ethanporcaro/eric-fulltext-meta huggingface dataset:
Undergraduates Who Do Not Apply for Financial Aid. Data Point. NCES 2016-406
Author: Ifill, Nicole
Date: 2016-08-00
Type: Reports - Evaluative
Subjects: National Surveys,Postsecondary Education,Student Surveys,Student Financial Aid,Educational Finance,Paying for College,Grants,Student Loan Programs,Scholarships,Fellowships,Tuition,Veterans,Employers,Undergraduate Students,Student Attitudes,Federal Aid,Institutional Characteristics,Debt (Financial)

This report is based on data from the 2011-12 National Postsecondary Student Aid Study (NPSAS:12), a large, nationally representative sample survey of students that focuses on how they finance their education. NPSAS includes data on the application for and receipt of financial aid, including grants, loans, assistantships, scholarships, fellowships, tuition waivers and discounts, veteran's benefits, employer aid, and other monies (other than from relatives or friends) students use to meet expenses. The following questions were answered: (1) What percentage of undergraduate students did not apply for financial aid in 2011-12, and how does that vary by type of institution?; and (2) What reasons do students give for not applying for financial aid?
Trends in Hate-Related Words at School among Students Ages 12 to 18. Data Point. NCES 2016-166
Author: Cidade, Melissa
Date: 2016-07-00
Type: Reports - Evaluative
Subjects: Trend Analysis,Language Usage,Adolescents,National Surveys,Secondary School Students,Aggression,Racial Bias,Sexual Orientation,Social Bias,Antisocial Behavior,Speech Communication,Qualitative Research,Gender Bias

Data from the School Crime Supplement (SCS) to the National Crime Victimization Survey, a nationally representative sample survey of students ages 12 through 18, were used to analyze trends in hate-related words. The SCS study is completed every other year. Data from seven consecutive surveys are included in this report: school years 2000-01, 2002-03, 2004-05, 2006-07, 2008-09, 2010-11, and 2012-13. Analysis is restricted to the SCS respondents in each year who were enrolled in grades 6 through 12, and did not receive any part of their education through homeschooling during the school year. In the study, students were asked if they had been called a hate-related word in the school building, on school property, on the school bus, or going to or from school, or if they had seen hate-related graffiti in school. Specifically, students were asked if during the school year anyone called them an insulting or bad name at school having to do with their race, religion, ethnic background or national origin, disability, gender, or sexual orientation (hate-related words). Students were also asked if they had seen any hate-related words or symbols (graffiti) written in school classrooms, school hallways, or outside of the school building. It was found that: (1) Among students between the ages of 12 and 18, the percentages who reported being called a hate-related word or seeing hate-related graffiti at school were lower in 2013 than they were in 2001; and (2) Among students ages 12 through 18 who reported being called a hate-related word at school, the percentage of students called a gender-based hate word decreased from 2001 to 2013, while the percentages of those students called race-, ethnically-, and sexual orientation-based hate words increased.
Trends in Bullying at School among Students Ages 12 to 18. Data Point. NCES 2016-004
Author: Cidade, Melissa
Date: 2016-07-00
Type: Reports - Evaluative
Subjects: Crime,Victims,Bullying,National Surveys,Adolescents,Student Surveys,Secondary School Students,Speech Communication,Aggression,Gender Differences,Qualitative Research,Student Behavior

Data from the School Crime Supplement (SCS) to the National Crime Victimization Survey, a nationally representative sample survey of students ages 12 through 18, were used to examine trends in bullying at school. The SCS study is completed every other year. Data from five consecutive surveys are included in this report: school years 2004-05, 2006-07, 2008-09, 2010-11, and 2012-13. Analysis is restricted to the SCS respondents in each year who were enrolled in grades 6 through 12, and did not receive any part of their education through homeschooling during the school year. The SCS asks students whether they were bullied in the school building, on school property, on the school bus, or going to or from school. Specifically, students are asked to report being made fun of, called names, or insulted; being the subject of rumors; being threatened with harm; being pushed, shoved, tripped, or spit on; being pressured into doing things they did not want to do; being excluded from activities on purpose; and having property destroyed on purpose. It was found that: (1) The percentage of students ages 12 through 18 who reported being bullied at school was lower in 2013 than every year since 2005. In 2005, 28 percent of students ages 12 through 18 reported being bullied at school. In 2013, the percentage was 22 percent; and (2) The changes in the percentage of students ages 12 through 18 who reported being bullied at school followed a similar pattern among males and females from 2005 to 2013.
Reports of Bullying and Other Unfavorable Conditions at School. Data Point. NCES 2016-169
Author: Cidade, Melissa
Date: 2016-07-00
Type: Reports - Evaluative
Subjects: National Surveys,Victims,Adolescents,Bullying,Secondary School Students,Educational Environment,Juvenile Gangs,Weapons,Drug Abuse,Drinking,At Risk Students,Aggression,School Vandalism,Visual Arts

Data from the School Crime Supplement (SCS) to the National Crime Victimization Survey (2013), a nationally representative sample survey of students ages 12 through 18, were used to evaluate co-occurring reports of bullying and other unfavorable conditions at school. Analysis is restricted to those respondents who were enrolled in grades 6 through 12, and did not receive any part of their education through homeschooling during the school year. The study included information reported on unfavorable conditions by students who reported being bullied in the school building, on school property, on the school bus, or going to or from school. Unfavorable conditions included presence of gangs, knowing another student brought a gun to school, availability of drugs, availability of alcohol, and seeing hate-related graffiti on school property. Availability of drugs is a composite variable indicating it was possible for students to get any of the following at school: marijuana, crack or other forms of cocaine, uppers, downers, LSD, PCP, heroin, prescription drugs illegally obtained without a prescription, or other illegal drugs. It was found that: (1) Students ages 12 through 18 who reported being bullied at school also reported other unfavorable school conditions at higher rates than students who did not report being bullied; and (2) Students ages 12 through 18 who reported being bullied at school also reported multiple kinds of unfavorable school conditions more often than students who did not report being bullied.
Synthesis of IES-Funded Research on Mathematics: 2002-2013. NCER 2016-2003
Author: Rittle-Johnson, Bethany
Date: 2016-07-00
Type: Reports - Evaluative
Subjects: Mathematics Achievement,Journal Articles,Books,Mathematics Skills,Knowledge Level,Grants,Numbers,Mathematical Concepts,Word Problems (Mathematics),Problem Solving,Elementary School Mathematics,Fractions,Algebra,Middle Schools,Secondary School Mathematics,Faculty Development,Program Development,Program Evaluation,Elementary Secondary Education

The focus of the present synthesis reflects the research on programs, practices, and policies intended to improve mathematics outcomes funded through the Institute of Education Sciences' (IES's) National Center for Education Research (NCER) and National Center for Special Education Research (NCSER). The authors were asked to review those published articles or book chapters that had emerged from projects funded by IES through NCER (U.S. Department of Education 2013) and NCSER (U.S. Department of Education 2012). Specifically, they were asked to review articles from peer-reviewed journals and book chapters from funded projects that were published from January 1, 2002, to June 30, 2014. In forming the synthesized contributions, the authors focused on publications that reported students' mathematics knowledge as an outcome, and the evidence needed to support a contribution generally had to consist of more than one publication from one grant. Thus, the report is not a general synthesis of research in the field, but rather what has been learned to date through review of peer-reviewed publications of 69 IES-funded grants on the topic. The authors identified 28 specific contributions that IES-funded research made to support mathematics learning and teaching from kindergarten through secondary school. The publication organizes the contributions by topic and grade level: (1) Improving Mathematics Learning: Whole Numbers, Operations, and Word Problem Solving in Elementary School; and Fractions and Algebra in the Middle Grades; and (2) Development and Evaluation of Teacher Professional Development Approaches. Each section describes the contributions IES-funded researchers are making in these areas and discusses the projects behind the contributions. Contains a combined list of references and project publications.
Survey Methods for Educators: Collaborative Survey Development (Part 1 of 3). REL 2016-163
Author: Irwin, Clare W.
Date: 2016-08-00
Type: Reports - Descriptive
Subjects: Surveys,Test Construction,Educational Cooperation,Test Items,Media Adaptation,Stakeholders,Expertise

This guide describes a five-step collaborative process that educators can use with other educators, researchers, and content experts to write or adapt questions and develop surveys for education contexts. This process allows educators to leverage the expertise of individuals within and outside of their organization to ensure a high-quality survey instrument that meets the policy or practice goals of the organization. Examples from collaborative survey development projects are highlighted for each step. The five-step collaborative survey development process is: (1) Step 1: Identify topics of interest; (2) Step 2: Identify relevant, existing survey items; (3) Step 3: Draft new survey items and adapt existing survey items; (4) Step 4: Review draft survey items with stakeholders and content experts; and (5) Step 5: Refine the draft survey with pretesting using cognitive interviewing. This guide is the first in a three-part series of survey method guides for educators. This guide covers survey development. The second guide in the series covers sample selection and survey administration, and the third guide in the series covers data analysis and reporting. The following are appended: (1) Additional survey development resources; (2) Sample table of specifications: Excerpt from the Early Childhood Education Research Alliance collaborative survey development project; (3) Sample analysis plan: Excerpt from the Northeast Rural Districts Research Alliance collaborative survey development project; (4) Sample feedback form: Excerpt from the Early Childhood Education Research Alliance collaborative survey development project; (5) Sample cognitive interview protocol from the Northeast Rural Districts Research Alliance collaborative survey development project; and (6) Sample cognitive interview analysis codebook from the Northeast Rural Districts Research Alliance collaborative survey development project. [For &quot;Survey Methods for Educators: Selecting Samples and Administering Surveys (Part 2 of 3). REL 2016-160,&quot; see ED567752. For &quot;Survey Methods for Educators: Analysis and Reporting of Survey Data (Part 3 of 3). REL 2016-164,&quot; see ED567753.]
Survey Methods for Educators: Selecting Samples and Administering Surveys (Part 2 of 3). REL 2016-160
Author: Pazzaglia, Angela M.
Date: 2016-08-00
Type: Reports - Descriptive
Subjects: Surveys,Sampling,Testing,Sample Size,Probability

This guide describes a five-step collaborative process that educators can use with other educators, researchers, and content experts to write or adapt questions and develop surveys for education contexts. This process allows educators to leverage the expertise of individuals within and outside of their organization to ensure a high-quality survey instrument that meets the policy or practice goals of the organization. Examples from collaborative survey development projects are highlighted for each step. The five-step collaborative survey development process is: (1) Step 1: Identify topics of interest; (2) Step 2: Identify relevant, existing survey items; (3) Step 3: Draft new survey items and adapt existing survey items; (4) Step 4: Review draft survey items with stakeholders and content experts; and (5) Step 5: Refine the draft survey with pretesting using cognitive interviewing. This guide is the second in a three-part series of survey method guides for educators. This guide covers sample selection and survey administration. The first guide in the series covers survey development, and the third guide in the series covers data analysis and reporting. The following are appended: (1) Additional survey sampling and administration resources; (2) Using Microsoft Excel to obtain a random sample; (3) Sample survey invitation; and (4) Sample survey reminder. [For &quot;Survey Methods for Educators: Collaborative Survey Development (Part 1 of 3). REL 2016-163,&quot; see ED567751. For &quot;Survey Methods for Educators: Analysis and Reporting of Survey Data (Part 3 of 3). REL 2016-164,&quot; see ED567753.]
Survey Methods for Educators: Analysis and Reporting of Survey Data (Part 3 of 3). REL 2016-164
Author: Pazzaglia, Angela M.
Date: 2016-08-00
Type: Reports - Descriptive
Subjects: Surveys,Data Analysis,Response Rates (Questionnaires),Statistics,Tables (Data)

This guide describes a five-step collaborative process that educators can use with other educators, researchers, and content experts to write or adapt questions and develop surveys for education contexts. This process allows educators to leverage the expertise of individuals within and outside of their organization to ensure a high-quality survey instrument that meets the policy or practice goals of the organization. Examples from collaborative survey development projects are highlighted for each step. The five-step collaborative survey development process is: (1) Step 1: Identify topics of interest; (2) Step 2: Identify relevant, existing survey items; (3) Step 3: Draft new survey items and adapt existing survey items; (4) Step 4: Review draft survey items with stakeholders and content experts; and (5) Step 5: Refine the draft survey with pretesting using cognitive interviewing. This guide is the third in a three-part series of survey method guides for educators. This guide covers data analysis and reporting. The first guide in the series covers survey development, and the second guide in the series covers sample selection and survey administration. The following are appended: (1) Additional resources for analyzing and reporting survey data; (2) Using SPSS to code data; (3) Sample response rate table; (4) Using SPSS to calculate summary statistics; (5) Sample figures and tables; and (6) Sample infographic. [For &quot;Survey Methods for Educators: Collaborative Survey Development (Part 1 of 3). REL 2016-163,&quot; see ED567751. For &quot;Survey Methods for Educators: Selecting Samples and Administering Surveys (Part 2 of 3). REL 2016-160,&quot; see ED567752.]
&quot;Double-Dosing&quot; in Math in North Carolina Public Schools. REL 2016-140
Author: Henry, Gary T.
Date: 2016-08-00
Type: Reports - Research
Subjects: Public Schools,Elementary Schools,Middle Schools,High Schools,Mathematics Curriculum,Enrollment,Remedial Mathematics,Mathematical Enrichment,Elementary School Students,Middle School Students,High School Students,School Districts,Elementary School Teachers,Middle School Teachers,Secondary School Teachers,Incidence,Student Characteristics,Comparative Analysis

Double-dosing in math expands the time for students to learn by having them enroll in two (or occasionally more) math courses during the regular school day. Although the practice can take different forms and be used at different grade levels (Chait, Muller, Goldware, &amp; Housman, 2007; Nomi &amp; Allensworth, 2009), most research on double-dosing in math has focused on students who need preparation to make the transition to Algebra I or similar rigorous high school math courses--typically, grade 8 or grade 9 students. This study aims to provide a more complete picture of the prevalence of double-dosing in math in North Carolina in 2011/12, the most recent year that data were available. It also reports on the use of double-dosing for remediation, maintenance, and enrichment; compares schools that use double-dosing in math with those that do not; and examines the various characteristics of students who receive a double dose of math. Two appendices are included: (1) Data and methodology; and (2) Supplemental tables.
Social Studies Education in Turkey and Islam
Author: Tonga, Deniz
Date: 2016-00-00
Type: Journal Articles
Subjects: Foreign Countries,Islam,Religious Factors,Social Studies,Curriculum,Religion,Islamic Culture,Citizenship Education,Moral Values,Values Education,Course Content,Elementary Secondary Education

Religion is one of the important factors that affect the human life. The concept of religion has a significant place within the scope of social studies education. Religion is a concept closely related to citizenship and value educations. As for the studies conducted in the field of social studies in Turkey, there have been few studies on Islam. The reason is that curriculum of social studies do not cover Islam sufficiently. However, religious elements are emphasized in the social studies course in many countries including the US. Within this context, the aim of this research is to evaluate the relationship between social studies and Islam. First, the concepts of social studies and Islam were addressed, and then mutual concepts and values of social studies and Islam were discussed.
Testing Effect in a College Class
Author: Chang, Sau Hou
Date: 2013-07-00
Type: Reports - Research
Subjects: Predictor Variables,Educational Environment,Learning Strategies,Scores,Achievement Gains,Outcome Measures,Statistical Significance,Pretests Posttests,Lecture Method,Intermode Differences,Teaching Methods,College Students

The present study aimed to investigate the &quot;testing effect&quot; in a regular college class. The research question was whether there were any differences in unit tests performance under different learning conditions. Thirty-three college students at a Midwest university participated in the present study. A repeated measures analysis of variance (ANOVA) was used with the independent variable of learning conditions (study-study, test-test and control). The dependent variables were three unit tests. Results showed that the mean unit test score in the test-test condition (66.29%) was significantly higher than that in the study-study condition (59.47%). However, the mean unit test score in the control condition (61.52%) did not differ from those in the test-test condition and study-study condition. Students rated the pre-/post-tests in the test-test condition (5.9), and the control condition when they were given only lecture notes (5.13) more helpful than the pre-/post-study statements in the study-study condition (3.97).
Pre-Service Science Teachers' Cognitive Structures Regarding Science, Technology, Engineering, Mathematics (STEM) and Science Education
Author: Hacioglu, Yasemin
Date: 2016-07-00
Type: Journal Articles
Subjects: Preservice Teachers,Cognitive Structures,STEM Education,Science Teachers,Associative Learning,Semi Structured Interviews,Student Attitudes,Scientific Concepts,Mathematical Concepts,Phenomenology,Foreign Countries,Concept Mapping,Qualitative Research,Teacher Education

The aim of this study is to reveal pre-service science teachers' cognitive structures regarding Science, Technology, Engineering, Mathematics (STEM) and science education. The study group of the study consisted of 192 pre-service science teachers. A Free Word Association Test (WAT) consisting of science, technology, engineering, mathematics and science education concepts and semi-structured interview records were utilised to reveal their opinions regarding these concepts and inter-conceptual relations were used as data collection tools. While the WAT was implemented with all of the pre-service teachers, semi-structured interviews were carried out with only eight of the pre-service science teachers. Using two data collection tools via triangulation, enabled the researchers to obtain similar and varied findings. According to the frequencies, WAT was analysed using the cut-off point (CP) method; hence, concept network maps were composed and interviews were descriptively analysed. The findings of the study revealed that pre-service teachers' cognitive structures involved STEM disciplines and science education were quite independent from each other. Also, they could not make a distinction between science concept and science education concept, nor associate &quot;technology, engineering and mathematics' concepts&quot; with &quot;science and science education&quot; concepts.
Co-Teaching in Student Teaching of an Elementary Education Program
Author: Chang, Sau Hou
Date: 2014-12-00
Type: Reports - Research
Subjects: Elementary Education,Student Teaching,Team Teaching,Cooperating Teachers,Preservice Teachers,Student Surveys,Teacher Surveys,Educational Practices,Likert Scales,Cooperative Planning,Communication Skills,Collegiality,Teacher Collaboration,Classroom Techniques,Knowledge Base for Teaching,Teaching Methods,Instructional Effectiveness

Successful co-teaching relies on essential elements, such as collaborative planning, communication skills, partnership relationship, classroom application, knowledge base, and co-teaching approaches. The objective of this study is to examine if teacher candidates and cooperating teachers use different essential co-teaching elements to implement co-teaching at the beginning and end of student teaching. Twenty-six teacher candidates and sixteen cooperating teachers completed the Essential Elements of Co-Teaching (EECT) survey by the end of student teaching. The results show that teacher candidates and cooperating teachers use different co-teaching elements and approaches by the end of student teaching. Implications for student teaching are recommended.
The Effects of Test Trial and Processing Level on Immediate and Delayed Retention
Author: Chang, Sau Hou
Date: 2013-07-00
Type: Reports - Research
Subjects: College Students,Retention (Psychology),Cognitive Processes,Correlation,Tests,Word Lists,Psycholinguistics,Databases,Word Frequency,Statistical Analysis

The purpose of the present study was to investigate the effects of test trial and processing level on immediate and delayed retention. Seventy-six college students were randomly assigned first to the single test and the repeated test trials, and then to the shallow processing level and the deep processing level to study forty stimulus words. Results showed that single test trial enhanced immediate retention and deep processing enhanced immediate and delayed retention. Findings also showed an interaction between test trial and processing level in delayed recall. When information was processed at a shallow level, single test trial enhanced delayed retention. When information was processed at a deep level, single test trial and repeated test trial performed similarly in delayed retention. The processing level at encoding seems to mediate the benefits of test trials at retrieval practice in delayed retention.