ethanporcaro/eric-fulltext-meta huggingface dataset:
Trends and Gaps in Reading Achievement across Kindergarten and Grade 1 in Two Illinois School Districts. Study Snapshot. REL 2021-058
Author: National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance (ED)
Date: 2021-02-00
Type: Reports - Descriptive
Subjects: Educational Trends,Achievement Gap,Reading Achievement,Kindergarten,Grade 1,School Districts,Racial Differences,English Language Learners,Lunch Programs,Special Education,Gender Differences,Equal Education

To assess education progress in the early grades and identify achievement gaps, this study examined reading achievement data for kindergarten and grade 1 students in two districts in Illinois: District U-46 (Elgin Area Schools) and District 186 (Springfield Public Schools). Drawing on a different reading assessment in each district, the study team documented reading achievement in these two early grades for two kindergarten cohorts (2016/17 for District U-46 and 2017/18 for District 186) and examined disparities in achievement for several student demographic groups. In particular, the study identified gaps in reading achievement at different time points in kindergarten and grade 1 by students' race/ethnicity, eligibility for the national school lunch program (an indicator of poverty), English learner status, participation in special education, and gender. Policymakers can use these findings to advocate for increased supports for early intervention before or at the start of kindergarten to close the reading achievement gaps found in the study. [For the full report, see ED610445; for the appendixes, see ED610446; for the study brief, see ED610448.]
Completion Grants: A Multi-Method Examination of Institutional Practice
Author: Goldrick-Rab, Sara
Date: 2020-09-00
Type: Reports - Research
Subjects: Public Colleges,Graduation,Grants,Student Financial Aid,College Students,Program Implementation,Eligibility,College Administration,Program Design

Purpose: Public universities are intent on increasing degree completion for many reasons. A stronger policy focus on completion and interest in removing students' financial hurdles has led to a rapid proliferation of completion grant programs. This paper reports on a mixed method implementation study of completion grant programs at seven broad- and open-access universities. We consider how the implementation of completion grant programs vary and how these variations are associated with administrative burden. Methods: Drawing on case studies of completion grant programs and student surveys, we examine the work of the administrators and professionals who create and implement these programs. Results: We analyze the drivers of variation in administrative burden, and describe model elements for administering completion grants that aim to minimize administrative burden and maximize efficacy. Implications: As it can diminish program efficacy and increase inequality, we pay particular attention to administrative burden for staff and students. [This paper will be published in the &quot;Journal of Student Financial Aid.&quot;]
University of Central Florida Accountability Plan, 2020. Revised
Author: State University System of Florida, Board of Governors
Date: 2020-07-06
Type: Reports - Descriptive
Subjects: Accountability,Educational Finance,Enrollment,Graduation Rate,Outcomes of Education,Strategic Planning,Educational Indicators,Educational Quality,Efficiency,Improvement Programs,Achievement,Institutional Characteristics,Undergraduate Students,Graduate Students,College Programs,State Universities

The Accountability Plan is an annual report that is closely aligned with the Board of Governors' 2025 System Strategic Plan. This report enhances the System's commitment to accountability and strategic planning by fostering greater coordination between institutional administrators, University Boards of Trustees and the Board of Governors regarding each institution's direction and priorities as well as performance expectations and outcomes on institutional and System-wide goals. Contents include: (1) Introduction; (2) Strategy; (3) Performance-Based Funding Metrics; (4) Preeminent Research University Funding Metrics; (5) Key Performance Indicators; (6) Enrollment Planning; (7) Academic Program Coordination; and (8) Definitions. [For &quot;University of Central Florida Accountability Plan, 2019,&quot; see ED602568.]
University of South Florida System Accountability Plan, 2020. Revised
Author: State University System of Florida, Board of Governors
Date: 2020-07-09
Type: Reports - Descriptive
Subjects: Accountability,Educational Finance,Enrollment,Graduation Rate,Outcomes of Education,Strategic Planning,Educational Indicators,Educational Quality,Efficiency,Improvement Programs,Achievement,Institutional Characteristics,Undergraduate Students,Graduate Students,College Programs,State Universities

The Accountability Plan is an annual report that is closely aligned with the Board of Governors' 2025 System Strategic Plan. This report enhances the System's commitment to accountability and strategic planning by fostering greater coordination between institutional administrators, University Boards of Trustees and the Board of Governors regarding each institution's direction and priorities as well as performance expectations and outcomes on institutional and System-wide goals. Contents include: (1) Introduction; (2) Strategy; (3) Performance-Based Funding Metrics; (4) Preeminent Research University Funding Metrics; (5) Key Performance Indicators; (6) Enrollment Planning; (7) Academic Program Coordination; and (8) Definitions. [For &quot;University of South Florida System Accountability Plan, 2019. Revised,&quot; see ED602601.]
Florida State University Accountability Plan, 2020. Revised
Author: State University System of Florida, Board of Governors
Date: 2020-07-06
Type: Reports - Descriptive
Subjects: Accountability,Educational Finance,Enrollment,Graduation Rate,Outcomes of Education,Strategic Planning,Educational Indicators,Educational Quality,Efficiency,Improvement Programs,Achievement,Institutional Characteristics,Undergraduate Students,Graduate Students,College Programs,State Universities

The Accountability Plan is an annual report that is closely aligned with the Board of Governors' 2025 System Strategic Plan. This report enhances the System's commitment to accountability and strategic planning by fostering greater coordination between institutional administrators, University Boards of Trustees and the Board of Governors regarding each institution's direction and priorities as well as performance expectations and outcomes on institutional and System-wide goals. Contents include: (1) Introduction; (2) Strategy; (3) Performance-Based Funding Metrics; (4) Preeminent Research University Funding Metrics; (5) Key Performance Indicators; (6) Enrollment Planning; (7) Academic Program Coordination; and (8) Definitions. [For &quot;Florida State University Accountability Plan, 2019,&quot; see ED596526.]
University of North Florida Accountability Plan, 2020
Author: State University System of Florida, Board of Governors
Date: 2020-04-14
Type: Reports - Descriptive
Subjects: Accountability,Educational Finance,Enrollment,Graduation Rate,Outcomes of Education,Strategic Planning,Educational Indicators,Educational Quality,Efficiency,Improvement Programs,Achievement,Institutional Characteristics,Undergraduate Students,Graduate Students,College Programs,State Universities

The Accountability Plan is an annual report that is closely aligned with the Board of Governors' 2025 System Strategic Plan. This report enhances the System's commitment to accountability and strategic planning by fostering greater coordination between institutional administrators, University Boards of Trustees and the Board of Governors regarding each institution's direction and priorities as well as performance expectations and outcomes on institutional and System-wide goals. Contents include: (1) Introduction; (2) Strategy; (3) Performance-Based Funding Metrics; (4) Key Performance Indicators; (5) Enrollment Planning; (6) Academic Program Coordination; and (7) Definitions. [For &quot;University of North Florida Accountability Plan, 2019,&quot; see ED602501.]
University of Florida Accountability Plan, 2020. Revised
Author: State University System of Florida, Board of Governors
Date: 2020-07-06
Type: Reports - Descriptive
Subjects: Accountability,Educational Finance,Enrollment,Graduation Rate,Outcomes of Education,Strategic Planning,Educational Indicators,Educational Quality,Efficiency,Improvement Programs,Achievement,Institutional Characteristics,Undergraduate Students,Graduate Students,College Programs,State Universities

The Accountability Plan is an annual report that is closely aligned with the Board of Governors' 2025 System Strategic Plan. This report enhances the System's commitment to accountability and strategic planning by fostering greater coordination between institutional administrators, University Boards of Trustees and the Board of Governors regarding each institution's direction and priorities as well as performance expectations and outcomes on institutional and System-wide goals. Contents include: (1) Introduction; (2) Strategy; (3) Performance-Based Funding Metrics; (4) Preeminent Research University Funding Metrics; (5) Key Performance Indicators; (6) Enrollment Planning; (7) Academic Program Coordination; and (8) Definitions. [For &quot;University of Florida Accountability Plan, 2019,&quot; see ED602497.]
Joint Educational Planning and Support for Children and Youth in Care: Cross-Ministry Guidelines
Author: Ministry of Education (British Columbia)
Date: 2017-00-00
Type: Guides - Non-Classroom
Subjects: Foreign Countries,Foster Care,Agency Cooperation,Child Welfare,School Role,Family Role,Caregiver Role,Adjustment (to Environment),Mental Health,Trauma,Access to Information,Information Dissemination,Resilience (Psychology),At Risk Students,Cooperative Planning,Family Environment,Teamwork,Teacher Role,Student Participation,Federal Legislation,Student Records,Child Custody,Well Being

The Ministry of Children and Family Development (MCFD) and the Ministry of Education (MEd), in consultation with regional representatives and public and independent school representatives, created these cross-ministry guidelines to improve information sharing, strengthen practice and joint planning, and promote effective communication among teachers, school-based teams, child welfare workers, caregivers and family members. Specifically, these guidelines are provided to assist school staff, child welfare workers and caregivers in responding to significant transitions for children and youth in care, including changing living arrangements, coming into foster care, or moving to a different school. The guidelines also apply to children and youth in care who have not recently experienced transition, but perhaps experience periods of increased vulnerability and difficulty as they grow and mature. For example, some children and youth in care might be experiencing mental health challenges related to trauma they have experienced. The guidelines focus on the importance of an information-sharing process that can help child welfare workers, school staff and caregivers in their efforts to provide continuity and stability, and to nurture a sense of belonging in educational programming. The goal is to help children and youth in care develop personal resiliency by putting in place the appropriate protective factors such as daily attendance, that will position them for greater success in school. Positive working relationships already exist regionally between many delegated child welfare workers and their education counterparts; these updated guidelines are therefore to support ongoing collaboration and ensure clarity in information-sharing practices and planning. In doing so, the guidelines can help child welfare workers and school staff determine appropriate goals and necessary supports, and monitor ongoing student progress and educational outcomes for children and youth in care. [These guidelines are an updated version of the original &quot;Joint Educational Planning and Support for Children and Youth in Care: Cross-Ministry Guidelines&quot; (2008).]
English Language Proficiency Standards in the BC Transfer System
Author: McQuarrie, Fiona
Date: 2019-07-00
Type: Reports - Research
Subjects: Foreign Countries,English Language Learners,Language Proficiency,Academic Standards,Admission Criteria,High School Students,Standardized Tests,English (Second Language),Language Tests,Second Language Learning,College Students,Test Use,Student Experience,Scores

The number of non-native English speakers enrolling in British Columbia's (BC's) post-secondary system has likely increased in recent decades. This has led to concerns about whether such students have adequate English-language proficiency for academic success. Since it is impossible to accurately identify non-native English speakers in BC Transfer System (BCTS) member institutions' admissions processes, this study focuses on three questions related to the measurement of English-language proficiency: (1) The standardized measures of English language proficiency used in BCTS members' admissions processes that are not related to completion of BC high school English 12 or its equivalent, including transfer credit from other institutions; (2) the minimum scores on these assessments that are accepted by BCTS members for admission to programs designed to improve students' English-language skills; and (3) the level of English-language proficiency required for students in English-language upgrading programs at BCTS member institutions to enrol in credit-bearing undergraduate academic courses. The study reviews the extensive research literature that explores measures of English-language proficiency used for admissions and whether there is any relationship between these and students' subsequent academic performance. The study also compares the minimum marks or grades on standardized tests that BCTS members require for admission to their institution's English-language upgrading programs.
Who Decides Transfer? A Review of Policies and Practices at BC Transfer System Member Institutions
Author: McQuarrie, Fiona A. E.
Date: 2020-11-00
Type: Reports - Research
Subjects: Foreign Countries,Transfer Policy,College Credits,Decision Making,College Transfer Students,College Administration,School Personnel,Criteria,Articulation (Education),Two Year Colleges,Universities

Within the BC Transfer System (BCTS), decisions to award transfer credit are important to the overall success of the system. When courses are deemed to be equivalent, the ability to transfer credits from those courses facilitates students' mobility and academic success, in addition to creating cost efficiencies at the participating institutions. However, despite the importance of informed, thoughtful decisions on transfer credit, there is relatively little information across the BCTS on the institutional roles or areas that participate in decisions on transfer credit requests. The purpose of this research is to examine and compare transfer credit decision-making processes at BCTS member institutions. This comparison is not intended to be evaluative, but rather to provide contextual information for institutions assessing or revising their own policies. The full text of the report provides a more complete and nuanced analysis of transfer credit decision processes across the BCTS. However, the broad outcomes of the analysis indicate that: (1) approximately 20% of BCTS member institutions do not explicitly identify the decision-makers and/or participants in the transfer credit decision process; (2) registrars and program heads are the roles that most commonly have the authority to decide on transfer credit requests; and (3) more than one role or area, in either a decision-making or advisory capacity, is generally involved in assessing transfer credit requests.
Computational Thinking, Socioeconomic Gaps, and Policy Implications. IEA Compass: Briefs in Education. Number 12
Author: Karpinski, Zbigniew
Date: 2021-01-00
Type: Reports - Evaluative
Subjects: Computation,Thinking Skills,Social Differences,Socioeconomic Status,Educational Policy,Employment Potential,Technological Literacy,Information Literacy,Foreign Countries

Numerous studies have shown that individuals from less advantaged backgrounds face poorer labor market prospects partly because they are characterized by low levels of skills, including digital skills. However, regarding digital skills, most of these studies rely on indicators of general digital competences rather than of specific information and communication technology (ICT) skills, which are particularly relevant to employability. One such skill is computational thinking (CT), which is related to problem-solving abilities in the digital domain and is often considered to be an important requirement for &quot;high-quality&quot; jobs. In this brief, we use IEA International Computer and Information Literacy Study (ICILS) 2018 data in order to compare the socioeconomic gap in computer and information literacy (CIL) with the corresponding one in CT. The results consistently show that students from less advantaged backgrounds have lower levels of skills than those from more advantaged backgrounds in both areas, but especially in CT.
Canadian Teachers Responding to Coronavirus (COVID-19) -- Pandemic Research Study. National Summary Report. Overview
Author: Canadian Teachers' Federation
Date: 2021-00-00
Type: Reports - Research
Subjects: COVID-19,Pandemics,Elementary Secondary Education,Foreign Countries,Public Education,Well Being,Equal Education,Access to Education,Educational Technology,Technology Uses in Education,Online Courses,Teaching Methods,School Closing,School Schedules,Mental Health,Student Needs,At Risk Students,Student Characteristics,Access to Computers,Internet,Student Behavior,Computer Use,Computer Mediated Communication,Social Media,Readiness

The impact of the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic on public education systems around the world has been both rapid and profound. The global onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, and ensuing cancellation of face-to-face kindergarten to grade 12 (K-12) classes across Canada, has created the need to document and research its immediate impacts by means of a Canadian Teachers' Federation (CTF/FCE) national teacher survey. The results of this survey summarized in this report, will assist the CTF/FCE and all provincial and territorial Member Organizations (MOs) in advocating for appropriate supports, policies, and programs as school buildings reopen, and in the event of future crises. Information collected from this survey will assist the CTF/FCE and its MOs in determining how to most effectively meet the needs of members in the transition back into K-12 public school buildings, and in navigating future crises that result in the closure of school buildings. This survey encompasses four key areas regarding teachers' experiences during this pandemic: (1) Well-Being and Equity; (2) Technology Use and Online Instruction; (3) Pedagogy and the Profession of Teaching; and (4) Return to Public School Buildings.
TEQSA Annual Report 2019-20
Author: Australian Government Tertiary Education Quality and Standards Agency (TEQSA)
Date: 2020-08-28
Type: Numerical/Quantitative Data
Subjects: Foreign Countries,Postsecondary Education,Educational Quality,Standards,Public Agencies,Performance,Budgets,COVID-19,Pandemics,Accountability,Administration,Administrative Organization,Organizational Objectives

This report informs The Hon Dan Tehan MP, Minister for Education; the Parliament of Australia; the Australian higher education community; and the general public about the performance of the Tertiary Education Quality and Standards Agency (TEQSA or the agency) during the financial year ending 30 June 2020. Prepared according to parliamentary reporting requirements, the report describes TEQSA's achievements against the objectives and actions set out in the &quot;TEQSA Corporate Plan 2019-23&quot; and in TEQSA's &quot;2019-20 Portfolio Budget Statements.&quot; This is the ninth annual report of the Tertiary Education Quality and Standards Agency (TEQSA). The 2019-20 operational year presented many changes and challenges. It was the first complete year, following increased budget funding, that: there was a full complement of staff to deliver the work of the agency; there were changes due to the impact of COVID-19 pandemic on the agency's regulatory approach and the work arrangements of staff; the agency was subject to an Australian National Audit Office (ANAO) performance audit; and there were changes in leadership of the agency. This report addresses these topics and more through a review of the year by the accountable authority, agency overview, performance overview, discussion on management and accountability, and a financial report. [For the 2018-2019 report, see ED602732.]
Assessing Research-Practice Partnerships: Five Dimensions of Effectiveness
Author: Henrick, Erin C.
Date: 2017-10-00
Type: Reports - Descriptive
Subjects: Theory Practice Relationship,Kindergarten,Elementary Secondary Education,Partnerships in Education,Guidelines,Trust (Psychology),Educational Research,Educational Improvement,Capacity Building,Researchers,Interpersonal Relationship,Teachers,Decision Making,Evaluation Methods,Organizational Effectiveness

Research-Practice Partnerships (RPPs) have emerged as a promising strategy for bridging the current gulf between research and practice by bringing together experts from both fields to address problems facing K-12 U.S. education. Education RPPs provide the organizational structure to facilitate sustained collaboration between researchers and practitioners to improve learning opportunities for students. However, there is limited literature about how to assess the effectiveness of these organizations. This white paper describes a framework that comprises five dimensions for assessing education RPPs. This framework includes a set of indicators for each dimension that describes where to look for evidence that an RPP is making progress on a particular dimension of effectiveness. The indicators are intended to guide the development of more specific protocols and measures that could contribute to a body of evidence related to partnership effectiveness. This framework can help RPP teams develop assessment plans that will enable them to monitor and improve their work on an ongoing basis. The authors begin by describing how they developed the dimensions and in doing so distinguish between three types of RPPs. They then describe the framework, which comprises five broad dimensions of effectiveness that represent objectives shared across the three types of RPPs. For each dimension, they articulate &quot;indicators of progress&quot; that partnerships might use to assess their progress in accomplishing each objective. They conclude by discussing how the framework might be used and then consider next steps for work in this area.