ethanporcaro/eric-fulltext-meta huggingface dataset:
State Test Score Trends through 2008-09, Part 1: Rising Scores on State Tests and NAEP. Arkansas
Author: Center on Education Policy
Date: 2010-11-00
Type: Numerical/Quantitative Data
Subjects: State Standards,Academic Achievement,Scores,Grade 4,Grade 8,Reading Achievement,Mathematics Achievement,Achievement Gains,State Programs,Educational Improvement,Educational Indicators,Educational Trends,Trend Analysis,Educational Testing,Educational Policy,Test Score Decline

This paper profiles Arkansas's test score trends through 2008-09. Between 2005 and 2009, the percentages of students reaching the proficient level on the state test and the basic level on NAEP (National Assessment of Educational Progress) went up in math at grades 4 and 8. In reading, the percentages scoring proficient on the state test went up at grades 4 and 8 while the percentage scoring basic on NAEP showed no change at either grade. Average annual gains were notably larger on the state test than on NAEP in both subjects and both grade levels. Average (mean) scores increased on both the state test and NAEP in most cases. The exception was in grade 4 reading, where average scores decreased on NAEP. (Contains 1 footnote.) [For the main report, &quot;State Test Score Trends through 2008-09, Part 1: Rising Scores on State Tests and NAEP&quot;, see ED513962.]
State Test Score Trends through 2008-09, Part 1: Rising Scores on State Tests and NAEP. Arizona
Author: Center on Education Policy
Date: 2010-11-00
Type: Numerical/Quantitative Data
Subjects: State Standards,Academic Achievement,Scores,Grade 4,Grade 8,Reading Achievement,Mathematics Achievement,Achievement Gains,State Programs,Educational Improvement,Educational Indicators,Educational Trends,Trend Analysis,Educational Testing,Educational Policy

This paper profiles Arizona's test score trends through 2008-09. Between 2005 and 2009, the percentages of students reaching the proficient level on the state test and the basic level on NAEP (National Assessment of Educational Progress) increased in grades 4 and 8 in both reading and math. Average annual gains were generally larger on the state test than on NAEP. There was one exception in grade 8 math where the average annual gain was larger at the basic level on NAEP. Trends in average (mean) test scores moved in the same direction (up) as trends in percentages proficient/basic. (Contains 1 footnote.) [For the main report, &quot;State Test Score Trends through 2008-09, Part 1: Rising Scores on State Tests and NAEP&quot;, see ED513962.]
State Test Score Trends through 2008-09, Part 1: Rising Scores on State Tests and NAEP. Alaska
Author: Center on Education Policy
Date: 2010-11-00
Type: Numerical/Quantitative Data
Subjects: State Standards,Academic Achievement,Scores,Grade 4,Grade 8,Reading Achievement,Mathematics Achievement,Achievement Gains,State Programs,Educational Improvement,Educational Indicators,Educational Trends,Trend Analysis,Educational Testing,Educational Policy

This paper profiles Alaska's test score trends through 2008-09. Between 2005 and 2009, the percentages of students reaching the proficient level on the state test and the basic level on NAEP (National Assessment of Educational Progress) increased in grades 4 and 8 in math and grade 8 in reading. In grade 4 reading, the percentage reaching the basic level on NAEP increased, while the percentage of students reaching the proficient level on the state test showed no change between 2005 and 2009. Average annual gains tended to be slightly larger on NAEP than on the state test, except in grade 4 math, where the average annual gain was larger on the state test. Alaska did not provide average (mean) score data. (Contains 1 footnote.) [For the main report, &quot;State Test Score Trends through 2008-09, Part 1: Rising Scores on State Tests and NAEP&quot;, see ED513962.]
How Many Schools and Districts Have Not Made Adequate Yearly Progress? Four-Year Trends
Author: Usher, Alexandra
Date: 2010-12-00
Type: Numerical/Quantitative Data
Subjects: Public Schools,Federal Legislation,Educational Improvement,Federal Programs,School Districts,Educational Indicators,Educational Trends,Trend Analysis,Educational Testing,Scores,Educational Assessment,School Effectiveness,Academic Achievement,Educational Policy,Accountability,Evaluation Criteria

The Center on Education Policy (CEP) analyzed trends over four years in the number of schools and school districts that did not make adequate yearly progress (AYP) in raising student achievement under the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB). Using data from the Consolidated State Performance Reports submitted to the U.S. Department of Education by all 50 states and the District of Columbia, CEP calculated the percentage of schools and districts in the nation and in each state that did not make AYP based on testing in school years 2005-06 through 2008-09. Three key findings emerged from the analysis: (1) One-third (33%) of the nation's schools did not make AYP in 2009. This marks an increase from 29% in 2006 but a decrease from 35% in 2008; (2) More than one-third (36%) of the nation's school districts did not make AYP in 2009, up from 29% in 2006; and (3) The percentages of schools and districts that did not make AYP often fluctuated from year to year within the same state and varied greatly across states. (Contains 2 figures, 2 tables and 5 footnotes.)
State Test Score Trends through 2008-09, Part 1: Rising Scores on State Tests and NAEP. California
Author: Center on Education Policy
Date: 2010-11-00
Type: Numerical/Quantitative Data
Subjects: State Standards,Academic Achievement,Scores,Grade 4,Grade 8,Reading Achievement,Mathematics Achievement,Achievement Gains,State Programs,Educational Improvement,Educational Indicators,Educational Trends,Trend Analysis,Educational Testing,Educational Policy

This paper profiles California's test score trends through 2008-09. Between 2005 and 2009, the percentages of students reaching the proficient level on the state test and the basic level on NAEP (National Assessment of Educational Progress) increased in grades 4 and 8 in both reading and math. Average annual gains were larger on the state test than on NAEP in both reading and math at grades 4 and 8. Trends in average (mean) test scores moved in the same direction (up) as trends in percentages proficient/basic. (Contains 1 footnote.) [For the main report, &quot;State Test Score Trends through 2008-09, Part 1: Rising Scores on State Tests and NAEP&quot;, see ED513962.]
State Test Score Trends through 2008-09, Part 1: Rising Scores on State Tests and NAEP. Colorado
Author: Center on Education Policy
Date: 2010-11-00
Type: Numerical/Quantitative Data
Subjects: State Standards,Academic Achievement,Scores,Grade 4,Grade 8,Reading Achievement,Mathematics Achievement,Achievement Gains,State Programs,Educational Improvement,Educational Indicators,Educational Trends,Trend Analysis,Educational Testing,Educational Policy,Test Score Decline

This paper profiles Colorado's test score trends through 2008-09. Between 2005 and 2009, the percentages of students reaching the proficient level on the state test and the basic level on NAEP (National Assessment of Educational Progress) increased in grades 4 and 8 in both reading and math. Average annual gains were generally larger on NAEP than on the state test. In grade 8 math, average annual gains on the state and NAEP tests were the same. Trends in average (mean) test scores generally moved in the same direction (up) as trends in percentages proficient/basic except in grade 8 reading, where average scores on the state test declined. (Contains 1 footnote.) [For the main report, &quot;State Test Score Trends through 2008-09, Part 1: Rising Scores on State Tests and NAEP&quot;, see ED513962.]
State Test Score Trends through 2008-09, Part 1: Rising Scores on State Tests and NAEP. Florida
Author: Center on Education Policy
Date: 2010-11-00
Type: Numerical/Quantitative Data
Subjects: State Standards,Academic Achievement,Scores,Grade 4,Grade 8,Reading Achievement,Mathematics Achievement,Achievement Gains,State Programs,Educational Improvement,Educational Indicators,Educational Trends,Trend Analysis,Educational Testing,Educational Policy

This paper profiles Florida's test score trends through 2008-09. Between 2005 and 2009, the percentages of students reaching the proficient level on the state test and the basic level on NAEP (National Assessment of Educational Progress) increased in grades 4 and 8 in both reading and math. Average annual gains were generally larger on the state test than on NAEP, except in grade 8 reading, where average annual gains on both assessments were the same. Trends in average (mean) scores moved in the same direction (up) as trends in percentages proficient/basic. (Contains 1 footnote.) [For the main report, &quot;State Test Score Trends through 2008-09, Part 1: Rising Scores on State Tests and NAEP&quot;, see ED513962.]
State Test Score Trends through 2008-09, Part 1: Rising Scores on State Tests and NAEP. Iowa
Author: Center on Education Policy
Date: 2010-11-00
Type: Numerical/Quantitative Data
Subjects: State Standards,Academic Achievement,Scores,Grade 4,Grade 8,Reading Achievement,Mathematics Achievement,Achievement Gains,State Programs,Educational Improvement,Educational Indicators,Educational Trends,Trend Analysis,Educational Testing,Educational Policy,Test Score Decline

This paper profiles Iowa's test score trends through 2008-09. Between 2005 and 2009, the percentages of students reaching the proficient level on the state test and the basic level on NAEP (National Assessment of Educational Progress) increased in grade 4 reading and math and in grade 8 math. In grade 8 reading, the percentage of students reaching the basic level on NAEP decreased while the percentage proficient on the state test increased. Average annual gains were larger on the state test than on NAEP in grade 8 reading and math. In grade 4 reading, the gains on the two assessments were equal in size, while in grade 4 math, the average annual gain was larger on NAEP than on the state test. Trends in average (mean) scores increased on both assessments and in all four grade/subject combinations except in grade 8 reading on NAEP. (Contains 1 footnote.) [For the main report, &quot;State Test Score Trends through 2008-09, Part 1: Rising Scores on State Tests and NAEP&quot;, see ED513962.]
State Test Score Trends through 2008-09, Part 1: Rising Scores on State Tests and NAEP. Louisiana
Author: Center on Education Policy
Date: 2010-11-00
Type: Numerical/Quantitative Data
Subjects: State Standards,Academic Achievement,Scores,Grade 4,Grade 8,Reading Achievement,Mathematics Achievement,Achievement Gains,State Programs,Educational Improvement,Educational Indicators,Educational Trends,Trend Analysis,Educational Testing,Educational Policy,Test Score Decline

This paper profiles Louisiana's test score trends through 2008-09. Between 2005 and 2009, trends on state tests and NAEP (National Assessment of Educational Progress) sometimes differed. On the state test, the percentages of students reaching the proficient level increased at grades 4 and 8 in both reading and math. On NAEP, the percentage of students reaching the basic level increased in grade 8 math, showed no change in grade 8 reading, and decreased in grade 4 reading and math. Average annual changes in percentages proficient/basic were larger in a positive direction on the state test than on NAEP in both subjects and both grades. Average (mean) scores increased on both the state and NAEP tests in grade 8 reading and math. At grade 4, however, average scores in both subjects went up on the state test but down on NAEP. (Contains 1 footnote.) [For the main report, &quot;State Test Score Trends through 2008-09, Part 1: Rising Scores on State Tests and NAEP&quot;, see ED513962.]
Becoming Less Separate? School Desegregation, Justice Department Enforcement, and the Pursuit of Unitary Status
Author: US Commission on Civil Rights
Date: 2007-09-00
Type: Numerical/Quantitative Data
Subjects: Public Schools,School Desegregation,Racial Composition,School Districts,Educational Opportunities,Law Enforcement,Racial Integration,Desegregation Effects,Desegregation Litigation,Desegregation Methods,Performance Factors,Educational Indicators,Educational Assessment,Educational Trends,Enrollment Trends,Court Litigation,Educational Policy,Social Justice,Sanctions,Civil Rights

The purpose of this report is to examine what effect the increase in the number of schools obtaining unitary status has had on the racial balance of schools that were previously under court order. Specifically, the report examines whether levels of integration tend to erode as consent decrees are lifted. To that end, the Commission collected data as to the legal status of school districts in seven states: Alabama, Georgia, Florida, Louisiana, Mississippi, North Carolina, and South Carolina. The Commission then analyzed this data to determine if obtaining unitary status was associated with greater levels of racial clustering or reduced integration within districts. In addition, the Commission examined the Educational Opportunities Section (EOS) of the Department of Justice, which is charged with the primary enforcement role in this area to determine what effect its policies and actions have had on the racial balance of school districts. The findings indicate that the increase in the number of jurisdictions obtaining unitary status has not had a negative effect on levels of integration. Moreover, the evidence indicates that the substantial number of districts that have obtained unitary status since 2000, at least partly through the actions of EOS, exhibit higher levels of integration than those districts that obtained such status in prior decades. The report also indicates that certain factors, unrelated to the legal status of a school district, have a more significant effect on levels of racial balance. Among these are the size of a district's student population, the percentage of white student enrollment, and the state in which the district is located. The Commission urges that these factors be further examined and that school districts and the communities of which they are a part take the steps necessary to address the vestiges of state based discrimination. Appended are: (1) Methodological Issues and Detailed Statistical Results; (2) Alabama Public Schools' Desegregation Status; (3) Florida Public Schools' Desegregation Status; (4) Georgia Public Schools' Desegregation Status; (5) Louisiana Public Schools' Desegregation Status; (6) Mississippi Public Schools' Desegregation Status; (7) North Carolina Public Schools' Desegregation Status; and (8) South Carolina Public Schools' Desegregation Status. Individual chapters contain footnotes. (Contains 4 figures and 53 tables.)
Affirmative Action in American Law Schools: A Briefing before the United States Commission on Civil Rights Held in Washington, D.C., June 16, 2006. Briefing Report
Author: US Commission on Civil Rights
Date: 2007-04-00
Type: Collected Works - Proceedings
Subjects: Legal Education (Professions),Civil Rights,Law Schools,Affirmative Action,Civil Rights Legislation,Hearings,Admission Criteria,Accreditation (Institutions),Planning Commissions,National Standards,Position Papers,Policy Analysis,Opinions,Change Strategies,Educational Policy,Focus Groups,Race,Debate

On June 16, 2006, a panel of experts briefed members of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights on affirmative action in American law schools. The panel convened to debate the empirical strength of the research on the effects of racial preferences in law school admissions and the legal and policy implications of the American Bar Association's diversity standards. Richard Sander, professor at University of California at Los Angeles Law School, and Richard O. Lempert, professor at the University of Michigan Law School, addressed the impact of racial preferences in law school admissions on the academic performance and bar admissions of African-American students. David Bernstein, Professor of Law at George Mason University, and Dean Steven Smith, Chair of the American Bar Association's Council on the Section on Legal Education and Admissions to the Bar and Dean of the California Western School of Law, addressed the standards by which law schools are accredited by the Council and the Council's then-proposed changes. This paper provides the summary of the proceedings. This publication includes the following papers: (1) Testimony for the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights (Richard H. Sander); (2) Testimony for the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights (Richard Lempert with William Kidder); (3) Opening Statement Before the United States Civil Rights Commission (Dean Steven R. Smith); (4) Standard 211: Unlawful and Unwise (David E. Bernstein); (5) Statement of Chairman Gerald A. Reynolds on Affirmative Action in American Law Schools; (6) Statement of Commissioner Gail I. Heriot (Joined by Chairman Gerald A. Reynolds); (7) Joint Dissent of Commissioners Arlan D. Melendez and Michael J. Yaki; (8) Dissent of Commissioner Michael J. Yaki; and (9) Joint Response to Commissioners Michael Yaki and Arlan D. Melendez (Chairman Gerald A. Reynolds, Vice Chair Abigail N. Thernstrom, and Commissioners Jennifer C. Braceras, Gail I. Heriot, Peter N. Kirsanow, and Ashley L. Taylor, Jr.). Appended are: (1) American Bar Association Section of Legal Education and Admissions to the Bar: Report to the House of Delegates; and (2) Commentary on Revisions to Standards for Approval of Law Schools 2005-06. (Contains 16 tables, 5 figures and 275 footnotes.)
The Benefits of Racial and Ethnic Diversity in Elementary and Secondary Education. A Briefing before the United States Commission on Civil Rights Held in Washington, D.C., July 28, 2006. Briefing Report
Author: US Commission on Civil Rights
Date: 2006-11-00
Type: Collected Works - Proceedings
Subjects: Public Schools,Civil Rights,School Desegregation,Secondary Education,Racial Segregation,Educational Benefits,Student Diversity,Elementary Education,Racial Composition,Social Attitudes,Consciousness Raising,Place of Residence,African American Students,Boards of Education,Court Litigation,Racial Relations,Cultural Isolation,Student Placement,Academic Achievement,White Students,Socioeconomic Status,Hispanic American Students,Grade 8,Racial Bias,Racial Attitudes,Achievement Gap,Reading Achievement,Mathematics Achievement,Teacher Qualifications,Curriculum,Teacher Certification,Accountability,Peer Influence,Federal Legislation,Federal Government,Education Work Relationship,Military Service,Business,Higher Education,Educational Policy,Outcomes of Education,Interaction,Research Methodology,Educational Research,Asian Americans,American Indians,Hearings

On July 28, 2006, a panel of experts briefed members of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights on the putative benefits of racial and ethnic diversity in elementary and secondary education. Four experts presented written statements to the Commissioners that assessed the social science literature on this issue. They also addressed whether or not racial and ethnic diversity in public schools should be mandated by the state and whether the net benefits of state-mandated diversity are different from the benefits that this diversity may yield when achieved through purely voluntary behavior. The experts also presented a number of studies to the Commission assessing the putative educational and social benefits of racial and ethnic diversity in elementary and secondary education. This volume presents the following papers: (1) The Outcomes of School Desegregation in Public Schools (David J. Armor); (2) Testimony Prepared for the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights Regarding the Educational Benefits of Diversity in Elementary and Secondary Education (Arthur L. Coleman); (3) The Benefits of Racial/Ethnic Diversity in Elementary and Secondary Education (Michal Kurlaender); and (4) Demographic Perspectives on Diversity, Racial Isolation, and the  Seattle School Board's Plan to &quot;Cure&quot; Residential &quot;Segregation&quot; (Stephan Thernstrom). A bibliography is included. (Individual papers contain figures, tables, exhibits, footnotes, appendices, and references.)
Moving Forward to Improve Engineering Education. NSB-07-122
Author: National Science Foundation
Date: 2007-11-19
Type: Reports - Evaluative
Subjects: Majors (Students),Engineering Education,Workshops,Engineering,School Holding Power,Academic Persistence,Educational Improvement,Technical Occupations,Labor Force,Public Opinion,Global Approach

This report of the National Science Board (Board) lays out the findings and recommendations for the National Science Foundation (NSF) to support innovations in engineering education programs. The Board, established by Congress in 1950, provides oversight for, and establishes the policies of, NSF. In March 2005, the Board undertook an examination of recent recommendations addressing changes in engineering education and implications for the engineering workforce. This effort built upon the work of the National Academy of Engineering (NAE) in its report, "The Engineer of 2020: Visions of Engineering in the New Century", as well as recent Board policy reports that identified issues of concern for the domestic engineering workforce. This paper synthesizes the results of two Board-sponsored workshops and significant Board deliberations. The first workshop was held at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology in October 2005 and included a range of experts representing broad interests in engineering education. For the second workshop, held at the Georgia Institute of Technology in November 2006, 23 leading deans of engineering (or equivalent) and the NSF Assistant Director for Engineering participated in discussions that identified needs for change in engineering education and model programs to address those needs. Throughout the process, the Board maintained a dialogue with NAE and coordinated with the NAE "Engineer of 2020" project. The recommendations in this final report address issues of public perception of engineering, retention of students in engineering majors, responsiveness of engineering education to change in the global environment, and needs for additional data to support policy and planning. Appendices include: (1) Workshop--Engineering Employment and Engineering Education: What are the Linkages? (Massachusetts Institute of Technology, October 20, 2005); (2) Workshop--Moving Forward to Improve Engineering Education (Georgia Institute of Technology, November 7, 2006); (3) Charge for Workshop I; and (4) Workplan for Workshop II. A bibliography is included.