialization, particularly communication and cooperation skills, or self-actualization, interacting with students as individuals to help them follow their unique paths of development. Although teachers-in-training value the themes of socialization and actualization most, they also value developing students' civic values as essential skills and content for contributing to the economy. In summary, most people want students to comprehensively succeed, not just be good test-takers in the three Rs.

    We propose a holistic model of comprehensive success that is built on both engagement and achievement, believing social, self-regulating, and critical thinking skills and dispositions represent the ideal levels of these two broad goals. School is an important environment that can foster comprehensive growth in students and adults alike. These processes of comprehensive success are consistent with the increasingly prevalent assertions from scholars and policy makers (e.g., J. Tomlinson, 1999), such as the findings in the New Commission on the Skills of the American Workforce Report from the National Center on Education and the Economy (Knapp et al., 2006). The New Commission asserted the educational needs for the new interconnected global world would go beyond strong mathematics, reading, and writing skills. To succeed in the workforce of the 21st century,

    [learners will] have to be comfortable with ideas and abstractions, good at both analysis and synthesis, creative and innovative, self-disciplined and well organized, able to learn very quickly and work well as a member of a team and have the flexibility to adapt quickly to frequent changes. (p. 8)

    Learners need a wide variety of rational, creative, emotional, interpersonal, and behavioral capacities to succeed. In an ideal educational system, teachers, administrators, and students are learning together—along with parents and community members—in interdependent, interpersonal, and personal ways (McCombs & Miller, 2007; Wheatley & Frieze, 2007).

    Listening to Student, Teacher, and Parent Voices

    What helps students and all learners to comprehensively grow and succeed? An innovative study, aptly named Voices From the Inside (Poplin & Weeres, 1992), asked virtually everyone associated with four urban and suburban public schools, representative of most Americans, what they thought about their schools. When we say everyone, we mean it: the students of all ages, the teachers, the custodians, cafeteria workers, administrators, parents, and other community members. The researchers spent 18 months, including 160 meetings; 24,000 pages of transcripts, journals, drawings, and essays; and hundreds of hours of tape to identify the problems of schooling. This study can be said to be not just student centered, but also teacher centered, parent centered, staff centered, researcher centered, and policy-maker centered. In the sense that everyone associated with these schools was trying to discover, or learn what can help improve schooling, the study was truly learner centered.

    Poplin and Weeres (1992) found that relationships, especially teacher–student relationships, are the biggest issue on everyone's mind. The next largest problem was the need for increased understanding and dialogue about diversity, particularly racial and economic diversity and to a lesser extent gender, among all community members. Problems related to diversity are essentially problems related to relationships, relationships between groups of people, not just individuals. Longitudinal studies support these main findings of the Voices From the Inside study. Cooperation and positive relationships have been among the most consistent fundamentals found to predict resilience (buoyancy and ability to recover from change or stress) in children and adults across cultural groups (Borman & Overman, 2004; Glantz & Johnson, 1999; Pianta, 1996). Our book's premise is that an effective way to reform schools is to foster facilitative, principled, and instructionally flexible relationships, especially between teachers and students, but also between all players in education.

    Importantly, and perhaps surprisingly to readers, in the Voices study, low test scores, violence, and higher dropout rates were not seen as the major problems in these schools. Poplin and Weeres (1992) discovered they were merely the consequences—consequences of a lack of meaningful relationships between all the participants of the school. Likewise, the researchers concluded regular conversations and emphasis must occur and be placed on relationships if schooling is to improve. Poplin and Weeres asserted any other approach will just treat the symptoms and not the problem itself.

    Frequently, when “nice” practices, like teaching students about respect and relationships, are brought up in conversations about education, there is a prevailing social bias asserting that these practices must not be effective or worthwhile. This bias may be expressed as, “Toughness gets results; niceness does not. The world today is a tough, competitive place.” While we acknowledge the world is in many respects tough and competitive and simply being nice is ineffective, we believe the rift between “nice” and “tough” is false. Part of the complexity of teaching in today's schools is dissolving these supposed dichotomies. Our model of learner-centered instruction (LCI) is about balancing challenge and empathy, high standards and high acceptance, achievement and enjoyment, as well as research and practice.

    A Model of Learner-Centered Instruction
    Learner Centered: Myriad Meanings

    The term learner centered has been used in many ways—most commonly, to distinguish an approach that is different, innovative, and potentially superior when compared to traditional practices in education. Table I.1 below lists some of the usages of learner-centered synonyms and practices in contrast with traditional ideas and practices. The left side of the table presents learner-centered aspects while the right side presents traditional aspects. Although we are aware that presenting these educational aspects and practices as opposites can hide many ways in which learner-centered and traditional approaches share similarities or may be combined for an effective educational approach, we also intend for the reader to draw from the table an emerging understanding of what we mean by learner centered. Sometimes learner centered evokes a lack of teacher-provided structure, especially when the term child centered is used. Although trust and nondirective or indirect facilitation are central to LCI, self-determination theory (e.g., Deci & Ryan, 1985; Ryan & Deci, 2000), the model of teacher interpersonal behavior (Wubbels, Brekelmans, den Brok, & van Tartwijk, 2006), and person-centered approaches (Bohart, 2006; T. G. Patterson & Joseph, 2007) assert that supporting learners' autonomy requires a balance of structure and freedom with both proximity and influence. We present Table I.1 to stimulate thought, inquiry, and dialogue about the congruence of educational goals with educational methods.

    Table I.1 Learner-Centered Facets Contrasted With Traditional Facets
    Learner-Centered ApproachesTraditional Approaches
    Person centeredCurriculum centered
    Self-directedTeacher directed
    DemocraticHierarchical
    Child centeredTeacher centered
    Process (how)Content (what)
    Constructing understandingCovering subject matter
    Inquiry basedKnowledge based
    ThinkingMemorizing
    RelationshipInstruction
    Experiential methodsLecture
    CooperationCompetition or individualism
    ActivePassive
    LearningTeaching
    Criterion referencingNorm referencing
    ShowingTelling
    FacilitatingProfessing
    Libratory pedagogyBanking model
    Learner-Centered Model Is Best Practice in Learning

    Beginning in 1990, the American Psychological Association formed a Presidential Task Force to clarify how psychological knowledge helps learning and how to improve schools with this knowledge. What emerged, with the leadership of Barbara McCombs, was Learner-Centered Psychological Principles: Guidelines for School Redesign and Reform (LCPs), which has since been revised (APA Task Force, 1993; APA Work Group, 1997). The LCPs include four general areas: cognitive and metacognitive, motivational and affective, developmental and social, and individual differences. Likewise, the LCPs were created as a collection of evidenced-based principles that highlight the active and relational psychosocial and constructivist aspects of learning, which stand in contrast to more traditional ideas of teaching that are focused more on the authoritative passing of knowledge to a passive, receptive student. Correspondingly, McCombs and Whistler (1997), and more recently McCombs and Miller (2007), describe an emerging theory of education known as the learner-centered model. The learner-centered model builds on the LCPs to focus on both the learner and the learning process. We believe these efforts have been helpful in broadening the conventional discussions of learner-centered instruction away from simple dichotomies toward the best, most pragmatic practices. In this sense, “learner-centeredness” may include many of the elements of traditional practice when they can help educational practice to focus on the central role of learners and learning.

    The learner-centered model has been extensively researched since 1993, especially using the Assessment of Learner-Centered Practices (ALCP) (McCombs, 1999). Although different forms of the ALCP target different student levels and include several measures of student motivation, teacher beliefs, and positive teacher–student relationships, these forms all emphasize three principles of LCI: encouragement of meaningful and deep learning, challenging higher-order thinking, and adaptation to individual and cultural differences.

    Learner-Centered Interpersonal Relationships Are Central

    I have learned that more students than I thought dislike school because of the TEACHERS. I went into teaching because I wanted to make school a good place for students. When I was in high school, it seemed most teachers did not care about their students. It was my rationale that I would be different and make school a better place for students. Are my colleagues and I failing to do this?

    —High school teacher, Voices From the Inside

    Carl Rogers (1951, 1959) proposed that facilitative relationships characterized by empathy, acceptance, and honesty are the key to human growth and development. Nel Noddings (1984, 1992) proposed that a caring relation, or connection between persons, characterized by engrossed listening and perceived compassion, is central to the necessary moral purpose and evolution of schools. Related research in education, counseling, play, parenting, and other interpersonal endeavors have generally confirmed the salience of facilitative and caring relationships in human development and productivity (Aspy, Aspy, & Roebuck, 1984; Bratton, Ray, Rhine, & Jones, 2005; Bruce & Levant, 1990; Carkhuff, 2000; Cornelius-White, 2007; Deci, Koestner, & Ryan, 2001; Elliott, Greenberg, & Lietaer 2004; Pianta, 1996; Wentzel, 2002). McCombs and Miller (2007) summarize much of this research, stating, “At its core, learning is relational in two ways: (1) individual learners attempt to make personal meaning from information and experiences and (2) strong student–teacher relationships provide a positive climate out of which natural learning and motivation emerge” (p. 8). Our model integrates the role of facilitative (empathic, accepting, and genuine) relationships with three principles of McCombs and colleagues' learner-centered model measured by the ALCP (encouragement, challenge, and adaptation) and a variety of instructional methods consistent with the learner-centered principles for comprehensive student success.

    Figure I.1 shows how the three principles of encouragement, challenge, and adaptation bridge the core relational stance and ways of interacting. LCI involves relational ways of being, including warmth and respect for learners as people first, authenticity that teachers too are humbly learners and people first, and trust that people are fundamentally hardwired to learn. This relational, attitudinal orientation to instruction leads to ways of interacting, such as empathy and adaptation to each unique learner and his or her learning processes. These collective ways of “being in relationship” lead to the principled practice of encouragement and challenge, two key terms that summarize an approach to the use of a wide variety of specific instructional methods. Authentic, relevant learning endeavors, guided inquiries, cooperative learning, direct instruction, and other methods each have a vital role to play in a learner-centered classroom. Flexibility and differentiation to the needs of the students and situation is guided by the lived relationships in classrooms.

    Figure I.1 A Model of LCI: Facilitative Relationships and Principled Utilization of Congruent Instructional Methods

    We used Figure I.1 earlier to propose that LCI aims for comprehensive student success, not just a change in “symptoms of schooling,” such as an increase in test scores or a decrease in dropout rates. Our model of LCI acknowledges relational influence is bidirectional or reciprocal; that is, student success can foster better teacher relationships and instructional methods even as teachers foster student success. Learner-centered instruction (LCI) is defined as an approach to teaching and learning that prioritizes facilitative relationships, the uniqueness of every learner, and the best evidence on learning processes to promote comprehensive student success through engaged achievement.

    An Invitation to Improve How You Learn

    One of the most important things you can do to learn something is to prepare, study, and review as a proactive process, especially the same day or time period that you learned of it. As we stress throughout this book, the more active learners are in constructing their learning, the better. Every time you study is an opportunity to learn to study more effectively even as every time learners learn, they can improve how they learn. Use this chance to improve your study skills and find resources and handouts to give your students. Check back to this introduction or the glossary to assess how well you are improving your ability to learn as you move through the chapters.

    One of the easiest places to look to better learn is on the Internet. Type “study methods” or “study skills” into any search engine, and you will find tens of millions of entries. Weimer's (2002) text Learner-Centered Teaching provides six handouts for use in helping to build study skills and self-regulated learning in higher education (though some are applicable with students younger than that). Or consult the journal or Web site of The Teaching Professor (http://www.teachingprofessor.com) for ongoing ideas and discussion. Lest you be disappointed, we will suggest a few ways for you to approach and review this book, but most important is that you ask and pursue the questions and answers of how you can best learn now and in the future. In other words, we suggest you take this opportunity to use the scaffolding that is this book to construct and reconstruct stable, long-lasting teaching and learning foundations.

    You might consider the experience of learning and building learner-centered practices as a whole. While reading, what relationships are you building for your success? Are you using the book as part of a class, study group, or mentoring program? If so, did you make a solid, positive, fun, or otherwise rewarding relationship with your instructor, mentor, or your peers? Are you keeping a journal or sharing things you are learning with a partner? Will you discuss changes in your beliefs or how you interacted with learners? Can you notice how you are changing in interacting with your children, parents, family, or friends during this time?

    Focus back and forth from the specific to the general. After reading through technical or detailed passages, take a moment to mull over some of the book's main themes and how each of these relates to your own learning and teaching:

    • teachers as facilitators of learning and learner development;
    • empirical and theoretical bases for LCI;
    • core relational characteristics of warmth, trust, empathy, and authenticity;
    • engagement as learning outcome and process, with social connections and self-regulation as optimal signs of engagement;
    • classroom management as influence and proximity, attractive power, and shared control and choice;
    • encouragement, challenge, and adaptation for learning, thinking, and differentiation;
    • ways achievement can be redefined to include both the basics (three Rs) and critical and creative problem identifying and solving;
    • relevant, inquiring topics, assignments, and projects;
    • relationships built between learners through cooperative learning; and
    • relationships built beyond the classroom to support the classroom.

    Periodically, flip through the pages and look ahead at the headings in each chapter. You can spend 10 minutes or 10 hours in this process, but give yourself multiple exposures with different degrees of attention to see what you know or remember, what you still do not understand, or what you want to learn more about. Make up additional questions, outlines, or figures. Consider the various methods you could use if you were an instructor using this textbook with your class to facilitate students looking forward and looking back, all the while being engaged in the present. Ideally, LCI can help lead to learners and teachers alike sharing their roles. Learners build social and self-regulating skills to achieve in sustainable and creative ways. Let the student become the master, and the master the student!

    Every aspect of this book is designed with you and your comprehensive success in mind. We will share much of our understanding of research and theory about what often helps people learn, but at its core, this book is for you to develop a way of being, teaching, and learning that will help learners succeed. We hope you will accept our invitation to engage in this development.

    Summary

    This chapter introduced the central concept of learner-centered instruction (LCI), an ethical and interpersonal endeavor, which is best pursued with an eye toward comprehensive student success. We introduced our model of LCI, emphasizing classroom and contextual relationships, learning principles, and the flexible differentiation of instruction utilizing methods such as inquiry, cooperative learning, and direct instruction. The introduction concluded with a suggested study guide in the form of an invitation to readers to improve their ability to learn while engaging this book. In the next chapter, we will give an overview of the research on relationships and principles central to LCI.

  • Glossary

    We have used bold throughout the text to highlight important or technical concepts. The glossary includes each bolded word or phrase, an explanation of its meaning or significance for learner-centered instruction (LCI), and the chapter number in which the concept is first discussed.

    • Achievement Gap: The differences in academic achievement between groups, especially racial or socioeconomic groups. Teachers College (2005) reported that, on average, Black, Latino, and poor students tend to be 2 years behind by 4th grade, 3 years by 8th grade, and 4 years behind by 12th grade, as compared to White and Asian students (Chapter 5).
    • Advance Organizer: An advertisement of what is to come in a lesson or series of lessons; a headline to help learners (and teachers alike) to plan and be ready to learn. (Introduction)
    • Aptitude: A very general mental capability that, among other things, involves the ability to reason, plan, solve problems, think abstractly, comprehend complex ideas, learn quickly, and learn from experience. It is not merely book learning, a narrow academic skill, or test-taking smarts. Rather, it reflects a broader and deeper capability for comprehending our surroundings—“catching on,” “making sense” of things, or “figuring out” what to do (http://www.lrainc.com/swtaboo/taboos/wsj_main.html). (Chapter 7)
    • Authentic Assessment: Testing a student's collective yet relevant set of knowledge, skills, and attitudes for real-world tasks, not just academic material. Authentic assessment helps students achieve and demonstrate both convergent and divergent thought processes. (Chapter 7)
    • Authentic Learning: Characteristics of authentic learning include high perceived relevance, reduced need for transferring learning, and direct redressing of real world problems. Authentic learning helps students engage their intrinsic motivation and environmental demands with a supportive context to learn. Authentic learning methods also reduce the distance students have to transfer their learning. (Chapter 8)
    • Autonomy Support: Actions that take learners' perspectives into account; provide relevant modeling, information, and advice; and support learner choice and self-determination and growth of responsibility. (Chapter 2)
    • Average Educational Variable: The average of thousands of educational interventions with millions of learners to determine the average amount of learning or positive changes that are associated with or result from an educational initiative. Learner-centered variables (warmth, realness, empathy, challenge, adaptation, etc.) often show correlations with student engagement and achievement above the average educational variable. (Chapter 1)
    • Backward Design Process: Teachers, when designing instruction, decide first what they want their students to understand, and then determine what evidence would show this understanding (Wiggins & McTighe, 2005). (Chapter 6)
    • Bio-Ecological Model (also known as nested systems theory): Bronfenbrenner's theory posits that human development involves the interaction of the learner and his or her context across biological, temporal, and micro (e.g., teacher–student), meso (e.g., teacher–administrator or teacher–parent), exo (e.g., teacher–professional organization), and macro (e.g., teacher–culture) levels. In LCI, ecological systems theory is used to emphasize teachers' building of relationships outside the classroom and attending to one's own physical health. (Chapter 10)
    • Chaos Theory (also known as interdisciplinary or dynamic systems theory): Complicated systems at first glance may appear to lack order but actually follow particular rules, such as the butterfly effect, where small changes in inputs result in large changes in outputs, or the attractor effect, where large changes in inputs result in no changes in outputs. (See Cornelius-White & Kriz, 2008, for more information as pertains to human learning and development.) (Chapter 4)
    • Choice Theory (previously called Control): Students make choices in and out of the classroom in order to meet basic needs of love, survival, freedom, fun, and power (also called recognition). Teachers craft and adjust assignments to fit needs. (Chapter 5)
    • Cooperative Test Construction (also known as student-made tests): Involves students and teachers to plan and write assessments to increase learning and motivation without compromising test validity for summative purposes. (Chapter 9)
    • Co-Regulation: The social connections that help people learn, including the reception of information, planning of learning strategies, and monitoring of these strategies. See also Self-Regulated Learning and Scaffolding. (Chapter 2)
    • Correlation: The amount that one thing tends to move in synch with another, most often depicted by Pearson's r. Correlations can be zero or negligible, where there is no established association between two (or more) variables (e.g., babies crying and day of the year they are born); positive, where there is an established association where two (or more) variables increase or decrease together (e.g., babies crying and hunger); or negative, where there is an established association where two (or more) variables increase or decrease in opposite directions (e.g., babies crying and being held). (Chapter 1)
    • Cultural Competence: Understanding one's own values and biases, the worldviews of those different from you, and flexibly using intervention methods to fit the particular persons and situation (ACA, 1996; Cornelius-White, 2002). (Chapter 6)
    • Deficit View: Teachers hold a deficit view when they attribute student struggles to inherent problems that are resistant to change and not strongly related to the context, including their relationship and attempted methods of teaching. (Chapter 3)
    • Differentiated Instruction: “Ensuring that what a student learns, how he/she learns it, and how the student demonstrates what he/she has learned is a match for what that student's readiness, interests, and preferred mode of learning [are]” (C. A. Tomlinson, 2004, p. 188). (Chapter 2)
    • Discipline Gap: Students of races and cultures, who have been historically marginalized, are far more likely to receive harsher and absolute discipline in American schools than their White, middle-class counterparts. Statistical analysis supports the idea that teachers' conscious and unconscious expectancies appear to have a role. (Chapter 5)
    • Distal-Proximal Effect: The distal (factors most distant from the person being impacted) is less potent than the proximal (those factors closest to the person), where students (or their current behavior) are the center. This simply means that the closer something is to students' lived experience, the more it affects their learning. (Chapter 1)
    • Engagement: Learners' need, desire, and commitment to attend to, participate in, cooperate with, and self-regulate their learning. Engagement is perhaps the most fundamental and enduring developmental step in life (Watson & Battistich, 2006). Even as joining is a basic need (Maslow, 1968), it is equally important as a process that facilitates success of all kinds on its own, including attachment (Bowlby, 1973), cognitive and social development (Vygotsky, 1962/1986), and moral development (Gilligan, 1982). (Chapter 4)
    • Equity Traps: Thought and behavior patterns, usually outside educators' awareness, that limit possibilities for equitable school practices for diverse students and their families. These traps include the deficit view, racial erasure, and paralogical beliefs and actions. (Chapter 3)
    • Ex Duco: Latin root for “education,” meaning to draw out the best in people. (Chapter 6)
    • Flow: The term used to describe optimal experiences, which are those where both performance and enjoyment are highest, characterized by clear goals, concentration, no self-consciousness, time distortion, immediate feedback, personal control, intrinsic reward, and a merging of action and awareness. (Chapter 2)
    • Formative Assessment: Continuous aids to learning/teaching cycle or feedback mechanisms. Formative is contrasted with summative assessment and not used for overall evaluation or grading procedures only in low-stakes ways. (Chapter 8)
    • Heterogeneous Grouping: In cooperative learning, making groups comprised of learners with different characteristics (e.g., not all boys, all high achievers). (Chapter 9)
    • High-Stakes Tests: For example, No Child Left Behind (NCBL) primarily uses Adequate Yearly Progress on one standardized test per state with a heavy emphasis on reading (not literature, per se) and arithmetic (not mathematics, per se) to the exclusion of other subjects and goals. Such tests have become known as high-stakes tests. (Chapter 7)
    • “I”-Statements: An effective way to build realness and help interpersonal relationships in the classroom is the practice of “I”-statements. Teachers, like parents and other leaders, often force their hand by attempting to control learners, when“I”-statements that simply convey teachers' intentions, feelings, or preferences work better. (Chapter 3)
    • Influence and Proximity: Influence ranges from dominance (D) to submission (S), and proximity ranges from cooperation (C) to opposition (O). LCI is characterized by a balance of high influence (particularly for academic achievement) and proximity (particularly for engagement and broader achievement), with reductions in influence and proximity as students achieve more self-regulating ability. Varying degrees of the two dimensions are described by eight types of teacher behavior: leadership (DC), helpful/friendliness (CD), understanding (CS), giving students freedom/responsibility (SC), uncertainty (SO), dissatisfaction (OS), being admonishing (OD), and strictness (DO) (Wubbels, Brekelmans, den Brok, & van Tartwijk, 2006). In LCI, helpful/friendly behavior should appear the most, followed closely by leadership, understanding, and giving students freedom, depending on the tasks involved and level of learner self-regulation. (Chapter 5)
    • Inquiry-Based Teaching (also known as guided discovery or experiential learning): Guides students to learn by helping them become researchers. This approach to teaching emphasizes the identification and specification of self-initiated or community-relevant questions, and builds skills to search and critically evaluate the Web, books, and other media; systematic samples; and the community of experts. (Chapter 8)
    • Instructional Feedback: A pivotal feature of optimal flow and learning experiences. They are preferably made in a timely, relevant manner, especially during the practicing phase of a knowledge or skill acquisition (Hattie, 1999; Hattie & Temperley, 2007). In LCI, feedback is conveyed with a balance of empathy and challenge. Learner-centered feedback aims to “connect while you correct” (Landreth & Bratton, 2006). (Chapter 3)
    • Jigsaw Method: A common example of a scripted approach to cooperative learning, involving explicit directions in procedures, that is able to be generalized across curriculum and grade and ability level. The typical procedure asks groups of students to form four- to six-person clusters as a team; learn material and become an expert in a specific section; re-form teams with all of the experts in a given area; and then reassemble to share, teach, and discuss with the original teams following the expert meetings. (Chapter 9)
    • Learner-Centered Instruction (LCI): An approach to teaching and learning that prioritizes facilitative relationships, the uniqueness of every learner, and the best evidence on learning processes to promote comprehensive student success through engaged achievement. Figure I.1 in the Introduction provides a model showing how LCI involves a relational stance, ways of interacting, principles, methods, and relationships in context. (Introduction)
    • Learning Centers: “Defined space[s] where materials are organized in such a way that children learn without the teacher's constant direction” (Mayesky, 2002, p. 80). (Chapter 4)
    • Meta-Analysis: A way of helping people see the forest, not just the trees, when they read research. More technically, a meta-analysis is a quantitative synthesis of all available studies in a particular area; in this case, learner-centered interpersonal relationships and principles. (Chapter 1)
    • Metacognition: Thinking about and knowing how to think and learn. Self-regulated learners improve their ability to learn; that is, they are motivated and know how to think well, applying studying, self-questioning, self-evaluation, and problem-solving strategies effectively to each learning situation. (Chapter 2)
    • Mirror Neurons: Brain components that fire both in individuals performing an action and in those observing the action. Mirror neurons provide a biological basis for empathy and cooperative behavior. (Chapter 2)
    • Moderator Analysis: Variables that may influence the relationship between an independent and a dependent variable. For example, in the learner-centered meta-analysis, teacher gender was considered as a potential moderator, hypothesizing that there may be a difference in how successful empathy or challenge (or other teacher variable) would be with positive student outcomes like engagement or achievement. Moderator analysis shows that though there are small, noticeable variations, LCI appears to be universally successful; that is, LCI contributes to success for nearly all learners and teachers. (Chapter 1)
    • Multiperspectival Thinking: Involves wearing many hats, such as psychologist, neuroscientist, and educator, ideally seeing how the learner is more than the sum of the perspectives. In LCI, teachers ideally approach each new instructional situation as a possibility, a possibility for student success, a possibility for learning something new within the teacher, and a possibility for transformation in our rapidly changing world. (Chapter 6)
    • Over-Learning: Knowing or practicing something beyond initial mastery so that it becomes automated or a natural extension of you. (Chapter 6)
    • Paralogical Beliefs and Behaviors: Conclusions and resulting actions that do not logically follow from premises. Paralogical beliefs are a form of self-deception that result from accepting common or traditional ideas without critical examination. Paralogical beliefs were discussed as ways that teachers are not authentic when interacting with culturally diverse learners. (Chapter 3)
    • Plastic: The quality of brains that are built to handle fluctuation more than constant attention, remaining plastic, or adaptable, until we die. (Chapter 2)
    • Platinum Rule: In contrast to the golden rule, which stresses one's own preferences (do unto others as you would them do unto you), the platinum rule (do unto others as they would have you do unto them) values empathy and adaptation to differences. (Chapter 3)
    • Positive Interdependence: The overarching condition of successful cooperative learning, and indeed learner-centered instruction and other person-centered approaches. “Positive interdependence is linking students together so one cannot succeed unless all group members succeed. Group members have to know that they sink or swim together” (Johnson, Johnson, & Holubec, 1998, p. 4). (Chapter 9)
    • Power: At a basic level, power simply means the ability to affect one's perspective, actions, or context. In LCI, power is ideally shared transparently between the teacher, students, and others in the educational context (e.g., administrators, parents) in keeping with the responsibilities of their roles and abilities. See also Influence and Proximity. Five types of teacher power (French & Raven, 1959/1974) include:
    • Attractive Power: The power of personability and learners' sense that teachers care about them and their interests. This form is most applicable to LCI.
    • Coercive Power: The power that draws boundaries through punishment. This form is least applicable to LCI.
    • Expert Power: Deference, attention, and emulation with teachers who know things that learners want to understand.
    • Legitimate Power: The influence that comes from being in an organizationally dominant, influential position (i.e., the role of teacher, also called role power).
    • Reward Power: The ability to influence others through reinforcement. In LCI, its use is limited to avoid deterioration of intrinsic motivation. (Chapter 5)
    • Proximity (see Influence and Proximity)
    • Pruning: In LCI, it refers to the removal of synapses not used, especially in terms of gray matter, happening throughout development prior to middle adulthood, especially in adolescence. Pruning follows the use it or lose it principle, whereby one's hardwiring changes as one grows to adapt to developmental and other life changes. (Chapter 2)
    • Publishing: The process of intentionally producing a product to publicly disseminate. It provides an opportunity for peer review, personal ownership, and recognition, and is another strategy for building a participatory community of learners (Atwell, 1998). (Chapter 4)
    • Racial Erasure: “The sentimental idea … that racism would cease to exist if everyone would just forget about race and just see each other as human beings who are the same” (hooks, 1992, p. 12). (Chapter 3)
    • Reciprocal: The goal of interpersonal relationships defined by cooperation, give–take, and mutuality, where both (or all) participants foster each other's learning and development (e.g., student success can foster better teacher relationships and instructional methods even as teachers foster student success). (Introduction)
    • Relational Trust: Among adults in the educational context (teachers with administrators, parents, each other, and others), the extent of respect, personal regard, and integrity between parents and teachers, teachers and principals, and teachers themselves. (Chapter 1)
    • Scaffolding: Conventionally known as the metal-skeleton support structure that construction workers use to help them access the next part of a building that would otherwise be out of reach. It is a link between the ground and the next brick. Similarly, scaffolding in education is the co-regulated process to guide and inculcate responsibility to help students learn and gain understanding and self-regulation. (Chapter 2)
    • Self-Regulation: A type of learning that represents an internalization of the social connections and scaffolding that have helped students learn in the past. Self-regulating students are cognitively and emotionally present, invested in getting something out of their education, and capable to do so. (Chapter 4)
    • Self-Regulatory Learning: Alertness and selectivity in receiving information (e.g., engaged listening or reading comprehension), being able to connect the information to one's own experiences and knowledge base to plan and initiate a question or learning strategy (deepening learning and searching for solutions), and continuous monitoring to self-check on whether one is successfully using information to accomplish what they want. (Chapter 2)
    • Stereotype Threat: The effect that occurs when a person enters a testing situation where a stereotype is activated; for example, students being subtly or directly informed that girls have worse math skills than boys, or that Black students have less intelligence than their White peers. (Chapter 7)
    • Synergistic Classroom: An enhanced classroom characterized by a combination of facilitative teacher behavior and active student behavior that leads to an effect greater than the sum of these two parts. (Chapter 8)
    • The Game (of school): In order to achieve success, students must follow the main rule of the game of school: The teacher is always right. (Chapter 2)
    • Transformative Learning: Being changed by what and how one learns, not just in building new long-term memories, but changing one's point of view, role in society, and potentially systems in society. (Chapter 2)
    • “Use It or Lose It” Principle: The term used across development, including early childhood, adolescence, and adulthood, which exists as an opposing explanatory principle to plasticity. In other words, there are critical (vital or nearly vital) or sensitive (much easier or longer lasting) times for learning some things, one of the most obvious being language fluency. (Chapter 2)
    • Wholetheme Achievement: From the wholetheme model, traditional education is viewed as essentially other-regulated (in contrast to self-regulated) education, meaning that teachers or other authority figures specify what knowledge is and how it should be obtained. Traditional education follows the idea of input–elaboration–output: Teachers provide input to students, who ideally elaborate through practice to converge in an output of performance, such as on tests. (Chapter 7)
    • Wiki: According to http://techterms.com, “a wiki is a Web site that allows users to add and update content on the site using their own Web browser” (http://www.techterms.com/definition/wiki). Wikipedia is probably the best known wiki platform. Individuals can start their own wikis hosted on several sites for free. (Chapter 9)
    • Zone of Proximal Development (ZPD): “The distance between the actual developmental level as determined through independent problem solving and the level of potential development as determined through problem solving under adult guidance or in collaboration with more capable peers” (Vygotsky, 1978, p. 86). In other words, the ZPD is that area where we can do something with another, more able person's assistance that we cannot yet do by ourselves. (Chapter 2)

    References

    ACT Research and Policy Issues. (2007). What works in student retention? Retrieved April 20, 2008, from http://www.act.org/research/policymakers/reports/retain.html
    Allen, I. E., & Seaman, J. (2007). Online nation: Five years of growth in online learning. Retrieved June 1, 2008, from http://www.sloan-c.org/publications/survey/pdf/online_nation.pdf
    Ambruster, B. B., Lehr, F., & Osborn, J. (2001). Put reading first: The research building blocks for teaching children to read. Washington, DC: National Institute for Literacy. Retrieved April 20, 2008, from http://www.nifl.gov/partnershipforreading/publications/reading_first1.html
    American Counseling Association. (1996). Multicultural counseling competencies and standards. Washington, DC: Author. Retrieved August 19, 2008, from http://www.counseling.org/Resources/
    American Educational Research Association. (2000, July). AERA position statement on high-stakes testing in pre-k–12 education. Washington, DC: Author.
    Andersen, J. F. (1979). Teacher immediacy as a predictor of teaching effectiveness. In D.Nimmo (Ed.), Communication yearbook3 (pp. 543–559). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
    Anderson, R. S. (1998). Why talk about different ways to grade? The shift from traditional assessment to alternative assessment. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 74, 5–16. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/tl.7401
    Andrews, L. R. (n.d.). Mainstream science on intelligence. Retrieved August 13, 2008, from http://www.lrainc.com/swtaboo/taboos/wsj_main.html
    Angelo, T. A., & Cross, K. P. (1993). Classroom assessment techniques (
    2nd ed.
    ). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
    APA Online. (2001, May). Appropriate use of high-stakes testing in our nation's schools. Washington DC: APA Office of Publications.
    APA Task Force on Psychology in Education. (1993, January). Learner-centered psychological principles: Guidelines for school redesign and reform. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association and Mid-Continent Regional Educational Library.
    APA Work Group of the Board of Educational Affairs. (1997, November). Learner-centered psychological principles: A framework for school reform and redesign. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
    Arbib, M. (2005). The mirror system hypothesis. Linking language to theory of mind. Retrieved February 17, 2006, from http://www.interdisciplines.org/coevolution/papers/11
    Aronson, E., Blaney, N., Stephin, C., Sikes, J., & Snapp, M. (1978). The jigsaw classroom. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
    Ashtiani, N. S., & Babaii, E. (2007). Cooperative test construction: The last temptation of educational reform?Studies in Educational Evaluation, 33, 213–228. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.stueduc.2007.07.002
    Aspy, D. N. (1969). A study of three facilitative conditions and their relationships to the achievement of third grade students. Dissertation Abstracts International, 30(5-A), 1853.
    Aspy, D. N. (1976). Knowledge of the physical dimensions of human life. Counselor Education and Supervision, 15, 4, 292–296. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/j.1556-6978.1976.tb02007.x
    Aspy, D. N., Aspy, C. B., & Roebuck, F. N. (1984). The third century in American education: Education in the age of productivity. Amherst, MA: Human Resource Development Press.
    Aspy, D. N., & Buhler, J. H. (1975). The effects of teachers' inferred self-concept upon student achievement. Journal of Educational Research, 68(10), 386–389.
    Aspy, D. N., & Roebuck, F. N. (1977). Kids don't learn from people they don't like. Amherst, MA: Human Resource Development Press.
    Aspy, D. N., Roebuck, F. N., & Aspy, C. B. (1983). Physical fitness in counseling and teaching. Journal of Humanistic Counseling, Education & Development, 21(3), 115–123. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/j.2164-4683.1983.tb00222.x
    Atwell, N. (1998). In the middle: New understandings about writing, reading, and learning (
    2nd ed.
    ). Portsmouth, NH: Boynton/Cook.
    Baker, A. J. (1999). Teacher-student interaction in urban at-risk classrooms: Differential behavior, relationship quality, and student satisfaction with school. Elementary School Journal, 100, 57–70. http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/461943
    Banaji, M. R., & Hardin, C. D. (1996). Automatic stereotyping. Psychological Science, 7(3), 136–141. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9280.1996.tb00346.x
    Bansberg, B. (2003, Spring). Applying the learner-centered principles to the special case of literacy. Theory into Practice. Retrieved April 20, 2008, from http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0NQM/is_2_42/ai_102696730/
    Beatty, M. J., & Zahn, C. J. (1990). Are student ratings of communication instructors due to “easy” grading practices? An analysis of teacher credibility and student-reported performance levels. Communication Education, 39(4), 275–282. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03634529009378809
    Behr, M., & Cornelius-White, J. H. D. (2008). Facilitating young people's development: International perspectives on person-centered theory and practice. Ross-on-Wye, UK: PCCS Books.
    Berk, R. A. (2005). Survey of 12 strategies to measure teaching effectiveness. International Journal of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education, 17(1), 48–62.
    Berlo, D. K., Lemert, J. B., & Mertz, R. J. (1969). Dimensions for evaluating the acceptability of message sources. Public Opinion Quarterly, 33, 563–576. http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/267745
    Beutler, L. E., Rocco, F., Moleiro, C. M., & Talebi, H. (2001). Resistance. Psychotherapy: Theory/Research/Practice/Training, 38, 431–436. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0033-3204.38.4.431
    Bing, A. (2001). Peace building through foreign study in Northern Ireland: The Earlham College example. In C. M.Weigert & J.Crews (Eds.), Teaching for justice: Concepts and models for service-learning in peace studies (pp. 82–90). Washington DC: American Association for Higher Education.
    Blake, P. R., & Gardner, H. (2007). A first course in mind, brain, and education. Mind, Brain, and Education, 1(2), 61–65. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1751-228X.2007.00007.x
    Block, J. D. (1971). A comparison of the verbal interaction in counseling groups differing in member interpersonal compatibility. Dissertation Abstracts Journal, 32(2-A), 780.
    Bloom, B. S. (1956). Taxonomy of educational objectives: The classification of educational goals. New York: Longmans, Green.
    Bloom, B. S. (1981). All our children learning: A primer for parents, teachers, and other educators. New York: McGraw-Hill.
    Boaler, J., & Humphreys, C. (2005). Connecting mathematical ideas: Middle school video cases to support teaching and learning. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
    Boe, E. E., May, H., & Boruch, R. F. (2002). Student task persistence in the third international mathematics and science study: A major source of achievement differences at the national, classroom, and student levels. Philadelphia: Pennsylvania University, Center for Research and Evaluation in Social Policy. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 478 493)
    Bohart, A. (2004). Relationship as healing. PsycCRITIQUES, 49, 182–184. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/004289
    Bohart, A. C. (2006). The client as active self-healer. In G.Stricker & J.Gold (Eds.), A casebook of psychotherapy integration (pp. 214–251). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/11436-018
    Bohart, A. C., Elliot, R., Greenberg, L. S., & Watson, J. C. (2002). Empathy. In J.Norcross (Ed.), Psychotherapy relationships that work: Therapist contributions and responsiveness to patients (pp. 89–108). New York: Oxford University Press.
    Borman, G. D., & Overman, L. T. (2004). Academic resilience in mathematics among poor and minority students. Elementary School Journal, 104(3), 177–195. http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/499748
    Bourdieu, P., Passeron, J-C., & Nice, R. (1990). Reproduction in education, society, and culture (
    2nd ed.
    ). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
    Bowlby, J. (1973). Attachment and loss. New York: Basic Books.
    Bozarth, J. D. (1998). Person-centered therapy: A revolutionary paradigm. Ross-On-Wye, UK: PCCS Books.
    Bracken, P., & Thomas, P. (2002). Time to move beyond the mind-body split. BMJ: British Medical Journal, 325(7378), 1433–1434. http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmj.325.7378.1433
    Bradway, K. P., Thompson, C. W., & Cravens, R. B. (1958). Preschool IQs after twenty-five years. Journal of Educational Psychology, 49(5), 278–281. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/h0044412
    Bratton, S. C., Ray, D., Rhine, T., & Jones, L. (2005). The efficacy of play therapy with children: A meta-analytic review of treatment outcomes. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 36(4), 376–390. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0735-7028.36.4.376
    Brewster, C., & Fager, J. (2000). Increasing student engagement and motivation: From time-on-task to homework. Retrieved June 12, 2007, from http://www.nwrel.org/request/oct00/testonly.html
    Brodley, B. T. (2005). Introduction: About the nondirective attitude. In B. E.Levitt (Ed.), Embracing nondirectivity: Reassessing person-centered theory and practice in the 21st century (pp. 1–5). Ross-on-Wye, UK: PCCS Books.
    Brodley, B. T. (2006). Non-directivity in client-centered therapy. Person-Centered and Experiential Psychotherapies, 5(1), 36–52. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/14779757.2006.9688391
    Bronfenbrenner, U. (1977). Who cares for America's children?Times Educational Supplement, 3262, 15–17.
    Bronfenbrenner, U. (1979). Beyond the deficit model in child and family policy. Teachers College Record, 81(1), 95–104.
    Brooks, J., & Brooks, M. (2001). In search of understanding: The case for constructivist classrooms. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.
    Brown, A. L., & Palincsar, A. S. (1989). Guided, cooperative learning and individual knowledge acquisition. In L. B.Resnick (Ed.), Knowing, learning, and instruction: Essays in honor of Robert Glaser (pp. 393–452). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
    Bruce, C., & Levant, R. F. (1990). A meta-analysis of the effects of parent effectiveness training. American Journal of Family Therapy, 18, 373–384. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01926189008250986
    Bruner, J. S. (1966). Toward a theory of instruction. Cambridge, MA: Belknapp Press, Harvard University.
    Bryk, A. S., & Schneider, B. L. (2002). Trust in schools: A core resource for improvement. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
    Business Council. (2007, May 24). New Yorkers' per-pupil school spending moves from third highest to highest, Census Bureau data show. Retrieved August 19, 2008, from http://www.bcnys.org/whatsnew/2007/052407schoolspending.htm
    Butler, D. L., & Winne, P. H. (1995). Feedback and self-regulated learning: A theoretical synthesis. Review of Educational Research, 65(3), 245–281. http://dx.doi.org/10.3102/00346543065003245
    Buzzelli, C. A. (1996). The moral implications of teacher-child discourse in early childhood classrooms. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 11(4), 515–534. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0885-2006%2896%2990020-4
    Cacioppo, J. T., Hawkley, L. C., Rickett, E. M., & Masi, C. M. (2005). Sociality, spirituality, and meaning making: Chicago health, aging, and social relations study. Review of General Psychology, 9(2), 143–155. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/1089-2680.9.2.143
    Caine, R. N., & Caine, G. (1997). Education on the edge of possibility. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
    Calkins, L. M. (1994). The art of teaching writing. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
    Cammarota, J., & Fine, M. (2008). Revolutionizing education: Youth participatory action research in motion. New York: Routledge.
    Carkhuff, R. R. (1969). Helping and human relations. New York: Holt, Rinehart, & Winston.
    Carkhuff, R. R. (2000). Human possibilities: Human capital in the 21st century. Amherst, MA: Possibilities Publishing.
    Cazden, C. B. (2001). Classroom discourse: The language of teaching and learning (
    2nd ed.
    ). Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
    Chavous, T. M., Bernat, D. H., Schmeelk-Cone, K., Caldwell, C. H., Kohn-Wood, L., & Zimmerman, M. A. (2003). Racial identity and academic attainment among African American adolescents. Child Development, 74(4), 1076–1090. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1467-8624.00593
    Cohen, S. (1981). Student ratings of instruction and student achievement: A meta-analysis of multisection validity studies. Review of Educational Research, 51(3), 281–309. http://dx.doi.org/10.3102/00346543051003281
    Cohen, P. A., Kulik, J. A., & Kulik, C. C. (1982). Education outcomes of tutoring: A meta-analysis of findings. American Educational Research Journal, 19(2), 237–248. http://dx.doi.org/10.3102/00028312019002237
    Colby, A., Ehlrich, T., Beaumont, E., & Stephens, J. (2003). Educating undergraduates for responsible citizenship. Change, the Magazine of Higher Learning, 35(6), 40–48. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00091380309604127
    Coloroso, B. (1994). Kids are worth it: Giving your child the gift of inner discipline. New York, NY: Morrow.
    Combs, A. W. (1986). What makes a good helper? A person-centered approach. Person-Centered Review, 1, 51–61.
    Combs, A. W. (1991). The schools we need: New assumptions for educational reform. Lanham, MD: University of Press America.
    Constantine, M. G., Lewis, E. L., Conner, L. C., & Sanchez, D. (2000). Addressing spiritual and religious issues in counseling African Americans: Implications for counselor training and practice. Counseling and Values, 45(1), 28–38. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/j.2161-007X.2000.tb00180.x
    Copes, L., & Shager, K. (2003). Phasing problem-based teaching into a traditional educational environment. In H. L.Schoen & R. I.Charles (Eds.), Teaching mathematics through problem solving: Grades 6–12 (pp. 195–205). Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.
    Cornelius-White, J. H. D. (2002). The phoenix of empirically supported therapy relationships: The overlooked person-centered basis. Psychotherapy: Theory, Research, Practice, Training, 39, 219–222. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0033-3204.39.3.219
    Cornelius-White, J. H. D. (2003a). The analyzed nondirectiveness of a brief, effective person-centered practice. The Person-Centered Journal, 10, 23–30.
    Cornelius-White, J. H. D. (2003b). The effectiveness of a nondirective person-centered practice. The Person-Centered Journal, 10, 31–38.
    Cornelius-White, J. H. D. (2007). Learner-centered teacher–student relationships are effective: A meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 77(1), 113–143. http://dx.doi.org/10.3102/003465430298563
    Cornelius-White, J. H. D., & Brown, R. D. (2006). Politicizing school reform through the person-centered approach: Mandate and advocacy. In M.Cooper, B.Malcolm, G.Proctor, & P.Sanders (Eds.), Politicizing the person-centered approach: An agenda for social change (pp. 263–269). Ross-on-Wye, UK: PCCS Books.
    Cornelius-White, J. H. D., & Cornelius-White, C. F. (2005). Trust builds learning: The context and effectiveness of non-directivity in education. In B. E.Levitt (Ed.), Embracing nondirectivity (pp. 314–323). Ross-on-Wye, UK: PCCS Books.
    Cornelius-White, J. H. D., & Godfrey, P. (2004). Pedagogical crossroads: Integrating feminist critical pedagogies and the person-centered approach to education. In G.Proctor & M.Napier (Eds.), Encountering feminism: Intersections of feminism and the person-centered approach (pp. 166–178). Ross-on-Wye, UK: PCCS Books.
    Cornelius-White, J. H. D., Hoey, A., Cornelius-White, C. F., Motschnig-Pitrik, R., & Figl, K. (2004). Teachers who care are more effective: A meta-analysis in progress. Journal of Border Educational Research, 3, 81–96.
    Cornelius-White, J. H. D., & Kriz, J. (2008). The formative tendency: Person-centered systems theory, interdependence, and human potential. In B. E.Levitt (Ed.), Reflections on human potential: Bridging the person-centered approach and positive psychology (pp. 116–130). Ross-on-Wye, UK: PCCS Books.
    Corno, L., & Mandinach, E. B. (1983). The role of cognitive engagement in classroom learning and motivation. Educational Psychologist, 18(2), 88–108. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00461528309529266
    Cosden, M., Morrison, G., Gutierrez, L., & Brown, M. (2004). The effects of homework programs and after-school activities on school success. Theory Into Practice, 43(3), 220–226. http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/s15430421tip4303_8
    Cotton, K. (2001). Research you can use to improve results. Update of section 3. Program report. Portland, OR: Northwest Regional Educational Laboratory.
    Cox, G. (1986). The ways of peace: A philosophy of peace as action. New York: Paulist Press.
    Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1998). Finding flow: The psychology of engagement with every day life. New York: Basic Books.
    Cundick, B. P. (1970). Measures of intelligence on southwest Indian students. Journal of Social Psychology, 81(2), 151–156. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00224545.1970.9922436
    Curwin, R., & Mendler, A. (1988). Discipline with dignity. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.
    Dale, E. (1969). Audio-visual methods in teaching. New York: Dryden Press. (Original work published 1946)
    Danielson, C. (1996). Enhancing professional practice: A framework for teaching. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
    Darling-Hammond, L. (2008). How they do it abroad. Time. Retrieved June 15, 2008, from http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1713557,00.html
    Darling-Hammond, L., & Sykes, G. (1999). Teaching as the learning profession: A handbook of policy and practice. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
    Davies, P. G., Spencer, S. J., Quinn, D. M., & Gerhardstein, R. (2002). Consuming images: How television commercials that elicit stereotype threat can restrain women academically and professionally. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 28(12), 1615–1628. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/014616702237644
    Deci, E. L., Koestner, R., & Ryan, R. M. (2001). Extrinsic rewards and intrinsic motivation in education: Reconsidered once again. Review of Educational Research, 71(1), 1–27. http://dx.doi.org/10.3102/00346543071001001
    Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1985). Intrinsic motivation and self determination in human behavior. New York: Plenum. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4899-2271-7
    Denig, S. J. (2004). Multiple intelligences and learning styles: Two complementary dimensions. Teachers College Record, 106(1), 96–111. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9620.2004.00322.x
    Detterman, D. K. (1993). The case for the prosecution: Transfer as an epiphenomenon. In D. K.Detterman & R. J.Sternberg (Eds.), Transfer on trial: Intelligence, cognition and instruction (pp. 1–24). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
    Dewey, J. (1997). Experience and education. New York: Macmillan. (Original work published 1938)
    Dewey, J. (1997). How we think. Boston: Heath. (Original work published 1910)
    Dillon, J. T. (1988). Questioning and teaching. A manual of practice. New York: Teachers College Press.
    Döering, E. (2008). What happens in child-centred play therapy? In M.Behr & J. H. D.Cornelius-White (Eds.), Relationship and development: Concepts, practice and research in person-centered work with children, adolescents, and parents. Person-centered work with young people (pp. 1–24). Ross-on-Wye, UK: PCCS Books.
    Draper, K., White, J., O'Shaughnessy, T. E., Flynt, M., & Jones, N. (2001). Kinder training: Play-based consultation to improve the school adjustment of discouraged kindergarten and first grade students. International Journal of Play Therapy, 10(1), 1–29. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/h0089441
    Dreikurs, R., & Cassel, P. (1972). Discipline without tears. New York: Hawthorn Books.
    Dreikurs, R., & Grey, L. (1968). Logical consequences: A new approach of discipline. Oxford, England: Meredith Press.
    Edwards, D., & Mercer, N. (1987). Common knowledge: The development of understanding in the classroom. New York: Methuen.
    Elder, L., & Paul, R. (2001). Critical thinking: Thinking on some purpose. Journal of Developmental Education, 25(1), 40–41.
    Elias, M. J., & Schwab, Y. (2006). From compliance to responsibility: Social and emotional learning and classroom management. In C. M.Evertson & C. S.Weinstein (Eds.), Handbook of classroom management: Research, practice, and contemporary issues (pp. 309–342). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
    Elliott, R., Greenberg, L. S., & Lietaer, G. (2004). Research on experiential psychotherapies. In M. J.Lambert (Ed.), Bergin and Garfield's handbook of psychotherapy and behavior change (
    5th ed.
    , pp. 501–540). New York: John Wiley & Sons.
    Erwin, J. C. (2004). The classroom of choice: Giving students what they need and getting what you want. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.
    Evertson, C. M., & Weinstein, C. S. (Eds.). (2006). Handbook of classroom management: Research, practice, and contemporary issues (pp. 1161–1191). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
    Farkas, S., & Johnson, J. (1997). Kids these days: What Americans really think about the next generation. Public Agenda Foundation. Retrieved August 4, 2006, from http://www.publicagenda.org/research/research_reports_details.cfm?list=50
    Fay, J., & Funk, D. (1997). Teaching with love and logic: Taking control of the classroom. Golden, CO: Love and Logic Press.
    Fickeisen, D. H. (1991). Kathy Greenberg—Learning how to learn. Retrieved February 9, 2008, from http://www.context.org/ICLIB/IC27/Greenbrg.htm
    Fielding, M. (2001). Students as radical agents of change. Journal of Educational Change, 2, 123–141. http://dx.doi.org/10.1023/A:1017949213447
    Finn, J. D. (1993). School engagement and students at risk. Washington, DC, National Center for Education Statistics. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 362322)
    Fischer, K. W., & Daley, S. G. (2006). Connecting cognitive science and neuroscience to education: Potentials and pitfalls in inferring executive processes. In L.Meltzer (Ed.), Executive function in education: From theory to practice (pp. 55–72). New York: Guilford Press.
    Fischer, K., & Yan, Z (2002). The development of dynamic skill theory. In D. J.Lewkowicz & R.Lickliter (Eds.), Conceptions of development: Lessons from the laboratory (pp. 279–312). New York: Psychology Press.
    Flanders, N. A. (1976). Interaction analysis and clinical supervision. Journal of Research and Development in Education, 9(2), 47–57.
    Flavell, J. H., & Miller, P. H. (1998). Social cognition. In D.Kuhn & R. S.Siegler (Eds.), Handbook of child psychology: Vol. 2. Cognition, perception, and language (pp. 851–898). New York: Wiley.
    Fleming, E. S., & Anttonen, R. G. (1971). Teacher-expectancy effect examined at different ability levels. Journal of Special Education, 5(2), 127–131. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/002246697100500204
    Fordham, S., & Ogbu, J. U. (1986). Black students' school success: Coping with the “burden of ‘acting white.’”Urban Review, 18(3), 176–206. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF01112192
    Frankenstein, M. (1987). Critical mathematics education: An application of Paulo Freire's epistemology. In I.Shor (Ed.), Freire for the classroom: A sourcebook for liberatory teaching (pp. 189–210). Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
    Fraser, B. J., Walberg, H. J., Welch, W. W., & Hattie, J. A. (1987). Syntheses of educational productivity research. International Journal of Educational Research, 11, 145–252. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0883-0355%2887%2990035-8
    Freiberg, H. J. (2007, April 11). A person-centered approach to classroom management. Paper presented at the International Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Chicago.
    Freiberg, H. J., Connell, M. L., & Lorentz, J. (2001). Effects of consistency management® on student mathematics achievement in seven chapter I elementary schools. Journal of Education for Students Placed at Risk (JES-PAR), 6(3), 249–270. http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/S15327671ESPR0603_6
    Freire, P. (1968). Pedagogy of the oppressed. New York: Bantam Books.
    French, J. R. P., Jr., & Raven, B. (1974). The bases of social power. In D.Cartwright (Ed.), Studies in social power (pp. 150–167). Oxford, England: University of Michigan. (Original work published 1959)
    Friend, M., & Cook, L. (2007). Interactions: Collaborative skills for school professionals. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
    Gardner, H. (2000). Intelligence reframed: Multiple intelligences for the 21st century. New York: Basic.
    Gardner, H., & Hatch, T. (1989). Multiple intelligences go to school: Educational implications of the theory of multiple intelligences. Educational Researcher, 18(8), 4–9.
    Gazda, G. M., Balzer, F. J., Childers, W. C., Nealy, A. U., Phelps, R. E., & Walters, R. P. (2005). Human relations development: A manual for educators (
    7th ed.
    ). Boston: Pearson.
    Giannetti, C. G., & Sagarese, M. M. (1998). Engaging parents and the community in schools. Educational Leadership, 55(2), 40–42.
    Giedd, J. N., et al. (1999). Brain development during childhood and adolescence: A longitudinal MRI study. Nature Neuroscience, 2, 861–863. http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/13158
    Gillies, R. M. (2007). Cooperative learning: Integrating theory and practice. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
    Gilligan, C. (1982). In a different voice: Psychological theory and women's development. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
    Ginott, H. G. (1972). Teacher and child: A book for parents and teachers. New York: MacMillan.
    Ginsberg, M., & Wlodkowski, R. J. (2000). Creating highly motivating classrooms for all students: A schoolwide approach to powerful teaching with diverse learners. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
    Glantz, M. D., & Johnson, J. (1999). Resilience and development: Positive life adaptations (Longitudinal research in the social and behavioral sciences: An interdisciplinary series). New York: Springer.
    Glasser, W. (1969). Schools without failure. New York: Harper & Row.
    Glasser, W. (1986). Control theory in the classroom. New York: Perennial Library.
    Glasser, W. (1998). The quality school: Managing students without coercion. New York: Harper.
    Glausser, A. S., & Bozarth, J. D. (2001). Person-centered counseling: The culture within. Journal of Counseling and Development, 79(2), 142–147. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/j.1556-6676.2001.tb01953.x
    Gleick, J. (1987). Chaos: Making a new science. New York: Viking.
    Goldstein, L. S. (1997). Teaching with love: A feminist approach to early childhood education. New York: Peter Lang.
    Good, M. E. (2006). Differentiated instruction: Principles and techniques for the elementary grades. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 491580)
    Gordon, B. (2003). Working with parents: Building spirit through collaboration. NAMTA Journal, 28, 137–140.
    Gordon, T. (1975). Parent Effectiveness Training: The tested new way to raise responsible children. New York: New American Library.
    Graesser, A. C., & Person, N. K. (1994). Question asking during tutoring. American Educational Research Journal, 31(1), 104–137. http://dx.doi.org/10.3102/00028312031001104
    Greenberg, L. S., & Geller, S. M. (2001). Congruence and therapeutic presence. In GillWyatt (Ed.), Congruence (Vol. 1, pp. 131–149). Ross-on-Wye, UK: PCCS Books.
    Gregory, A. (2006). A window on the discipline gap: Defiance or cooperation in the high school classroom. Dissertation Abstracts International Section A: Humanities and Social Sciences, 66(8-A), 2831.
    Grow, G. O. (1991). Teaching learners to be self-directed. Adult Education Quarterly, 41(3), 125–149. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0001848191041003001
    Guarino, C. M., Santibanez, L., & Daley, G. A. (2006). Teacher recruitment and retention: A review of the recent empirical literature. Review of Educational Research, 76(2), 173–208. http://dx.doi.org/10.3102/00346543076002173
    Guerney, B. J. (1964). Filial therapy: Description and rationale. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 28(4), 304–310. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/h0041340
    Gunnison, H. (1976). Humanistic education and teacher education. ETC: A Review of General Semantics, 33(2), 162–170.
    Gwen-Paquette, C., & Tochon, F. V. (2002). The role of reflective conversations and feedback in helping preservice teachers learn to use cooperative activities in their second language classrooms. Modern Language Journal, 86(2), 204–226. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1540-4781.00145
    Halpern, D. F. (2003). Thought and knowledge: An introduction to critical thinking. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
    Harbaugh, A. P., & Cornelius-White, J. H. D. (2007). Learner-centered instructional relationships: Encouraging students to learn, grow and like school. In S.Jones, C.Pearman, & E.Sheffield (Eds.), Why kids hate school? (pp. 107–120). Dubuque, IA: Kendall Hunt.
    Hatano, G. (1996). A conception of knowledge acquisition and its implications for mathematics education. In L. P.Steffe, P.Nesher, P.Cobb, G. A.Goldin, & B.Greer (Eds.), Theories of mathematical learning (pp. 197–217). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
    Hattie, J. A. (1999, August 2). Influences on student learning. Inaugural Lecture at the University of Auckland, Australia.
    Hattie, J., & Timperley, H. (2007). The power of feedback. Review of Educational Research, 77(1), 81–112. http://dx.doi.org/10.3102/003465430298487
    Herman, J. (1997). Assessing new assessments: How do they measure up?Theory Into Practice, 36(4), 196–204. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00405849709543769
    Hiebert, J., & Wearne, D. (2003). Developing understanding through problem solving. In H. L.Schoen & R. I.Charles (Eds.), Teaching mathematics through problem solving: Grades 6–12 (pp. 3–14). Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.
    Hiemstra, R., & Sisco, B. (1990). Individualizing instruction. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
    Hoffman, M. L. (2001). Empathy and moral development: Implications for caring and justice. New York: Cambridge University Press.
    Hoffman, M. L., Llagas, C., & Snyder, T. D. (2003). Status and trends in the education of blacks. Jessup, MD: ED Pubs.
    Hogan-Garcia, M. (2002). Four skills of multicultural competence: A process for understanding and practice. Pacific Grove, CA: Brooks/Cole.
    Hölldampf, D., Aich, G., Jakob, T., & Behr, M. (2008). The use of person-centered approach for parent-teacher communication: A qualitative study. In M.Behr & J.H. D.Cornelius-White (Eds.), Facilitating young people's development: International perspectives on person-centered theory and practice (pp. 164–175). Ross-On-Wye, UK: PCCS Books.
    hooks, b. (1992). Black looks: Race and representation. Boston: South End Press.
    hooks, b. (1994). Teaching to transgress: Education as the practice of freedom. New York: Routledge.
    Hoover-Dempsey, K. V., Battiato, A. C., Walker, J. M. T., Reed, R. P., DeJong, J. M., & Jones, K. P. (2001). Parental involvement in homework. Educational Psychologist, 36(3), 195–209. http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/S15326985EP3603_5
    Howard, J. (2003). Academic service-learning: A counternormative pedagogy. In C.Compact (Ed.), Introduction to service-learning toolkit: Readings and resources for faculty (
    2nd ed.
    , pp. 57–63). Providence, RI: Editor.
    Howes, C., & Ritchie, S. (2002). A matter of trust: Connecting teachers and learners in the early childhood classroom. New York: Teachers College Press.
    Huetinck, L., & Munshin, S. N. (2007). Teaching mathematics in the 21st century. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
    Husen, T., & Tuijnman, A. (1991). The contribution of formal schooling to the increase in intellectual capital. Educational Researcher, 20(7), 17–25. Retrieved August 8, 2007, from http://edr.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/20/7/17http://dx.doi.org/10.3102/0013189X020007017
    Immordin-Yang, M. H., & Damasio, A. (2007). We feel, therefore we learn: The relevance of affective and social neuroscience to education. Mind, Brain, and Education, 1(1), 3–10. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1751-228X.2007.00004.x
    Iran-Nejad, A. (2000). Brain, knowledge, and self-regulation. New York: Institute Mind and Behavior.
    Iran-Nejad, A. (2006, July). Education as multiple-source self-regulation: A wholetheme perspective. Proceedings of the Annual Cognitive Science Conference, Vancouver, Canada. Retrieved August 20, 2008, from http://www.cogsci.rpi.edu/CSJarchive/Proceedings/2006/docs/p2648.pdf
    Iran-Nejad, A., & Gregg, M. (2001). The brain-mind cycle of reflection. Teachers College Record, 103(5), 868–895. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/0161-4681.00137
    Janesick, V. J. (2006). Authentic assessment primer. New York: Peter Lang.
    Jay, J. K., & Johnson, K. L. (2002). Capturing complexity: A typology of reflective practice for teacher education. Teacher and Teacher Education, 18(1), 73–85. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0742-051X%2801%2900051-8
    Jensen, E. (1998). Teaching with the brain in mind. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
    Jhally, S. (1997). Advertising and the end of the world. Media Foundation. Retrieved August 8, 2007, from http://www.mediaed.org/videos/CommercialismPoliticsAndMedia/Advertising_EndOfWorld
    Johnson, D. W. (2006). Reaching out: Interpersonal effectiveness and self-actualization (
    9th ed.
    ). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
    Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (1989). Cooperation and competition: Theory and research. Edina, MN: Interaction.
    Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (2006). Conflict resolution, peer mediation, and peacemaking. In C. M.Everston, & C. S.Weinstein (Eds.), Handbook of classroom management: Research, practice, and contemporary issues (pp. 803–832). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
    Johnson, D., Johnson, R., & Holubec, E. (1998). Cooperation in the classroom. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
    Johnson, J., Arumi, A. M., & Ott, A. (2006). A public agenda initiative to build momentum for improving American schools. Public Agenda Foundation. Retrieved January 25, 2008, from http://www.publicagenda.org/research/research_reports_details.cfm?list=98
    Johnson, J., & Immerwahr, J. (1994). First things first: What Americans expect from public schools. Public Agenda Foundation. Retrieved January 25, 2008, from http://www.publicagenda.org/research/research_reports_details.cfm?list=77
    Johnson, R., & Johnson, D. W. (2002). Teaching students to be peacemakers: A meta-analysis. Journal of Research in Education, 12(1), 25–39.
    Jussim, L., & Harber, K. D. (2005). Teacher expectations and self-fulfilling prophecies: Knowns and unknowns, resolved and unresolved controversies. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 9(2), 131–155. http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/s15327957pspr0902_3
    Kagan, S. (1994). Cooperative learning. San Clemente, CA: Kagan Cooperative Learning.
    Kaufeldt, M. (1999). Begin with the brain: Orchestrating the learner-centered classroom. Tucson, AZ: Zephyr Press.
    Kazemi, E. (1998). Discourse that promotes conceptual understanding. Teaching Children Mathematics, 4(7), 410–414.
    Kirschenbaum, H. (2008). The life and work of Carl Rogers. Ross-on-Wye, UK: PCCS Books.
    Kirschner, P. A., Sweller, J., & Clark, R. E. (2006). Why minimal guidance during instruction does not work: An analysis of the failure of constructivist, discovery, problem-based, experiential, and inquiry-based teaching. Educational Psychologist, 41(2), 75–86. http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/s15326985ep4102_1
    Knapp, C., et al. (2006). Tough choices or tough times: New commission on the skills of the American workforce report. Washington, DC: National Center on Education and the Economy. Retrieved August 8, 2007, from http://www.skillscommission.org/executive.htm
    Knowles, M. S. (1980). The modern practice of adult education (revised and updated). Chicago: Association Press. (Original work published 1970)
    Knuth, E., & Peressini, D. (2001). Unpacking the nature of discourse in mathematics classrooms. Mathematics Teaching in the Middle School, 6(5), 320–325.
    Kohn, A. (1993). Rewards vs. learning: A response to Paul Chance. Phi Theta Kappan, 74(10), 783–787.
    Kohn, A. (2000). Burn at the high stakes. Journal of Teacher Education, 51(4), 315–327. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0022487100051004007
    Koretz, D., Stecher, B., Klein, S., McCaffrey, D., & Deibert, E. (1993). Can portfolios assess student performance and influence instruction? The 1991–92 Vermont experience (CSE Technical Report No. 371). Los Angeles: University of California, Center for Research on Evaluation, Standards, and Student Testing (CRESST).
    Kottler, J. A., & Kottler, E. (2007). Counseling skills for teachers (
    2nd ed.
    ). Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
    Kounin, J. S. (1970). Observing and delineating technique of managing behavior in classrooms. Journal of Research and Development in Education, 4(1), 62–72.
    Kozol, J. (2005). Preparing minds for markets: A noted child advocate laments the redefining of learning in proprietary terms. School Administrator, 62(9), 31.
    Kramarski, B., & Mizrachi, N. (2006). Online discussion and self-regulated learning: Effects of instructional methods on mathematical literacy. Journal of Educational Research, 99(4), 218–230. http://dx.doi.org/10.3200/JOER.99.4.218-231
    Krivickas, R. V. (2005). Active learning at Kuanas University of Technology. Global Journal of Engineering Education, 9(1), 43–47.
    Kriz, J. (2006). Self-actualization. Norderstedt, Germany: Books on Demand.
    Lambert, M. J. (Ed.). (2003). Bergin and Garfield's handbook of psychotherapy and behavior change (
    5th ed.
    ). New York: Wiley.
    Landreth, G. L. (2002). Play therapy: The art of the relationship (
    2nd ed.
    ). New York: Brunner-Routledge.
    Landreth, G. L., & Bratton, S. C. (2006). Child parent relationship therapy (CRPT). New York: Taylor & Francis Group.
    Lawson, A. E. (1995). Science teaching and the development of thinking. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
    Lever-Duffy, J., McDonald, J. B., & Mizell, A. P. (2005). Teaching and learning with technology (
    2nd ed.
    ). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
    Lewis, C., Perry, R., Hurd, J., & O'Connell, M. P. (2004). A deeper look at lesson study. Educational Leadership, 61(5), 18.
    Logue, O. J. (1993, March). Job satisfaction and retention variables of special education paraeducators. Paper presented at the Twelfth Annual Conference on the Training and Employment of Paraprofessionals in Education and Related Services, Seattle, WA.
    Lovelace, M. K. (2005). Meta-analysis of experimental research based on the Dunn and Dunn model. Journal of Educational Research, 98(3), 176–183. http://dx.doi.org/10.3200/JOER.98.3.176-183
    Luft, J., & Ingham, H. (1955). The Johari window, a graphic model of interpersonal awareness. Proceedings of the western training laboratory in group development. Los Angeles: UCLA.
    Marshall, C., & Gerstl-Pepin, C. I. (2005). Re-framing education politics for social justice. Boston: Pearson/Allyn & Bacon.
    Martin, D. G. (2000). Counseling and therapy skills (
    2nd ed.
    ). Prospect Heights, IL: Waveland.
    Martin, M. M., Chesebro, J. L., & Mottet, T. P. (1997). Students' perceptions of instructors' socio-communicative style and the influence on instructor credibility and situational motivation. Communication Research Reports, 14, 431–440. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/08824099709388686
    Martinello, M. L. (1998). Learning to question for inquiry. Educational Forum, 62, 164–171. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00131729808983803
    Martino, A. M., & Maher, C. A. (1999). Teacher questioning to stimulate justification and generalization in mathematics: What research practice has taught us. Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 18(1), 53–78. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0732-3123%2899%2900017-6
    Marzano, R. J., & Kendall, J. S. (2006). The new taxonomy of educational objectives (
    2nd ed.
    ). Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
    Maslow, A. H. (1968). Toward a psychology of being. Princeton, NJ: Van Nostrand.
    Maslow, A. H. (1971). Peak experiences in education and art. Theory Into Practice, 10(3), 149–153. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00405847109542321
    Mayer, R. (2004). Should there be a three-strike rule against pure discovery learning? The case for guided methods of instruction. American Psychologist, 59, 14–19. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.59.1.14
    Mayesky, M. (2002). Creative activities for young children (
    7th ed.
    ). New York: Thomson Delmar Learning.
    McClain, C. H. (1993). Teacher–paraeducator relationships in special education classrooms. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Nebraska.
    McCombs, B. L. (1999). Defining tools for teacher reflection: The Assessment of Learner-Centered Practices (ALCP). (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 478622) (See also http://www.charysma-online.com)
    McCombs, B., & Marzano, R. (1990). Putting the self in self-regulated learning: The self as agent in integrating will and skill. Educational Psychologist, 25, 51–69. http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/s15326985ep2501_5
    McCombs, B. L., & Miller, L. (2007). Learner-centered classroom practices and assessments: Maximizing student motivation, learning, and achievement. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
    McCombs, B. L., & Whistler, J. S. (1997). Learner-centered classroom and school: Strategies for increasing student motivation and achievement. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
    McFarlane, A. H., Bellissimo, A., & Norman, G. R. (1995). Family structure, family functioning and adolescent well-being: The transcendent influence of parental style. Journal of Child Psychology, 36(5), 847–864. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-7610.1995.tb01333.x
    McGlone, M. S., & Aronson, J. (2006). Stereotype threat, identity salience, and spatial reasoning. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 27(5), 486–493. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.appdev.2006.06.003
    McKeachie, W. J. (1986). Teaching tips: A guidebook for the beginning college teacher (
    8th ed.
    ). Lexington, MA: D. C. Heath.
    McKeachie, W. J. (1997). Student ratings: The validity of use. American Psychologist, 52(11), 1218–1225. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.52.11.1218
    McKenzie, K. B., & Scheurich, J. J. (2004). Equity traps: A useful construct for preparing principals to lead schools that are successful with racially diverse students. Educational Administration Quarterly, 40(5), 601–632. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0013161X04268839
    McVee, M. B., Dunsmore, K., & Gavelek, J. R. (2005). Schema theory revisited. Review of Educational Research, 75(4), 531–566. http://dx.doi.org/10.3102/00346543075004531
    MedStat Health and Productivity Research. (2005). Health and productivity research: Recent publications and presentations. Retrieved August 19, 2008, from http://www.medstat.com/uploadedFiles/docs/074-HPM_Publications_Presentations.pdf
    Mehan, H. (1979). Learning lessons: Social organization in the classroom. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
    Mehrabian, A. (1971). Silent messages. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
    Meltzer, D. E., & Manivannan, K. (2002). Transforming the lecture-hall environment: The fully interactive physics lecture. American Journal of Physics, 70(6), 639–654. http://dx.doi.org/10.1119/1.1463739
    Merrill, M. (2007). Revitalize your teaching through collaboration and integration. In R.Stone (Ed.), Best practices for teaching writing: What award winning classroom teachers do (pp. 79–80). Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
    Mezirow, J., and Associates. (2000). Learning as transformation: Critical perspectives on a theory in progress. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
    Monroe, C. (2006). African American boys and the discipline gap: Balancing educators' uneven hand. Educational Horizons, 84(2), 102–111.
    Moon, T. R., Callahan, G. M., & Tomlinson, G. A. (2003, April 28). Effects of state testing programs on elementary schools with high concentrations of student poverty: Good news or bad news?Current Issues in Education, 6(8). Retrieved June 6, 2008, from http://cie.asu.edu/volume6/number8/index.html
    Motschnig-Pitrik, R. (2005). Person-centered E-learning in action: Can technology help to manifest person-centered values in academic environments?Journal of Humanistic Psychology, 45(4), 503–530. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0022167805279816
    Mühlhäuser-Link, S., Aich, G., Wetzel, S., Kormann, G., & Behr, M. (2008). The dialogue between teachers and parents: Concepts and outcomes of a communication training. In M.Behr & J. H. D.Cornelius-White (Eds.), Facilitating young people's development: International perspectives on person-centered theory and practice (pp. 176–197). Ross-On-Wye, UK: PCCS Books.
    Myers, S. A., & Bryant, L. E. (2004). College students' perceptions of how instructors convey credibility. Qualitative Research Reports in Communication, 5, 22–27.
    Naizer, G. L. (1997). Validity and reliability issues of performance-portfolio assessment. Action in Teacher Education, 18(4), 1–9. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01626620.1997.10463359
    National Center for Educational Statistics. (1998). Pursuing excellence: A study of U.S. twelfth grade mathematics and science achievement in international context: Initial findings from the third international mathematics and science study. Washington, DC: Office of Education Research and Improvement, U.S. Department of Education. Retrieved August 19, 2008, from http://nces.ed.gov/pubs98/twelfth/
    National Center for Educational Statistics. (2002). Overview of Public Elementary and Secondary Schools and Districts: Year 2001–02. Washington, DC: Author. Retrieved August 7, 2008, from http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2003/overview03/tables/table_11.asp
    National Center for Educational Statistics. (2005). Indicators of school crime and safety: 2005. Washington, DC: Author. Retrieved March 4, 2008, from http://nces.ed.gov/programs/crimeindicators/crimeindicators2005/Indicators.asp?PubPageNumber=1
    National Center for Educational Statistics. (2006). Supplemental notes. Note 2: The current population survey (CPS). Washington, DC: Author. Retrieved March 4, 2008, from http://nces.ed.gov/programs/coe/2006/supnotes/n02.asp
    National Center for Educational Statistics. (2007). Status and trends in the education of racial and ethnic minorities. Washington, DC: Office of Education Research and Improvement, U.S. Department of Education. Retrieved August 19, 2008, from http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2007/minoritytrends/
    National Center on Education and the Economy. (2006). Tough choices or tough times: The report of the new commission on the skills of the American workforce (Executive summary). Retrieved January 12, 2008, from http://skillscommission.org/pdf/exec_sum/ToughChoices_EXECSUM.pdf
    National Center on Education and the Economy. (2007). Tough choices or tough times. Retrieved August 8, 2007, from http://www.skillscommission.org
    National Child Abuse and Neglect Data System. (2007). Child maltreatment 2005. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office. Retrieved August 19, 2008, from http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/cb/pubs/cm05/index.htm
    National Commission on Teaching and America's Future (NCTAF). (2003). No dream denied: A pledge to America's children. Retrieved August 7, 2007, from http://www.nctaf.org
    National Endowment for the Arts. (2007). To read or not to read: A question of national importance (Research Report #47). Washington, DC: Author. Retrieved August 19, 2008, from http://www.nea.gov/research/ToRead.pdf
    NGA Center for Best Practices. (2000). Teacher supply and demand: Is there a shortage?Washington, DC: National Governor's Association. Retrieved August 22, 2008, from http://www.nga.org/Files/pdf/000125TEACHERS.pdf
    Nichols, S. L., & Berliner, D. C. (2007). Collateral damage: How high-stakes testing corrupts America's schools. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Education Press.
    Noddings, N. (1984). Caring: A feminine approach to ethics and moral education. Berkeley: University of California Press.
    Noddings, N. (1992). The challenge to care in schools: An alternative approach to education. New York: Teachers College Press.
    Noddings, N. (1994). Does everybody count? Reflections on reforms in school mathematics. Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 13(1), 89–104. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0732-3123%2894%2990040-X
    Noddings, N. (2003). Happiness and education. New York: Cambridge University Press. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511499920
    Noddings, N. (2006). Critical lessons: What our schools should teach. New York: Cambridge University Press. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511804625
    Noddings, N. (2007). When school reform goes wrong. Amsterdam, NY: Teachers College Press.
    O'Hara, M. (2007). Psychological literacy for an emerging global society: Another look at Rogers' “persons of tomorrow” as a model. Person-Centered and Experiential Psychotherapies, 6(1), 45–60. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/14779757.2007.9688427
    Orfield, G., Losen, D., Wald, J., & Swanson, C. (2004). Losing our future: How minority youth are being left behind by the graduation rate crisis. Cambridge, MA: The Civil Rights Project at Harvard University, the Urban Institute, Advocates for Children in New York, & the Civil Society Institute.
    Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2002). Education at a Glance. Paris: Author. Retrieved August 8, 2008, from http://stats.oecd.org/glossary/detail.asp?ID=5388
    Oyesserman, D., Gant, L., & Ager, J. (1995). A socially contextualized model of African American identity: Possible selves and school persistence. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 69, 1216–1232. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.69.6.1216
    Palincsar, A. S. (1998). Social constructivist perspectives on teaching and learning. Annual Review of Psychology, 49, 345–375. http://dx.doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.49.1.345
    Palmer, P. J. (1998). The courage to teach: Exploring the inner landscape of a teacher's life. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
    Patillo, J., & Vaughn, E. (1992). Learning centers for child-centered classrooms. Washington, DC: National Education Association.
    Patterson, C. H. (1973). Humanistic education. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
    Patterson, C. H. (2006). Education and the humanistic crisis. The Person-Centered Journal, 13, 7–11.
    Patterson, C. H., & Hidore, S. C. (1997). Successful psychotherapy: A caring, loving relationship. Northvale, NJ: Jason Aronson.
    Patterson, T. G., & Joseph, S. (2007). Person-centered personality theory: Support from self-determination theory and positive psychology. Journal of Humanistic Psychology, 47(1), 117–139. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0022167806293008
    Pelham, A. S. (2007). Over-representation of African-Americans in suspensions in Metro/Nashville public schools (Tennessee). Dissertation Abstracts International Section A: Humanities and Social Sciences, 68(3-A), 825.
    Perkins, D. N., & Salomon, G. (1989). Are cognitive skills context-bound?Educational Researcher, 18(1), 16–25. http://dx.doi.org/10.3102/0013189X018001016
    Peterson, R. W. (1994). School readiness considered from a neuro-cognitive perspective. Early Education and Development5(2), 120–140. http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/s15566935eed0502_4
    Piaget, J. (1972). The psychology of the child. New York: Basic Books.
    Piaget, J. (1990). The child's conception of the world. New York: Littlefield Adams.
    Pianta, R. C. (1996). High-risk children in schools: Constructing sustainable relationships. New York: Routledge.
    Pianta, R. C. (2006). Classroom management and relationships between children and teachers: Implications for research and practice. In C. M.Evertson & C. S.Weinstein (Eds.), Handbook of classroom management: Research, practice, and contemporary issues (pp. 685–710). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
    Pifer, D. A. (2000). Getting in trouble: The meaning of school for “problem” students. The Qualitative Report, 5, 1/2. Retrieved August 20, 2008, from http://www.nova.edu/ssss/QR/QR5-1/pifer.html
    Plomin, R., Pedersen, N. L., Lichtenstein, P., & McClearn, G. E. (1994). Variability and stability in cognitive abilities are largely genetic later in life. Behavior Genetics, 24(3), 207–215. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF01067188
    Poplin, M., & Weeres, J. (1992). Voices from the inside: A report on schooling from inside the classroom. Part one: Naming the problem. Claremont, CA: The Institute for Education in Transformation at the Claremont Graduate School.
    Pogue, L., & AhYun, K. (2006). The effect of teacher nonverbal immediacy and credibility on student motivation and affective learning. Communication Education, 55, 331–344. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03634520600748623
    Prenksy, M. (2001). Digital natives, digital immigrants. On the Horizon, 9(5), 1–6. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/10748120110424816
    Prensky, M. (2008). Turning on the lights. Educational Leadership, 65(6), 40–45.
    Prevost, F. J. (1996). A new way of teaching. Journal of Education, 178(1), 49–59.
    Public Agenda Foundation. (2004). Attitudes about teaching. New York: Public Agenda Foundation. Retrieved August 21, 2008, from http://www.publicagenda.org/files/pdf/attitudes_about_teaching.pdf
    Pugalee, D. K. (1999). Constructing a model of mathematical literacy. Clearing House, 73, 19–22. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00098659909599632
    Purkey, W. W. (2006). Teaching class clowns (and what they can teach us). Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
    Purkey, W. W., & Novak, J. M. (1996). Inviting school success: A self-concept approach to teaching, learning, and democratic practice. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
    Purkey, W. W., & Novak, J. M. (2008). Fundamentals of invitational education. Kennesaw, GA: International Alliance for Invitational Education.
    Purkey, W. W., & Strahan, D. B. (2002). Inviting positive classroom discipline. Westerville, OH: National Middle School Association. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 473511)
    Raffini, J. P. (1996). 150 ways to increase intrinsic motivation in the classroom. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
    Ralph, E. G. (2005). College teaching. New York: Novinka.
    Ramachandran, V. S. (2006). Mirror neurons and imitation learning as the driving force behind “the great leap forward” in human evolution. Edge Foundation. Retrieved January 25, 2008, from http://www.edge.org/3rd_culture/ramachandran06/ramachandran06_index.html
    Raskin, N. J. (2005). The nondirective attitude. The Person-Centered Journal, 12, 5–22.
    Ratner, C., & Hui, L. (2003). Theoretical and methodological problems in cross-cultural psychology. Journal for the Theory of Social Behavior, 33(1), 67–94. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1468-5914.00206
    Ray, D., Bratton, S., Rhine, T., & Jones, L. (2001). The effectiveness of play therapy: Responding to the critics. International Journal of Play Therapy, 10(1), 85–108. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/h0089444
    Redfield, D. L., & Rousseau, E. W. (1981). A meta-analysis of experimental research on teacher questioning behavior. Review of Educational Research, 51(2), 237–245. http://dx.doi.org/10.3102/00346543051002237
    Redl, F., & Wattenberg, W. W. (1951). Mental hygiene in teaching. New York: Harcourt, Brace.
    Reilly, D. H. (2005). Learner-centered education: Successful student learning in a non-linear environment. Baltimore: Publish America.
    Reys, R. E., Lindquist, M. M., Lambdin, D. V., Smith, N. L., & Suydam, M. N. (2003). Helping children learn mathematic (
    6th ed.
    ). New York: J. Wiley.
    Rice, K., & Dawley, L. (2007, November). Going virtual! The status of professional development for K–12 teachers. Retrieved March 20, 2008, from http://edtech.boisestate.edu/goingvirtual/goingvirtua11.pdf
    Rice, L. N. (1974). The evocative function of the therapist. In D. A.Wexler & L. N.Rice (Eds.), Innovations in client-centered therapy (pp. 289–311). New York: Wiley.
    Richmond, V. P., McCroskey, J. C., Kearney, P., & Plax, T. G. (1987). Power in the classroom: VII. Linking behavior alteration techniques to cognitive learning. Communication Education, 36(1), 1–12. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03634528709378636
    Rickard, H. C., Rogers, R., Ellis, N. R., & Beidleman, W. B. (1988). Some retention, but not enough. Teaching of Psychology, 15(3), 151–152. http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/s15328023top1503_14
    Riner, P. S. (2000). Successful teaching in the elementary classroom. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill.
    Rogers, C. R. (1951). Client-centered therapy. London: Constable.
    Rogers, C. R. (1959). A theory of therapy, personality, and interpersonal relationship as developed in the client-centered framework. In S.Koch (Ed.), Psychology: A study of science. Formulations of the person and the social context (pp. 184–256). New York: McGraw-Hill.
    Rogers, C. R. (1969). Freedom to learn: A view of what education might become. Columbus, OH: Charles E. Merrill.
    Rogers, C. R. (1980). A way of being. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
    Rogers, C. R. (1983). Freedom to learn for the 80's. Columbus, OH: Charles E. Merrill.
    Rogers, C. R., & Freiberg, H. (1994). Freedom to learn (
    3rd ed.
    ). New York: Merrill/Macmillan.
    Rosenberg, M. S., & Jackman, L. A. (2003). Development, implementation, and sustainability of comprehensive school-wide behavior management systems. Intervention in School and Clinic, 39(1), 10–21. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/10534512030390010201
    Rosenshine, B., & Stevens, R. (1986). Teaching functions. In M. C.Wittrock (Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching (
    3rd ed.
    , pp. 376–391). New York: Macmillan.
    Rosenthal, B. S. (1994). The impact of social support on staying in school: A preliminary report. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans, LA. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 380343)
    Rosenthal, R., & Rubin, D. B. (1978). Interpersonal expectancy effects: The first 345 studies. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 1(3), 377–415. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X00075506
    Rosnow, R. L., Rosenthal, R., & Rubin, D. B. (2000). Contrasts and correlations in effect-size estimation. Psychological Science, 11(6), 446–453. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1467-9280.00287
    Rowley, J. B. (1999). The good mentor. Educational Leadership, 56(8), 20–22.
    Rubalcava, M. (2005). Let kids come first. Educational Leadership, 62(8), 70–72.
    Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. American Psychologist, 55, 68–78. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.55.1.68
    Sachse, R., & Elliott, R. (2001). Process-outcome research on humanistic therapy variables. In D. J.Cain & J.Seeman (Eds.), Humanistic psychotherapies: Handbook of research and practice (pp. 83–115). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
    Sackett, P. R., Hardison, C. M., & Cullen, M. J. (2005). On interpreting research on stereotype threat and test performance. American Psychologist, 60(3), 271–272. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.60.3.271
    Sapon-Shevin, M. (1999). Because we can change the world: A practical guide to building cooperative, inclusive classroom communities. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
    Schellenberg, E. G. (2006). Long-term positive associations between music lessons and IQ. Journal of Educational Psychology, 98(2), 457–468. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.98.2.457
    Schmid, C. L. (2001). Educational achievement, language-minority students, and the new second generation. Sociology of Education, Extra Issue, 71–87. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2673254
    School discipline: An uneven hand. (2002, March 15). Seattle Post-Intelligencer. Retrieved August 11, 2008, from http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/disciplinegap/
    Schratz, M., & Walker, R. (2001). Research as social change: New opportunities for qualitative research. New York: Routledge.
    Seeman, J. (2001). On congruence: A human system paradigm. In G.Wyatt (Ed.), Congruence (Vol. 1, pp. 200–212). Ross-on-Wye, UK: PCCS Books.
    Seeman, J. (2008). Psychotherapy and the fully functioning person. Bloomington, IN: AuthorHouse.
    Shavelson, R. J., Baxter, G. P., & Gao, X. (1993). Sampling variability of performance assessments. Journal of Educational Management, 30(3), 215–232.
    Shonkoff, J. P., & Phillips, D. A. (Eds.). (2000). From neurons to neighborhoods: The science of early childhood development. Washington, DC: National Academy Press. Retrieved December 26, 2006, from http://orsted.nap.edu/openbook.php?record_id=9824&page=R1
    Sirin, S. R. (2005). Socioeconomic status and academic achievement: A meta-analytic review of research. Review of Educational Research, 75(3), 417–453. http://dx.doi.org/10.3102/00346543075003417
    Slater, P. E. (1962). Parental behavior and the personality of the child. Journal of Genetic Psychology, 101, 53–68. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00221325.1962.10533613
    Slavin, R. E. (1994). Roots and wings: Inspiring academic excellence. Educational Leadership, 52(3), 10–13.
    Slavin. R. E. (1995). Cooperative learning: Theory, research, and practice (
    2nd ed.
    ). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
    Slavin, R. E. (2000). Educational psychology: Theory and practice (
    6th ed.
    ). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
    Sleeter, C. E. (1989). Doing multicultural education across grade levels and subject areas: A case study of Wisconsin. Teaching and Teacher Education, 5(3), 189–203. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0742-051X%2889%2990003-6
    Smith, T. M., & Ingersoll, R. M. (2004). What are the effects of induction and mentoring on beginning teacher turnover?American Educational Research Journal, 41(3), 681–714. http://dx.doi.org/10.3102/00028312041003681
    Snyder, C. R., Shorey, H. S., & Rand, K. L. (2006). Using hope theory to teach and mentor academically at-risk students. In W.Buskist & S. F.Davis (Eds.), Handbook of the teaching of psychology (pp. 170–174). Malden, MA: Blackwell. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/9780470754924.ch29
    Solomon, D., Battistich, V., & Hom, A. (1996). Teacher beliefs and practices in schools serving communities that differ in socioeconomic level. Journal of Experimental Education, 64(4), 327–347.
    Spradlin, T. E., & Prendergast, K. A. (2006). Emerging trends in teacher recruitment and retention in the No Child Left Behind era. Education Policy Brief, 4(12), 1–16.
    Sprinkle, R., Hunt, S., Simonds, C., & Comadena, M. (2006). Fear in the classroom: An examination of teachers' use of fear appeals and students' learning outcomes. Communication Education, 55(4), 389–402. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03634520600879170
    Stathopoulou, G., Powers, M. B., Berry, A. C., Smits, J. A. J., & Otto, M. W. (2006). Exercise interventions for mental health: A quantitative and qualitative review. Clinical Psychology: Science and Practice, 13, 179–193. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2850.2006.00021.x
    Steele, C. M. (1997). A threat in the air: How stereotypes shape intellectual identity and performance. American Psychologist, 52, 613–629. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.52.6.613
    Steele, C. M. (2004). Not just a test. The Nation. Retrieved May 20, 2008, from http://www.thenation.com/doc/20040503/steele
    Steele, C. M., & Aronson, J. (1995). Stereotype threat and the intellectual test performance of African Americans. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 69(5), 797–811. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.69.5.797
    Stevens, J., & Goldberg, D. (2001). For the learners' sake: Brain-based instruction for the 21st century. Tucson, AZ: Zephyr Press.
    Stevens, R. J., & Slavin, R. E. (1995). The cooperative elementary school: Effects on students' achievement, attitudes, and social relations. American Educational Research Journal, 32(2), 321–351. http://dx.doi.org/10.3102/00028312032002321
    Stringer, E. T. (1996). Action research: A handbook for practitioners. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
    Subotnik, R. F., Karp, D. E., & Morgan, E. R. (1989). High IQ children at midlife: An investigation into the generalizability of Terman's genetic studies of genius. Roeper Review, 11(3), 139–144. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02783198909553190
    Subramony, D. P. (2003). Dale's cone revisited: Critically examining the misapplication of a nebulous theory to guide practice. Educational Technology, 43(4), 25–30.
    Sue, D. W., & Sue, D. (2003). Counseling the culturally diverse: Theory and practice (
    4th ed.
    ). New York: John Wiley & Sons.
    Supovitz, J. A., & Brennan, R. T. (1997). Mirror, mirror on the wall, which is the fairest test of all? An examination of the equitability of portfolio assessment relative to standardized tests. Harvard Educational Review, 67(3), 472–506.
    Teachers College. (2005). Achievement gap: Facts and figures. Press release from June 9, 2005. Retrieved February 21, 2008, from http://www.tc.columbia.edu/news/article.htm?id=5183
    Terman, L. M. (1954). The discovery and encouragement of exceptional talent. American Psychologist, 9(6), 221–230. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/h0060516
    Teven, J. J., & Hanson, T. L. (2004). The impact of teacher immediacy and perceived caring on teacher competence and trustworthiness. Communication Quarterly, 52, 39–53. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01463370409370177
    Teven, J. J., & Herring, J. E. (2002). Teacher power in the classroom: A preliminary investigation of instructor power, perceived credibility, and student satisfaction. Retrieved June 5, 2006, from http://www.wtamu.edu/~jteven/teachpower.html
    Teven, J. J., & McCroskey, J. C. (1996). The relationship of perceived teacher caring with student learning and teacher evaluation. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Speech Communication Association, San Diego, CA. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 407690)
    Thalheimer, W. (2006). People remember 10%, 20% … Oh really? Will at Work Learning. Retrieved February 7, 2008, from http://www.willatworklearning.com/2006/05/people_remember.html
    Theroux, P. (2007). Enhance learning with technology. Retrieved September 16, 2006, from http://members.shaw.ca/priscillatheroux/motivation.html (Original work published 1994)
    Tomlinson, C. A. (1999). The differentiated classroom: Responding to the needs of all learners. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
    Tomlinson, C. A. (2001). How to differentiate instruction in mixed-ability classrooms. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
    Tomlinson, C. A. (2004). Sharing responsibility for differentiating instruction. Roper Review, 26, 188. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02783190409554268
    Tomlinson, C. A., & Allan, S. D. (2000). Leadership for differentiating schools and classrooms. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
    Tomlinson, J. (1999). Globalization and culture. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
    Toppo, G. (2004). 48 school deaths highest in years: Law enforcement cites gangs, budget cuts. http://HazingLaw.com. Retrieved February 7, 2008, from http://www.hazinglaw.com/schooldeaths.htm
    Truong, T. M., Griswold, W. G., Ratto, M., & Star, S. L. (2002, July). The ActiveClass Project: Experiments in encouraging classroom participation (Technical report CS2002–0715). San Diego: University of California, Computer Science and Engineering.
    University of Wisconsin. (2006). National Survey of Student Engagement: An overview of the results of the 2006 National Survey of Student Engagement. Eau Claire, WI: Author.
    Unrau, N. (1997). Thoughtful teachers, thoughtful students. Scarborough, Ontario, Canada: Pippin.
    Urdan, T., Midgely, C., & Anderman, E. M. (1998). The role of classroom goal structure in students' use of self-handicapping strategies. American Educational Research Journal, 35(1), 101–122. http://dx.doi.org/10.3102/00028312035001101
    Valenzuela, A. (1999). Subtractive schooling: U. S. Mexican youth and the politics of caring. New York: State University of New York Press.
    Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
    Vygotsky, L. S. (1980). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
    Vygotsky, L. S. (1986). Thought and language. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. (Original work published 1962)
    Warren, J. R., & Halpern-Manners, A. (2007). “Is the glass emptying or filling up? Reconciling divergent trends in high school completion and dropout.”Educational Researcher, 36, 335–343. http://dx.doi.org/10.3102/0013189X07306580
    Watson, J., & Ryan, J. (2007). Keeping pace with online learning 2007. Evergreen, CO: Evergreen Consulting Associates.
    Watson, M., & Battistich, V. (2006). Building and sustaining caring communities. In C. M.Evertson & C. S.Weinstein (Eds.), Handbook of classroom management: Research, practice, and contemporary issues (pp. 253–279). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
    Weigert, K. M., & Crews, J. (Ed.). (1999). Teaching for justice: Concepts and models for service-learning in peace studies. Washington, DC: American Association for Higher Education.
    Weimer, M. (2002). Learner-centered teaching: Five key changes to practice. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
    Weiner, I. B., Freedheim, D. K., Schinka, J. A., & Velicer, W. F. (2003). Handbook of psychology. John Wiley & Sons. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/0471264385
    Weinstein, C. (1998). “I want to be nice, but I have to be mean”: Exploring prospective teachers' conceptions of caring and order. Teaching and Teacher Education, 14(2), 153–163. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0742-051X%2897%2900034-6
    Wellesley College, Center for Research on Women, American Association of University Women, & Educational Foundation. (1992). How schools shortchange girls—The AAUW report: A study of major findings on girls and education. Washington, DC: AAUW Educational Foundation, National Education Association.
    Wentzel, K. R. (2002). Are effective teachers like good parents? Teaching styles and student adjustment in early adolescence. Child Development, 73, 287–301. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1467-8624.00406
    Wheatley, M., & Frieze, D. (2007). Beyond networking: How large-scale change really happens. School Administrator, 64(4), 35–38.
    Whitehead, U. O. (2007). African-American students' perceptions of teacher attitudes on academic achievement and discipline sanctions. Dissertation Abstracts International Section A: Humanities and Social Sciences, 68(6-A), 2275.
    Wicker, B., Keysers, C., Plailly, J., Royet, J.-P., Gallese, V., & Rizzolatti, G. (2003). Both of us disgusted in my insula: The common neural basis of seeing and feeling disgust. Neuron, 40, 655–664. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0896-6273%2803%2900679-2
    Wicker, B., Ruby, P., Royet, J.-P., & Fonlupt, P. (2003). A relation between rest and the self in the brain?Brain Research Reviews, 43(2), 224–230. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.brainresrev.2003.08.003
    Wieder, G. S. (1951). A comparison study of the relative effectiveness of two methods of teaching a thirty-hour course in psychology in modifying attitudes associated with racial, religious, and ethnic prejudice (Ph.D. dissertation, New York University, 1951). Dissertation Abstracts International, 12, 02, 0163.
    Wiggins, G. P., & McTighe, J. (2005). Understanding by design. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
    Williams, B. (Ed.). (2003). Closing the achievement gap: A vision for changing beliefs and practices (
    2nd ed.
    ). Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
    Wittenbrink, B., Judd, C. M., & Park, B. (1997). Evidence for racial prejudice at the implicit level and its relationship with questionnaire measures. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology, 72(2), 262–274. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.72.2.262
    Wolter-Gustafson, C. (2008). Non-dualism and non-directivity: A person-centered concept of health and the fully functioning person. In B.Levitt (Ed.), Reflections on human potential: Bridging the person-centered approach and positive psychology (pp. 147–160). Ross-on-Wye, UK: PCCS Books.
    Wong, K. K., & Nicotera, A. (2007). Successful schools and educational accountability: Concepts and skills to meet leadership challenges. Boston: Pearson.
    Wood, G. H. (1992). Schools that work: America's most innovative public education programs. New York: Dutton.
    Wubbels, T. (1993). Teacher–student relationships in science and mathematics classes: What research says to the science and mathematics teacher (No. 11). Perth, Australia: Key Centre for School Science and Mathematics, Curtin University of Technology.
    Wubbels, T. (2006). Classroom management around the world. In M.Hayden, J.Levy, J. J.Thompson (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of research in international education (pp. 267–279). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. http://dx.doi.org/10.4135/9781848607866
    Wubbels, T., Brekelmans, M., den Brok, P., & van Tartwijk, J. (2006). An interpersonal perspective on classroom management in secondary classrooms in the Netherlands. In C. M.Everston & C. S.Weinstein (Eds.), Handbook of classroom management: Research, practice, and contemporary issues (pp. 1161–1192). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
    Yoshida, M., Fernandez, C., & Stigler, J. W. (1993). Japanese and American students' differential recognition memory for teachers' statements during a mathematics lesson. Journal of Educational Psychology, 85(4), 610–617. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.85.4.610
    Zevenbergen, R. (2001). Mathematics, social class, and linguistic capital: An analysis of mathematics classroom interactions. In B.Atweh, H.Forgasz, & B.Nebres (Eds.), Sociocultural research on mathematics education: An international perspective (pp. 201–216). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
    Zimmerman, B. J., Greenberg, D., & Weinstein, C. (1994). Self-regulating academic study time: A strategy approach. In D. H.Schunk & B. J.Zimmerman (Eds.), Self-regulation of learning and performance: Issues and educational applications (pp. 181–202). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

    About the Authors

    Jeffrey H. D. Cornelius-White, PsyD, LPC, is associate professor in the Department of Counseling, Leadership, and Special Education, Provost's Fellow for Teaching and Learning, at Missouri State University (MSU) in Springfield, and adjunct assistant professor for the Cooperative EdD Program in Educational Leadership and Policy Analysis at the University of Missouri–Columbia. He is chair of the board of the World Association for Person-Centered and Experiential Psychotherapy and Counseling, coeditor of The Person-Centered Journal, content editor of the Journal of Border Educational Research, and coeditor of the 2008 book with PCCS entitled Facilitating Young People's Development: International Perspectives on Person-Centered Theory and Practice. He has also been a Dean's Fellow, Service-Learning Fellow, and Program Director for School Counseling at MSU. His 50 publications have been mostly concerned with person-centered and social justice issues in education, psychology, and counseling. Jef is the father of two children, Evan and Avery, and partner to his wife, Cecily. He enjoys biking, swimming, reading, and playing with his kids.

    Adam P. Harbaugh is an assistant professor of curriculum and instruction in the Department of Middle, Secondary, and K–12 Education at the University of North Carolina at Charlotte. He primarily teaches middle and secondary methods courses. Adam holds master's and PhD degrees in curriculum and instruction and bachelor's and master's degrees in mathematics. Adam is also a certified middle grades and secondary mathematics teacher with experience in middle- and high-school mathematics classrooms. Adam's publications and research interests are centered on supporting teachers' effective use of communications, problem solving, and technology in their mathematics classrooms. He is an associate editor of School Science and Mathematics Journal. Adam is the father of two children, Sarah and Jackson, and partner to his wife, Rebecca. He enjoys running, photography, racquetball, and spending time with his family.


    • Loading...
Back to Top

Copy and paste the following HTML into your website