ethanporcaro/eric-fulltext-meta huggingface dataset:
Motivating Students to Learn: Transforming Courses Using a Gameful Approach. CRLT Occasional Paper No. 40
Author: Ajlen, Ronit
Date: 2020-00-00
Type: Reports - Descriptive
Subjects: Teaching Methods,Game Based Learning,Educational Games,Student Motivation,Higher Education,Personal Autonomy,Inquiry,Risk,Competence,College Environment,Student Participation,Program Development,Grading,Feedback (Response),College Faculty,College Students

Gameful pedagogy is &quot;an approach that takes inspiration from well-designed games to create learning environments that support student motivation&quot; (Holman, 2018, p. 1). According to Self-Determination Theory (Ryan &amp; Deci, 2000), students are intrinsically motivated when their basic psychological needs for autonomy (the need to make meaningful choices), competence (the need to master optimally difficult challenges), and sense of belonging (the need to have positive interactions with others) are met. Gameful pedagogy incorporates design elements of games, such as choice and safe failure, to motivate students to engage with course content. As such, it requires instructors to fundamentally rethink their course design, especially their assignments and grading systems. Courses at the University of Michigan (U-M) that take a gameful approach are defined by some amount of assignment choice, as well as an additive point system in which students build their grade up from zero. That is, their final grade is a sum of all of their assignment grades rather than an average of those grades. This framework allows students the freedom to fail because there is room to recover from setbacks by completing additional work. Students are encouraged to take learning risks and to step outside comfortable territory. According to the Center for Academic Innovation, U-M instructors from a range of disciplines and across 48 programs have employed gameful pedagogy impacting over 10,000 learners as of summer term 2019. This report shares: (1) faculty perspectives on why they have chosen a gameful approach to their course(s); (2) examples of how they have implemented it; and (3) important considerations for those interested in doing the same.
What Is the Highest Level of Policy Where Tuition-Setting Authority Is Granted for Four-Year Public Institutions? 50-State Comparison: State Policies on Postsecondary Tuition Setting, Capping and Freezing
Author: Education Commission of the States
Date: 2020-05-00
Type: Numerical/Quantitative Data
Subjects: Postsecondary Education,Higher Education,Public Colleges,State Policy,Educational Policy,Tuition,State Legislation,State Boards of Education,Board of Education Policy

The &quot;50-State Comparison: State Policies on Postsecondary Tuition Setting, Capping and Freezing&quot; details the highest level of policy, by state, that addresses the authority to set tuition for the four-year and two-year public sectors. This resource shows the highest level of policy where tuition-setting authority is granted for four-year public institutions. Forty-three states plus the District of Columbia have adopted a state statute that outlines tuition-setting authority for the four-year public sector. [View the full &quot;50-State Comparison: State Policies on Postsecondary Tuition Setting, Capping and Freezing&quot; here: https://www.ecs.org/50-state-comparison-state-policies-on-postsecondary-tuition/.]
What Is the Highest Level of Policy Where Tuition-Setting Authority Is Granted for Two-Year Public Institutions? 50-State Comparison: State Policies on Postsecondary Tuition Setting, Capping and Freezing
Author: Education Commission of the States
Date: 2020-05-00
Type: Numerical/Quantitative Data
Subjects: Postsecondary Education,Higher Education,Public Colleges,State Policy,Educational Policy,Tuition,State Legislation,State Boards of Education,Two Year Colleges,Board of Education Policy

The &quot;50-State Comparison: State Policies on Postsecondary Tuition Setting, Capping and Freezing&quot; details the highest level of policy, by state, that addresses the authority to set tuition for the four-year and two-year public sectors. This resource shows the highest level of policy where tuition-setting authority is granted for two-year public institutions. Forty-six states plus the District of Columbia have adopted a state statute that outlines tuition-setting authority for the two-year public sector. [View the full &quot;50-State Comparison: State Policies on Postsecondary Tuition Setting, Capping and Freezing&quot; here: https://www.ecs.org/50-state-comparison-state-policies-on-postsecondary-tuition/.]
What Is the Highest Level of Policy Where the Tuition Rate Is Set for Four-Year Public Institutions? 50-State Comparison: State Policies on Postsecondary Tuition Setting, Capping and Freezing
Author: Education Commission of the States
Date: 2020-05-00
Type: Numerical/Quantitative Data
Subjects: Postsecondary Education,Higher Education,Public Colleges,State Policy,Educational Policy,Tuition,State Legislation,State Boards of Education,Board of Education Policy

The &quot;50-State Comparison: State Policies on Postsecondary Tuition Setting, Capping and Freezing&quot; details the highest level of policy, by state, that addresses the authority to set tuition for the four-year and two-year public sectors. This resource shows the highest level of policy where the tuition rate is set for four-year public institutions. In 49 states and the District of Columbia, the authority to set tuition rates in the four-year public sector rests with single- or multi-campus boards. [View the full &quot;50-State Comparison: State Policies on Postsecondary Tuition Setting, Capping and Freezing&quot; here: https://www.ecs.org/50-state-comparison-state-policies-on-postsecondary-tuition/.]
What Is the Highest Level of Policy Where the Tuition Rate Is Set for Two-Year Public Institutions? 50-State Comparison: State Policies on Postsecondary Tuition Setting, Capping and Freezing
Author: Education Commission of the States
Date: 2020-05-00
Type: Numerical/Quantitative Data
Subjects: Postsecondary Education,Higher Education,Public Colleges,State Policy,Educational Policy,Tuition,State Legislation,State Boards of Education,Two Year Colleges,Board of Education Policy

The &quot;50-State Comparison: State Policies on Postsecondary Tuition Setting, Capping and Freezing&quot; details the highest level of policy, by state, that addresses the authority to set tuition for the four-year and two-year public sectors. This resource shows the highest level of policy where the tuition rate is set for two-year public institutions. In 48 states and the District of Columbia, the authority to set tuition rates in the two-year public sector rests with single- or multi-campus boards. [View the full &quot;50-State Comparison: State Policies on Postsecondary Tuition Setting, Capping and Freezing&quot; here: https://www.ecs.org/50-state-comparison-state-policies-on-postsecondary-tuition/.]
Does a State Law, Rule or Regulation Require a Tuition Cap or Freeze for Four-Year Public Institutions? 50-State Comparison: State Policies on Postsecondary Tuition Setting, Capping and Freezing
Author: Education Commission of the States
Date: 2020-05-00
Type: Numerical/Quantitative Data
Subjects: Postsecondary Education,Higher Education,Public Colleges,State Policy,Educational Policy,Tuition,State Legislation

The &quot;50-State Comparison: State Policies on Postsecondary Tuition Setting, Capping and Freezing&quot; details the highest level of policy, by state, that addresses the authority to set tuition for the four-year and two-year public sectors. This resource shows whether a state law, rule or regulation requires a tuition cap or freeze for four-year public institutions. Eleven states have adopted state policies to cap or freeze tuition growth in the four-year public sector. [View the full &quot;50-State Comparison: State Policies on Postsecondary Tuition Setting, Capping and Freezing&quot; here: https://www.ecs.org/50-state-comparison-state-policies-on-postsecondary-tuition/.]
The State of Linguistics in Higher Education Annual Report 2015. Third Edition
Author: Shar, Liz, Comp.
Date: 2016-03-00
Type: Reports - Research
Subjects: Linguistics,Higher Education,Employment,Group Membership,Professional Associations,Databases,National Surveys,Educational Attainment,Academic Rank (Professional),College Faculty,Doctoral Degrees,Salaries,Academic Degrees,Trend Analysis,Undergraduate Students,Graduate Students,Enrollment Trends,Majors (Students),Gender Differences,Syntax,Specialization,Applied Linguistics,Phonology,Semantics,Language Acquisition,Ethnicity,Citizenship,Financial Support,Student Teaching

In an effort to document demographic changes in the academic linguistics community, the Linguistic Society of America (LSA) has commissioned an annual report detailing information about job titles, students, degrees awarded, average salaries, and more. The report offers information about trends in student enrollment and employment by industry. Data for the report was compiled primarily from self-reported information to the LSA's online Directory of Linguistics Programs and Departments. It also includes information based on U.S. federal surveys of PhD linguists and institutions, along with data gleaned from the LSA membership database. An overview of trends in linguistics for this year include: (1) The most common career outcome for linguistics PhDs is a position in higher education; (2) Within higher education, departments report that most members of their faculty are full professors, but the non-professorial category is growing, particularly for women in other full-time and part-time positions; (3) The field of linguistics is growing most rapidly for undergraduates, with an increase of approximately 120 more students awarded BA degrees annually for the past 13 years; (4) Most linguistics undergraduate degrees are awarded to women. Although women represent just over half of graduate students in linguistics, a number which has been increasing over the last 50 years, women comprise over 65 percent of the undergraduate population; and (5) The top five specializations for graduate students in linguistics are: Syntax, Applied Linguistics, Phonology, Semantics, and Language Acquisition. [This edition is based on the original report prepared by Lauren Friedman and Alyson Reed. The data found in this edition were compiled with assistance from Robert Townsend and Dan Foley. For the 2014 report, see ED607300.]
Does a State Law, Rule or Regulation Require a Tuition Cap or Freeze for Two-Year Public Institutions? 50-State Comparison: State Policies on Postsecondary Tuition Setting, Capping and Freezing
Author: Education Commission of the States
Date: 2020-05-00
Type: Numerical/Quantitative Data
Subjects: Postsecondary Education,Higher Education,Public Colleges,State Policy,Educational Policy,Tuition,State Legislation,Two Year Colleges

The &quot;50-State Comparison: State Policies on Postsecondary Tuition Setting, Capping and Freezing&quot; details the highest level of policy, by state, that addresses the authority to set tuition for the four-year and two-year public sectors. This resource shows whether a state law, rule or regulation requires a tuition cap or freeze for two-year public institutions. Ten states have adopted state policies to cap or freeze tuition growth in the two-year public sector. [View the full &quot;50-State Comparison: State Policies on Postsecondary Tuition Setting, Capping and Freezing&quot; here: https://www.ecs.org/50-state-comparison-state-policies-on-postsecondary-tuition/.]
The State of Linguistics in Higher Education Annual Report 2016. Fourth Edition
Author: Chung, May F., Comp.
Date: 2017-02-00
Type: Reports - Research
Subjects: Linguistics,Higher Education,Employment,Group Membership,Databases,National Surveys,Professional Associations,Academic Degrees,Educational Attainment,Salaries,Enrollment Trends,Trend Analysis,Majors (Students),Graduate Students,Undergraduate Students,Doctoral Degrees,College Faculty,Academic Rank (Professional),Gender Differences,Ethnicity,Financial Support,Student Teaching,Citizenship,Specialization

In an effort to document demographic changes in the academic linguistics community, the Linguistic Society of America (LSA) has commissioned an annual report detailing information about job titles, students, degrees awarded, average salaries, and more. The report offers information about trends in student enrollment and employment by industry. Data for the report was compiled primarily from self-reported information to the LSA's online Directory of Linguistics Programs and Departments. It also includes information based on U.S. federal surveys of PhD linguists and institutions, along with data gleaned from the LSA membership database. Trends in linguistics for this year include: (1) The most common career outcome for linguistics PhDs is a position in higher education; (2) Within higher education, departments report that most members of their faculty are full professors, but the non-professorial category is growing, particularly for women in other full-time positions; (3) The field of linguistics is growing most rapidly for undergraduates, with an increase of approximately 120 more students awarded BA degrees annually for the past 14 years, although in recent years, the number of awarded Bachelors has increased at a slower rate; (4) Most linguistics undergraduate degrees are awarded to women. Although women represent over half of graduate students in linguistics, a number which has been increasing over the last 50 years, women comprise 57 percent of the undergraduate population, surpassing the amount of male undergraduate recipients; and (5) More linguistics degrees, including Bachelors, Masters, and PhDs, are awarded to White or Caucasian recipients than any other ethnicity. [This edition is based on the original report prepared by Lauren Friedman and Alyson Reed. The data found in this edition were compiled with assistance from Robert Townsend, Dan Foley, and Katherine Hale. For the 2015 report, see ED607309.]
The State of Linguistics in Higher Education Annual Report 2017. Fifth Edition
Author: Kibbey, Tyler, Comp.
Date: 2018-02-00
Type: Reports - Research
Subjects: Linguistics,Higher Education,Databases,National Surveys,Professional Associations,Academic Degrees,Educational Attainment,Enrollment Trends,Trend Analysis,Doctoral Degrees,Employment,Salaries,College Faculty,Academic Rank (Professional),Majors (Students),Undergraduate Students,Graduate Students,Gender Differences,Ethnicity,Specialization,Sexual Identity,Citizenship,Financial Support,Student Teaching

In an effort to document demographic changes in the academic linguistics community, the Linguistic Society of America (LSA) has commissioned an annual report detailing information about job titles, students, degrees awarded, average salaries, and more. The report offers information about trends in student enrollment and employment by industry. Data for the report was compiled primarily from self-reported information to the LSA's online Directory of Linguistics Programs and Departments. It also includes information based on U.S. federal surveys of PhD linguists and institutions, along with data gleaned from the LSA membership database. Trends in linguistics for this year include: (1) The most common career outcome for linguistics PhDs is a position in higher education; (2) Within higher education, departments report that most members of their faculty are full professors, but the non-professorial category is growing, particularly for women in other full-time positions; (3) The field of linguistics is growing most rapidly for undergraduates, with an increase of approximately 120 more students awarded BA degrees annually for the past 14 years; although in recent years, the number of awarded Bachelor's has increased at a slower rate; (4) Most linguistics undergraduate degrees are awarded to women. Women represent over half of graduate students in linguistics, a number which has been increasing over the last 50 years, while women comprise 57 percent of the undergraduate population, surpassing the amount of male undergraduate recipients; and (5) More linguistics degrees, including Bachelor's, Master's, and PhDs, are awarded to White or Caucasian recipients than any other ethnicity. [This edition is based on the original report prepared by Lauren Friedman and Alyson Reed. The data found in this edition were compiled with assistance from Robert Townsend, Dan Foley, and Katherine Hale. For the 2016 report, see ED607311.]
The State of Linguistics in Higher Education Annual Report 2018. Sixth Edition
Author: Birch, Meghan, Comp.
Date: 2019-02-00
Type: Reports - Research
Subjects: Linguistics,Higher Education,Databases,Trend Analysis,Enrollment Trends,Salaries,National Surveys,Group Membership,Professional Associations,Doctoral Programs,Employment,Academic Rank (Professional),College Faculty,Educational Attainment,Academic Degrees,Undergraduate Students,Graduate Students,Gender Differences,Majors (Students),Ethnicity,Student Teaching,Specialization,Financial Support

In an effort to document demographic changes in the academic linguistics community, the Linguistic Society of America (LSA) has commissioned an annual report detailing information about job titles, students, degrees awarded, average salaries, and more. The report offers information about trends in student enrollment and employment by industry. Data for the report was compiled primarily from self-reported information to the LSA's online Directory of Linguistics Programs and Departments. It also includes information based on U.S. federal surveys of PhD linguists and institutions, along with data gleaned from the LSA membership database. Trends in linguistics for this year include: (1) The most common career outcome for linguistics PhDs is a position at an institution for higher education; (2) Within higher education, departments report that 42% of their faculty are full professors, but the non-professorial category is growing, particularly for women in other part-time positions; (3) The field of linguistics is growing rapidly for doctoral students; (4) Most linguistics doctoral degrees are awarded to women, who represent over half of graduate students in linguistics. This trend has remained consistent over the past six years; and (5) More linguistics degrees, including Bachelor's, Master's, and PhDs, are awarded to White or Caucasian recipients than any other ethnicity. [This edition is based on the original report prepared by Lauren Friedman and Alyson Reed. The data found in this edition were compiled with assistance from Robert Townsend, Benjamin Schmidt, and Karen Hamrick. For the 2017 report, see ED607312.]
The State of Linguistics in Higher Education Annual Report 2019. Seventh Edition
Author: Dorsey, Chanika, Comp.
Date: 2020-03-00
Type: Reports - Research
Subjects: Linguistics,Higher Education,Databases,Professional Associations,Group Membership,National Surveys,Gender Differences,Ethnicity,Enrollment Trends,Trend Analysis,Employment,Educational Attainment,Academic Degrees,Majors (Students),College Faculty,Academic Rank (Professional),Doctoral Degrees,Undergraduate Students,Graduate Students,Financial Support,Student Teaching,Specialization

In an effort to document demographic changes in the academic linguistics community, the Linguistic Society of America (LSA) has commissioned an annual report detailing information about job titles, students, degrees awarded, average salaries, and more. The report offers information about trends in student enrollment and employment by industry. Data for the report was compiled primarily from self-reported information to the LSA's online Directory of Linguistics Programs and Departments. It also includes information based on U.S. federal surveys of PhD linguists and institutions, along with data gleaned from the LSA membership database. Trends in linguistics for this year include: (1) The most common career outcome for linguistics PhDs is a position at an institution for higher education; (2) Within higher education, departments report that 40% of their faculty are full professors, but the non-professorial category is growing, particularly for women in other part-time positions; (3) The number of doctorate students is growing; (4) Most linguistics doctoral degrees are awarded to women, who represent over half of graduate students in linguistics. This trend has remained consistent over the past six years; and (5) More linguistics degrees, including Bachelor's, Master's, and PhDs, are awarded to White or Caucasian recipients than any other ethnicity. [This edition is based on the original report prepared by Lauren Friedman and Alyson Reed. The data found in this edition were compiled with assistance from Robert Townsend, Kelly Kang, Joan Maling, David Foley, and Jonathan Gordon. For the 2018 report, see ED607313.]
Reading First Implementation Study 2008-09: Final Report
Author: Gamse, Beth
Date: 2011-06-00
Type: Reports - Research
Subjects: Reading Programs,Federal Programs,Program Effectiveness,Program Implementation,Budgeting,Retrenchment,Sustainability,Academic Achievement,Primary Education,Federal Legislation,Educational Legislation

The Reading First (RF) Program was first and foremost designed to improve young students' reading skills, as reading proficiency is critical to students' success in school. Students must be able to read and comprehend text well in order to master subject matter taught in various content areas. Disproportionately large numbers of minority and economically disadvantaged children struggle with learning to read, and their lack of reading skill in turn results in inadequate academic performance. The program's authorizing legislation required the U.S. Department of Education (ED) to conduct an independent evaluation of the RF Program. Two major evaluations of Reading First have been completed: The &quot;Reading First Implementation Evaluation&quot; (U.S. Department of Education, 2008) and the &quot;Reading First Impact Study&quot; (Gamse, Jacob, Horst, Boulay and Unlu, 2008), respectively, provided evidence about the implementation and the impact of the program. Findings from those two studies indicated that reading instruction had changed in ways consistent with key program goals and strategies. The current study, the &quot;Reading First Implementation Study: 2008-09,&quot; builds on and addresses issues with the prior two. This report addresses a set of study questions--about states' planned responses to the RF budget reduction and describes state-level staff expectations about which RF program elements can be sustained with reduced funding levels--using interviews conducted with state-level staff in fall 2008. The study's findings are timely, as policymakers and legislators are considering strategies and policies for both current and future federal investments in literacy (e.g., Title I, Part A). A future reexamination of Reading First's implementation and rollout, as well as its focus, may contribute to future programs designed to improve students' reading and academic achievement, perhaps by providing more information on the extent of implementation, including the role of instruction in specific components of reading skill. [For &quot;Reading First Implementation Evaluation: Final Report,&quot; see ED504204. For &quot;Reading First Impact Study. Final Report. NCEE 2009-4038,&quot; see ED503344.]