ethanporcaro/eric-fulltext-meta huggingface dataset:
Embedding Bullying Interventions into a Comprehensive System of Student and Learning Supports. A Center Policy & Practice Brief
Author: University of California, Los Angeles. Center for Mental Health in Schools
Date: 2011-04-00
Type: Reports - Descriptive
Subjects: Bullying,Intervention,Educational Environment,School Policy,Policy Formation,Aggression,Victims,Peer Relationship,Computer Mediated Communication,Power Structure,Student Behavior,Labeling (of Persons),Behavior Problems,Environmental Influences,Behavior Modification,Social Development,Emotional Development,Barriers,Classroom Techniques

Everybody agrees that school bullying is a major problem, but considerable controversy exists over the best way to address the problem. The following
discussion presents (a) a brief analysis and synthesis of the current state of the art, (b) underscores the need to avoid another piecemeal set of policy and
practice initiatives, and (c) stresses that the growing emphasis on school bullying provides an opportunity to accelerate development of a comprehensive, multifaceted, and cohesive system of student and learning supports. Implications for policy are presented. (Contains 2 exhibits.)
What Do Principals Say about Their Work? Implications for Addressing Barriers to Learning and School Improvement
Author: Adelman, Howard
Date: 2011-08-00
Type: Reports - Descriptive
Subjects: Administrator Attitudes,Principals,Barriers,Administrator Effectiveness,Job Satisfaction,Job Performance,Learner Engagement,Administrator Responsibility,Politics of Education,Educational Research,Disabilities,Student Diversity,Work Environment,Family Work Relationship,Special Needs Students,Instructional Leadership,Educational Quality,Teacher Effectiveness,Student Developed Materials,Neighborhoods,Environmental Influences,Family Influence,Peer Influence,Student Characteristics

This brief highlights what principals say about their work, especially about
how the job has changed and what factors most affect job performance and
satisfaction. The data have been culled from various surveys, reports,
interviews, and so forth published since 2000. Specific attention is given to
the degree to which concerns about addressing barriers to learning and
teaching and re-engaging disconnected students are and are not discussed.
Implications for school improvement are outlined. The intent of this report is to stimulate discussion of ways to enhance and enable principal effectiveness with the full range of students at their schools. At the end of the document is an invitation to send comments that can be synthesized and shared widely. Two attachments present: (1) Some Resources for Principals to Learn More About and for Teaching about a Comprehensive System of Learning Supports; and (2) A Few Examples of Center Resources That Can Be Adapted for Professional Development Related to Student and Parent Engagement and Re-engagement. (Contains 1 exhibit.)
Dropout Prevention: Do Districts Pursue Best Practice Recommendations? A Center Policy & Practice Report
Author: University of California, Los Angeles. Center for Mental Health in Schools
Date: 2011-10-00
Type: Reports - Descriptive
Subjects: Dropout Prevention,Dropouts,Best Practices,Intervention,Barriers,Student Motivation,Learner Engagement,Educational Policy,Student Participation,Educational Improvement,Crisis Intervention,Family School Relationship,School Community Relationship,School Districts,Elementary Secondary Education

This report focuses on the reality that the dropout situation is unlikely to improve as long as policy and practice fail to ensure students have a comprehensive system of student and learning supports. To highlight the intervention problem, the emphasis is on first comparing federal practice guidance recommendations for addressing the dropout problem with data about what schools are doing; then, we stress the need to embed dropout prevention into development of a unified and comprehensive component for addressing barriers to learning and teaching and re-engaging disconnected students at every school. An appendix presents: "Motivation is a Primary Concern in Addressing All Students." A list of cited references and some related reading is provided along with some relevant references for broadening staff understanding of motivation.  (Contains 1 table.)
The Condition of Accreditation: U.S. Accreditation in 2011
Author: Council for Higher Education Accreditation
Date: 2012-08-00
Type: Numerical/Quantitative Data
Subjects: Accreditation (Institutions),Statistical Data,Colleges,Higher Education,Enrollment,College Students,Organization Size (Groups),Administrative Organization

Institutions are accredited by three types of accreditors: national faith-related organizations that accredit religiously affiliated and doctrinally based institutions that are primarily degree-granting and nonprofit; national career-related organizations that accredit mainly for-profit career-based degree-granting and non-degree-granting institutions; and regional organizations that accredit mainly nonprofit, degree-granting institutions. Eighteen (18) recognized institutional accrediting organizations accredited 7,818 institutions in 2010-2011. This report presents Information and statistics provided by accrediting organizations during the 2010-2011 academic year. This includes quantitative information about the numbers of accredited institutions and programs in the U.S., student enrollment, operating characteristics of accrediting organizations, international accreditation activity and recognition of accrediting organizations. A key to abbreviations for institutional accrediting organizations and programmatic accrediting organizations is appended. (Contains 21 figures.) [This report was produced by CHEA (Council for Higher Education Accreditation) Institute for Research and Study of Accreditation and Quality Assurance.]
A Priority Research Agenda for Understanding the Influence of the Common Core State Standards for Mathematics
Author: Heck, Daniel J.
Date: 2011-11-00
Type: Reports - Descriptive
Subjects: Academic Standards,State Standards,Mathematics Education,Educational Objectives,Goal Orientation,Context Effect,Program Effectiveness,Case Studies,Educational Research,Educational Assessment,Instructional Materials,Teacher Attitudes,Mathematics Curriculum,Outcomes of Education,College Readiness,Alignment (Education),Educational Quality,STEM Education

The Common Core State Standards for Mathematics (CCSSM) are part of a broader effort coordinated by the National Governors Association Center for Best Practices and the Council of Chief State School Officers to develop common state standards in key subjects. The CCSSM specify content learning goals by grade in K-8 and by conceptual categories in the high school grades. In addition, there are eight standards for mathematical practice to be addressed throughout K-12 mathematics education, describing fundamental approaches to, and dispositions toward, learning and doing mathematics. States, districts, schools, and teachers may choose to follow, or not follow, the CCSSM specifications; and those that do will likely differ in how they interpret the standards, what they plan to do in response, and their capacity to implement their plans. As a result, and because of
considerable differences among school contexts and student populations, common standards are not likely to lead to the same results, either in implementation or in impacts on students. The goal in this project was to suggest a set of priorities for research that would provide the field with a reasonably broad and deep understanding of the influence of the CCSSM. The priority research agenda recommends a set of case studies, investigations of relationships, and status studies to address three overarching questions: (1) How is the mathematics education system responding to the introduction of the CCSSM? (2) What happens, and for whom, as a result? and (3) How can the CCSSM and future standards be improved? The purposes of this priority research agenda are to inform funders of mathematics education research about important areas
of investigation to consider supporting, and to suggest to the mathematics education research community focal areas of study to build the field's knowledge about the influence of the CCSSM. The following are appended: (1) Contributors; and (2) Other Research Areas of Interest for Understanding the Influence of the CCSSM. [This report was written with William O. Fulkerson, Adrienne A. Smith, and Shayla M. Thomas.] (Contains 2 footnotes.)
Safe Schools: A Best Practices Guide
Author: Council of Educational Facility Planners International (CEFPI)
Date: 2013-00-00
Type: Reports - Descriptive
Subjects: School Safety,Public Schools,Educational Environment,Educational Facilities Design,Conferences (Gatherings),Emergency Programs,Crisis Management,School Personnel,Organizational Communication,School Organization,Best Practices

Every day in America more than 50 million children go to neighborhood public schools. Parents send them off with every hope they will be safe while there. And yet, as has been the case in too many cities, violence shatters that hope. The Council of Educational Facilities Planners International (CEFPI) seeks to lead in the effort to bolster schools and provide safer and more secure learning environments. As a result, this planning guide has been created to provide elected officials, educators, planners, and builders with essential knowledge certain to aid in the protection of students. This guide seeks to answer the primary question of how to create a built environment which lends itself to emergency 
preparedness and response. It explores four major and interrelated categories in doing so: infrastructure, crisis communications, staffing, and procedures. On February 6, 2013, CEFPI hosted a security summit in Washington, D.C. Attendees included personnel from national, state, and local educational and security agencies. No school administrator wants to have to face the challenges of violence; yet all must come to grips with that possibility. They must plan and prepare for a broad array of threats. Appended is a list of speakers and attendees.
Iowa Department of Education Guidelines for PK-12 Competency-Based Pathways
Author: Iowa Department of Education
Date: 2013-08-14
Type: Guides - Non-Classroom
Subjects: Competency Based Education,Guidelines,State Policy,State Departments of Education,Elementary Secondary Education,Administrative Principles,Certification,Educational Resources,Educational Principles,State Standards,Educational Policy,Program Descriptions,Mastery Learning,Educational Objectives,Student Evaluation,Educational Methods

This document provides guidelines for developing competency-based pathways in Iowa districts and schools and outlines waiver requirements and procedures. Competency-based pathways provide ways to validate learning of standards that occurs outside the structure of the traditional school and offer flexibility for schools to engage students in learning that moves beyond the traditional constraints of seat time and divisions among content areas. These pathways provide opportunities for students to advance through content or earn credit toward high school graduation regardless of age or amount of time in the classroom, online, or in a setting off campus. They will enable districts and schools to provide student-centered, personalized learning systems through which students of all ages develop both ownership and control of their own learning. Educators and students will be better able to connect learning to students' interests. Provided are: (1) Principles, (2) Definitions and Explanations; (3) License and Endorsement; (4) Examples; (5) Student Access; (6) District Policy; (7) Resources; and (8) State Contact.
Accrediting Organizations in the United States: How Do They Operate to Assure Quality? Fact Sheet #5
Date: 2006-04-00
Type: Reports - Descriptive
Subjects: Accreditation (Institutions),Colleges,Standards,Educational Policy,Disclosure,Higher Education,College Administration,College Faculty

Accreditation is the primary means by which the quality of higher education institutions and programs is assured in the United States. Accreditation is a form of self-regulation in which colleges, universities and programs have come together to develop standards, policies and procedures for self-examination and judgment by peers. In 2005, approximately 7,000 institutions and 18,000 programs held accredited status. This Fact Sheet presents information on accredited organizations in the United States and how they operate to assure quality. Responses to the following questions are highlighted: (1) What institutions and programs are accredited? (2) What are the standards and policies used by these organizations to make judgements about quality? (3) What additional information do accrediting organizations make available? and (4) How do accrediting organizations operate? [This Fact Sheet updates and expands the May 2003 Fact Sheet #5 (ED467773).]
Presidential Guideline Series, Vol. 1-6
Author: Council for Higher Education Accreditation
Date: 2007-12-00
Type: Reports - Descriptive
Subjects: Guidelines,Higher Education,Accreditation (Institutions),Quality Assurance,Leadership,Administrator Role,Quality Control,Educational Needs,College Presidents,College Administration

The Council for Higher Education Accreditation "Presidential Guidelines Series" was developed during 2006-2007 as means to further engage presidents in the work of accreditation and to offer tools for presidential leadership in this important area. Six individual Guidelines were issued, each addressing a vital dimension of the president accreditation relationship. The six pieces are now available in this single document. They include: (1) Presidential Leadership in Accreditation; (2) The Value of Presidential Involvement and Commitment; (3) Preparing for the Self Study--The President's Role; (4) Preparing for the Site Visit--The President's Role; (5) Using the Accreditation Visit to Benefit the Institution; and (6) What Presidents Need to Know about International Accreditation and Quality Assurance.
Accreditation and Academic Freedom. An American Association of University Professors--Council for Higher Education Accreditation Advisory Statement
Author: Council for Higher Education Accreditation
Date: 2013-00-00
Type: Reports - Descriptive
Subjects: Accreditation (Institutions),Academic Freedom,Colleges,College Faculty,Standards,Educational Environment,Educational Policy,Partnerships in Education

This joint American Association of University Professors-Council for Higher Education advisory statement addresses the role that accreditation plays in sustaining and enhancing academic freedom in the context of review of institutions and programs for quality. It offers five suggestions about the role of accreditation with regard to academic freedom. These are: (1) emphasize the principle of academic freedom in the context of accreditation review, stressing its fundamental meaning and essential value; (2) affirm the role that accreditation plays in the protection and advancement of academic freedom; (3) review current accreditation standards, policies and procedures with regard to academic freedom and assure that institutions and programs accord with high expectations in this vital area; (4) at accreditation meetings and workshops, focus on challenges to academic freedom, with particular attention to the current climate and its effect on faculty, institutions, and programs; and (5) explore developing partnerships among accreditors to concentrate additional attention on academic freedom and further secure the commitment of the entire accreditation community.
Child Poverty and Its Lasting Consequence. Low-Income Working Families. Paper 21
Author: Ratcliffe, Caroline
Date: 2012-09-00
Type: Reports - Descriptive
Subjects: Poverty,Low Income Groups,Dropouts,Family Characteristics,Family Influence,At Risk Persons,Child Development,Persistence,Racial Differences,Minority Groups,Educational Attainment,Infants,Whites,African Americans,Hispanic Americans,Family Structure,Adults,Marital Status,Early Parenthood,Place of Residence,Gender Differences

One in six newborns were born poor over the past 40 years, and nearly half remained poor half their childhoods. These persistently poor children are nearly 90 percent more likely than never-poor children to enter their 20s without completing high school and are four times more likely to give birth outside of marriage during their teenage years. Children whose parents did not complete high school are less likely to complete high school themselves. This paper examines the magnitude of child poverty, family characteristics related to childhood poverty persistence, and childhood poverty's lasting consequences. An appendix presents data and sample. (Contains 4 tables, 4 figures, and 26 notes.)
Access to Effective Teaching for Disadvantaged Students. NCEE 2014-4001
Author: Isenberg, Eric
Date: 2013-11-00
Type: Reports - Research
Subjects: Disadvantaged Youth,Access to Education,Educational Quality,Teacher Effectiveness,Language Arts,Mathematics Instruction,School Districts,Achievement Gap,Comparative Analysis,Equal Education,Teacher Placement,Student Placement,School District Size,Geographic Regions,Correlation,Peer Influence,Middle School Students,Elementary School Students,Gender Differences,Racial Differences,Limited English Speaking,Special Education,Student Characteristics

Recent federal initiatives emphasize measuring teacher effectiveness and ensuring that disadvantaged students have equal access to effective teachers. This study substantially broadens the existing evidence on access to effective teaching by examining access in 29 geographically dispersed school districts over the 2008-2009 to 2010-2011 school years. The report describes disadvantaged students' access to effective teaching in grades 4 through 8 in English/language arts (ELA) and math, using value-added analysis to measure effective teaching. On average, disadvantaged students had less access to effective teaching in these districts. Providing equal access to effective teaching for FRL and non-FRL students would reduce the student achievement gap from 28 percentile points to 26 percentile points in ELA and from 26 percentile points to 24 percentile points in math in a given year. The main findings are: (1) On average, disadvantaged students had less access to effective teaching in the 29 study districts in grades 4 through 8. The magnitude of differences in effective teaching for disadvantaged and nondisadvantaged students in a given year was equivalent to a shift of two percentile points in the student achievement gap. (2) Access to effective teaching for disadvantaged students did not change over time in the study districts. (3) Disadvantaged students' access to effective teaching varied across school districts. (4) Unequal access to effective teaching was most related to the school assignment of teachers and students rather than to the way that teachers were assigned to students within schools. Appended are: (1) Analytic Methods; (2) Diagnostics of Value-Added Models; and (3) Additional Tables and Sensitivity Analyses for Chapter IV. (Contains 24 tables, 35 figures, and 48 footnotes.)
Accreditation and Accountability: A CHEA Special Report. CHEA Occasional Paper
Author: Council for Higher Education Accreditation
Date: 2006-12-00
Type: Reports - Descriptive
Subjects: Accountability,Accreditation (Institutions),Academic Achievement,Evidence,Disclosure,Outcomes of Education,Information Dissemination,Institutional Characteristics,Cost Effectiveness,Colleges

A good deal of national attention has been paid to accreditation and issues of accountability during the past year. The dominant topics have been student learning outcomes, institutional performance, and information to the public. From the Secretary of Education's Commission on the Future of Higher Education to reauthorization of the Higher Education Act, the accreditation community has been challenged to alter their practices to focus greater attention on those areas. The Council for Higher Education Accreditation (CHEA) has published 13 papers, advisories, and commentaries on outcomes, performance, and public information during the past five years. This document is a distillation of CHEA's work, summarizing key recommendations, ideas, and effective practices for accrediting organizations working with institutions and programs. [This report was produced by CHEA (Council for Higher Education Accreditation) Institute for Research and Study of Accreditation and Quality Assurance.]
Council for Higher Education Accreditation. Profile of Accreditation--Revised. Fact Sheet #1
Author: Council for Higher Education Accreditation
Date: 2012-08-00
Type: Reports - Descriptive
Subjects: Accreditation (Institutions),Higher Education,Quality Assurance,Educational Quality,Organizational Effectiveness,Institutional Characteristics,Standards,Quality Control,Benchmarking,Institutional Evaluation,College Programs,Professional Recognition,Accountability

Accreditation is a process of external quality review used by higher education education to scrutinize colleges, universities, and educational programs for quality assurance and quality improvement. In the United States, accreditation is carried out by private, nonprofit organizations designed for this specific purpose. Institutions and educational programs seek accredited status as a means of demonstrating their academic quality to students and the public and to become eligible for federal funds. Numbers of accredited Institutions are as follows: (1) 7,818 institutions are accredited, and (2) 22,654 programs are accredited. These institutions and programs are accredited by organizations recognized either by the Council for Higher Education Accreditation (CHEA) or by organizations recognized by the United States Department of Education (USDE). CHEA or USDE "recognition" is a review of the quality and effectiveness of accrediting organizations based on the respective standards of CHEA or USDE. Of the 7,818 institutions: (1) 4,921 (63%) are degree-granting; (2) 2,897 (37%) are non-degree-granting; (3) 3,909 (50%) are nonprofit; and (4) 3,909 (50%) are for-profit. 7,178 accredited institutions were certified to participate in the federal Title IV (Student Assistance) Program in 2010-2011. Of those institutions, 2,043 were public, 1,869 were private non-profit, and 3,266 were for-profit. If an institution participates in Title IV, students have the opportunity to apply for federal grants and loans to finance their education. Accreditation serves the following purposes: (1) Quality Assurance; (2) Access to Federal Funds; (3) Ease of Transfer; and (4) Private Sector Confidence. CHEA's primary purpose is to assure and strengthen academic quality and ongoing quality improvement in courses, programs, and degrees. USDE's primary purpose is to assure that federal student aid funds are purchasing quality courses and programs. (Provides 5 footnotes.)
Non Profit and For-Profit Higher Education Accreditation. Council for Higher Education Accreditation. Fact Sheet  #7
Author: Council for Higher Education Accreditation
Date: 2012-08-00
Type: Reports - Descriptive
Subjects: Accreditation (Institutions),Colleges,Corporations,Nonprofit Organizations,Proprietary Schools,Academic Degrees,Public Colleges,Church Related Colleges,Career Education

This fact sheet presents data provided to the Council for Higher Education Accreditation (CHEA) by accrediting organizations for accrediting activity during 2010-2011. It includes both Title IV and Non-Title IV institutions. Data are presented in the following categories: (1) Accrediting Organizations; (2) Fourteen Major For-Profit Higher Education Corporations; and (3) Institutional Totals.