ethanporcaro/eric-fulltext-meta huggingface dataset:
Vermont Public School Dropout and High School Completion Report for the 2009-2010 School Year
Author: Vermont Department of Education
Date: 2011-04-00
Type: Numerical/Quantitative Data
Subjects: Public Schools,Dropout Rate,Graduation Rate,Enrollment Trends,High School Graduates,Elementary Schools,Middle Schools,High Schools,Grade 7,Grade 8,Grade 9,Grade 10,Grade 11,Grade 12,Females,Males,Economically Disadvantaged,Disabilities,English Language Learners,Race

The annual event dropout rate describes the proportion of students who leave school each year without completing a high school program. The event dropout rates for the school year 2009-2010 of 1.89% for grades 7 through 12th and 2.69% for grades 9 through 12th are consistent with the dropout rates for the past four years. The event completion rate data for school year 2009-2010 are reported alongside with a cohort graduation rate for the class of 2010. The event completion rate represents the number of students enrolled in the senior class who graduate or complete school at the end of their senior year. The statewide event completion rate for school year 2009-2010 is 93.16%. The cohort graduation rate is the percentage of students from a given class who receive a high school diploma. The cohort graduation rate for the class of 2010 is 87.46%. Dropout Information is appended. (Contains 1 figure and 11 tables.) [For the 2008-2009 edition of this report, see ED536805.]
Vermont Public School Dropout and High School Completion Report for the 2010-2011 School Year
Author: Vermont Department of Education
Date: 2012-03-00
Type: Reports - Evaluative
Subjects: Public Schools,Dropout Rate,Graduation Rate,Enrollment Trends,High School Graduates,Elementary Schools,Middle Schools,High Schools,Grade 7,Grade 8,Grade 9,Grade 10,Grade 11,Grade 12,Females,Males,Economically Disadvantaged,Disabilities,English Language Learners,Race

The annual event dropout rate describes the proportion of students who leave school each year without completing a high school program. The event dropout rates for the school year 2010-2011 of 1.77% for grades 7 through 12th and 2.55% for grades 9 through 12th are consistent with the dropout rates for the past four years. The event completion rate data for school year 2010-2011 are reported alongside with a cohort graduation rate for the class of 2011. The event completion rate represents the number of students enrolled in the senior class who graduate or complete school at the end of their senior year. The statewide event completion rate for school year 2010-2011 is 92.82%. The cohort graduation rate is the percentage of students from a given class who receive a high school diploma. The cohort graduation rate for the class of 2011 is 87.46%. Dropout Information is appended. (Contains 1 figure and 11 tables.) [For the 2009-2010 edition of this report, see ED536806.]
How Art Works: The National Endowment for the Arts' Five-Year Research Agenda, with a System Map and Measurement Model. Appendix A & B
Author: National Endowment for the Arts
Date: 2012-09-00
Type: Reports - Descriptive
Subjects: Art,Research Projects,Art Education,Creative Activities,Participation,Economic Impact,Community Benefits,Individual Development,Innovation,Art Expression,Data,Research Design

This paper presents two appendices supporting the "How Art Works: The National Endowment for the Arts' Five-Year Research Agenda, with a System Map and Measurement Model" report. In Appendix A, brief descriptions of relevant studies and datasets for each node in the "How Art Works" system map are presented. This appendix is meant to supply examples of how such concepts are discussed in the literature and (in some cases) which variables may be used for future research and metrics development. The list was compiled by Monitor Institute for the National Endowment for the Arts' Office of Research & Analysis (ORA). In Appendix B, the two phases of the "How Art Works" report are described. A list of participants is also included. (Contains 1 figure and 13 footnotes.) [For the full report, "How Art Works: The National Endowment for the Arts' Five-Year Research Agenda, with a System Map and Measurement Model," see ED536817.]
Encouraging Strong Family Relationships. State Policies That Work. Brief Number 6
Author: Center for the Study of Social Policy
Date: 2012-00-00
Type: Reports - Evaluative
Subjects: One Parent Family,Family Work Relationship,Family Life,Social Networks,Discussion,Parent Child Relationship,Family Relationship,State Policy,Well Being,Family Financial Resources,Marriage,Interpersonal Relationship,Costs,Child Care,Guidelines,Health Services,Early Parenthood,Pregnancy,Prevention,Contraception,Taxes,At Risk Persons,Health Insurance,Divorce,Family Violence,Parent Participation,Fathers,Child Custody,Child Welfare,Leaves of Absence,Services

The relational well-being of families is an important factor affecting a family's economic success, physical and mental heath, the readiness and success of children in school, and the engagement of youth in positive and productive roles. In short, the strength of family bonds is crucial to a family's capacity to provide, nurture, and care for its members. "Strong Family Relationships" is defined as the relational well-being of families. While the successful promotion of "strong family relationships" is clearly tied to ensuring family economic success and family health, this brief focuses primarily on strengthening the formation of families, the interaction of parents and children, the connection of families to social networks, and the adequacy and quality of necessary family resources. Addressing these many facets of family life is important given the dramatic changes and pressures associated with contemporary American family life. For example, fewer couples are marrying or are choosing to marry at later ages, more are cohabiting, increasing numbers of children will spend some part of their childhood in a single parent home, and rising health care, housing, and child care costs are making it difficult for families to balance the competing demands of work and family. This brief is a companion to a complete policy and research paper that provides an overview of current trends affecting American families and offers a beginning framework for state policies that strengthen family relationships. (Contains 72 endnotes.) [For the full report, "Encouraging Strong Family Relationships. Policy Matters: Setting and Measuring Benchmarks for State Policies. A Discussion Paper for the "Policy Matters" Project," see ED536821.]
A Coherent Approach to High School Improvement: A District and School Self-Assessment Tool
Author: Fryer, Lindsay
Date: 2012-03-00
Type: Reports - Descriptive
Subjects: Teacher Effectiveness,Stakeholders,Intervention,Leadership Effectiveness,Needs Assessment,Educational Change,High Schools,Dual Enrollment,Sustainability,School Restructuring,Educational Improvement,School Districts,Educational Policy,Educational Practices,Faculty Development,Accountability,School Effectiveness,Self Evaluation (Groups)

High school improvement initiatives often focus on specific intervention strategies, programs, or priority topics (e.g., dropout intervention, dual enrollment, freshman academies). However, research shows that systemic and sustainable improvement can be achieved only when initiatives are implemented with consideration for the broader education contexts in which they operate. The National High School Center has developed "A Coherent Approach to High School Improvement: A District and School Self-Assessment Tool" to help districts and schools assess their current high school education policies and practices, identify areas of strengths and limitations, and implement coherent school reform initiatives. The foundation for this self-assessment tool is the National High School Center's "Eight Elements of High School Improvement: A Mapping Framework." The eight elements of high school improvement are the following: (1) Rigorous Curriculum and Instruction; (2) Teacher Effectiveness and Professional Growth; (3) Stakeholder Engagement; (4) Organization and Structure; (5) Assessment and Accountability; (6) Student and Family Involvement; (7) Effective Leadership; and (8) Sustainability. The tool is composed of two primary sections that address each of the eight core elements of high school improvement; the first section is a self-assessment process and the second section focuses on next steps. The "Self-Assessment" section of the tool details specific "Indicators of Effectiveness," grouped into themed "Areas of Focus," which represent important school or district practices. The "Next Steps" section offers an approach to determine specific policies and practices that potentially address system gaps that relate to each key element. [For its related report, "A Coherent Approach to High School Improvement: A School and District Needs Assessment Tool," see ED511822.]
Twenty State Policies to Enhance States' Prosperity and Create Bright Futures for America's Children, Families and Communities. Policy Matters: 2008 Data Update
Author: Center for the Study of Social Policy
Date: 2008-03-00
Type: Numerical/Quantitative Data
Subjects: Educational Policy,Evidence,Policy Formation,State Policy,Best Practices,Change Strategies,Organizational Change,Trend Analysis,State Action,Minimum Wage,Tax Credits,Financial Policy,Finance Reform,Employee Assistance Programs,Insurance,Nutrition,Taxes,Health Services,Child Welfare,Family Relationship,Family Programs,Opportunities,Technical Assistance,Resource Allocation

As of March 2008, over half of U.S. states are facing projected budget shortfalls for the coming fiscal year. During economic downturns such as this, opportunities available to hard-working, low-wage families are diminished. These conditions create growing concerns for policymakers who must, with fewer state resources, enhance opportunities and provide relief to the affected families in their states. Policymakers want to know that the budgetary choices they make will be wise investments and accomplish their intended goals. To this end, the &quot;Policy Matters&quot; report can be a useful tool because it identifies evidence-based policies and assembles the most recent state data available in order to assist legislators, governors, and other leaders in making these critical decisions. The &quot;2008 update&quot; provides new information on policy measures and highlights key policy changes made by states since the 2007 &quot;Policy Matters&quot; update was published. By providing current information and data, &quot;Policy Matters&quot; can help policymakers, advocates, and researchers: (1) Identify opportunities for additional policy change within states; (2) Compare policy and policy changes across states; and (3) Examine trends by policy area. (Contains 113 endnotes.)
How Art Works: The National Endowment for the Arts' Five-Year Research Agenda, with a System Map and Measurement Model
Author: National Endowment for the Arts
Date: 2012-09-00
Type: Reports - Descriptive
Subjects: Art,Systems Approach,Art Education,Creative Activities,Participation,Quality of Life,Economic Impact,Community Benefits,Individual Development,Innovation,Art Expression,Research Administration,Measurement,Public Agencies,Research Projects

This report stems from a collaborative research inquiry into the nature and consequences of art in American life. Although it culminates in a research agenda for the National Endowment for the Arts, the document also proposes a way for the nation's cultural researchers, arts practitioners, policy-makers, and the general public to view, analyze, and discuss the arts as a dynamic, complex system. A system map of "how art works" can provide an opportunity to organize recurring themes and concepts. At a time when robust data collection and reporting drives the ability of most U.S. sectors to define themselves and demonstrate their worth, such a map can be all the more valuable. It allows people from diverse backgrounds and viewpoints to arrive at a shared understanding of how the system works, what are its key elements and relationships, and which external factors can alter the system's efficacy. It provides a cartography of current research and exposes gaps in knowledge. Beyond these merits, a system map offers a blueprint for future measurement goals and strategies, suggesting which variables are critical to study for the purpose of communicating impact. To a large extent, the "How Art Works" system map reflects the strengths, limitations, and potential of existing research on the arts. Alternatives to the map--or future iterations--may generate even better research questions and methodologies to explore the nature of art, its contributions to human and societal development, and its place in American life. (Contains 11 illustrations and 24 footnotes.) [For companion report, "How Art Works: The National Endowment for the Arts' Five-Year Research Agenda, with a System Map and Measurement Model. Appendix A & B," see ED536812.]
Growing and Sustaining Parent Engagement: A Toolkit for Parents and Community Partners
Author: Center for the Study of Social Policy
Date: 2010-12-00
Type: Guides - Non-Classroom
Subjects: Success,Parents,Parent Participation,Check Lists,Social Networks,Community Relations,Rating Scales

The Toolkit is a quick and easy guide to help support and sustain parent engagement. It provides how to's for implementing three powerful strategies communities can use to maintain and grow parent engagement work that is already underway: Creating a Parent Engagement 1) Roadmap, 2) Checklist and 3) Support Network. This toolkit includes information, examples, and helpful questions that parents and community partners can draw from as they jointly develop engagement strategies that reflect their unique priorities and communities. (Contains 5 resources.)
How the United States Funds the Arts. Third Edition
Author: National Endowment for the Arts
Date: 2012-11-00
Type: Reports - Descriptive
Subjects: Museums,Theaters,Private Sector,Financial Support,State Federal Aid,Donors,Incentives,Philanthropic Foundations,Art,Arts Centers,Public Agencies,Public Support,Cultural Centers,Tax Credits

The infrastructure for arts and cultural support in the United States is complex and adaptive. Citizens who enjoy the arts can choose from a wide array of drama, visual and media arts, dance, music, and literature available in formal and informal settings--theaters, museums, and concert halls, but also libraries, schools, places of worship, open-air venues, restaurants or nightclubs, and, via technology, at home or on the move. In the last two decades, the number of arts and cultural organizations has grown, even as revenues from sales and attendance have risen to all-time high levels. In the following chapters, this monograph identifies three basic types of financial support for the arts: (1) direct public funds awarded by the National Endowment for the Arts (NEA) and by state, regional, and local arts agencies; (2) funding from federal departments and agencies other than the NEA; and (3) private sector contributions, which make up the lion's share of contributed income for arts organizations. This third revenue stream flows from individual and corporate donors and from charity foundations, and it flows more smoothly because of incentives in the U.S. tax system.
The Role of Learning Progressions in Standards-Based Education Reform. Policy Brief. RB-52
Author: Mosher, Frederic A.
Date: 2011-09-00
Type: Reports - Evaluative
Subjects: Science Education,Foreign Countries,Educational Change,Instructional Improvement,Mathematics Education,Research and Development,Researchers,Role,Academic Standards,Consortia,Educational Improvement,Educational Policy

The concept of &quot;learning progressions&quot; has begun to show up in discussions of education policy and research as a potential answer to the question of how to specify what being &quot;on track&quot; might mean. A number of recent NRC (National Research Council) reports on science education highlight the concept (National Research Council, 2001; National Research Council, 2007). The National Science Foundation (NSF) is funding quite a bit of research and development on progressions in science and mathematics. Mathematics education researchers tend to use the term &quot;learning trajectories,&quot; or &quot;hypothetical learning trajectories,&quot; for an essentially equivalent concept. Some national education systems, and some of the Australian states, use the term in describing the levels of learning in their common curricula. As noted above, the idea informed the development of the Common Core Standards and turns up as well in the language of the two Common Core state assessment consortia. In the past three years, with support from Pearson Education and the William and Flora Hewlett Foundation, the Center on Continuous Instructional Improvement (CCII) organized two working groups of scholars and education researchers to review the concepts of learning progressions and learning trajectories as they are being applied in science and mathematics education; their purpose was to try to clarify what they are and what is known about them, and to assess their potential usefulness for informing the development of better standards, curricula, and assessments. As a result of these deliberations, CCII produced two reports, one for science and one for mathematics (Corcoran, Mosher, &amp; Rogat, 2009; Daro, Mosher, &amp; Corcoran, 2011). This policy brief reviews their conclusions and the implications of their findings for policy and for future research and development. (Contains 1 table and 2 footnotes.)
Measuring School Capacity, Maximizing School Improvement. Policy Brief. RB-53
Author: Beaver, Jessica K.
Date: 2012-07-00
Type: Reports - Evaluative
Subjects: Capacity Building,Program Content,Human Capital,School Personnel,Social Capital,School Culture,Alignment (Education),Educational Resources,Classification,Evaluation Criteria,Educational Change,Educational Improvement,Elementary Secondary Education

It is an oft-heard refrain in schools: &quot;These schools lack the capacity they need.&quot; Or, &quot;We need to build capacity in schools so that students can achieve.&quot; In district offices, statehouses, and elsewhere, the sentiment is repeated in various forms, but the term &quot;capacity&quot; is almost always used. What do education leaders mean when they use the word capacity? Some people use the word to mean the intangible behaviors or characteristics that are needed for a school to improve, while others use capacity as a synonym for ability or knowledge. Meanwhile, economists often talk about capacity in terms of quantities or outcomes that an organization is able to produce. Given the nearly ubiquitous use of the term in education policy discourse, the authors offer a common framework for analyzing capacity that educators, policymakers, and researchers alike can apply and understand with consistency. Their goal is not to provide an easy, new, one-sentence definition, but rather to create a shared language that can be applied to research and improvement efforts in schools. In this Policy Brief, they break capacity down into component parts, explaining how each one builds off the next and contributes to the overall concept. Their hope is that the four research-based components they suggest--human capital, social capital, program coherence, and resources (building on Hatch, 2009; Elmore, 2000; Fullan, 2000; Spillane &amp; Thompson, 1997; Corcoran &amp; Goertz, 1995)--will stimulate discussion of a widely accepted meaning of capacity in both research and practice. Their secondary goal is to demonstrate what it means to be a high-, medium-, or low-capacity school. Accordingly, they apply their components-based definition to data collected from 11 schools in Pennsylvania. After using the approach designed to assess school capacity, they classify each school as high, medium, or low and identify themes from the three resulting groups. This applied analysis allows them to provide a descriptive illustration of the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and challenges of each classification. (Contains 17 sources.)
Boosting Completion at Community Colleges: Time, Choice, Structure and the Significant Role of States. Policy Brief
Author: Complete College America
Date: 2010-08-31
Type: Reports - Descriptive
Subjects: Higher Education,College Graduates,Stakeholders,Community Colleges,Grants,Educational Change,Government Role,Accountability,Educational Legislation,State Legislation,Time to Degree,Program Administration,Course Selection (Students)

A new American majority of students is emerging on campuses, especially at community colleges. These students must delicately balance long hours at jobs they must have with the higher education they desire. Even though this emerging majority has fundamentally different needs, American higher education in general has been slow to change, continuing to deliver courses and programs designed decades ago and best suited for full-time, residential students. Time, choice and structure are the essential optics through which all higher education reforms must be viewed in order to maximize the likelihood of graduating more of today's students. Successful, large-scale programs and systems around the country have proven that by utilizing informed choice and structured delivery, students can successfully balance jobs and school--and are much more likely to graduate. To achieve the substantial gains in college completion Americans must have to compete, must reinvent American higher education. To do so, requires significant shared responsibility by all stakeholders, including government. More of the same will not do. States, as the leading investors in higher education, have the power and authority to demand more from higher education--and they have a moral obligation to do so. Complete College America's &quot;Essential Steps for States&quot; make clear that states can utilize powerful policy levers now to remove unnecessary obstacles and speed student success. By utilizing the NGA/CCA Common College Completion Metrics, yawning gaps in current data collection will be filled and states will be empowered with new tools to hold higher education accountable and inform reform design. The Administration can seize key opportunities to encourage states, incent needed reforms, and signal its clear interest in more college graduates, not just enrollments. Appended are: (1) &quot;Community College: The Unfinished Revolution&quot; by James Rosenbaum, et.al.; (2) NGA/CCA Common College Completion Metrics; and (3) Complete College America's &quot;Essential Steps for States.&quot; Attached are: (1) Complete College Tennessee: A synopsis of the legislation prepared by Complete College America; and (2) Community College and Career Training Grants: Complete College America's Recommendations to the Administration.