ethanporcaro/eric-fulltext-meta huggingface dataset:
Parents and the High Cost of Child Care: 2013 Report
Author: Wood, Stephen
Date: 2013-00-00
Type: Reports - Research
Subjects: Child Care,Costs,Parents,Family Income,Expenditures,Student Costs,Infant Care,Rural Urban Differences,Poverty,Financial Support,One Parent Family,Child Care Centers,Public Support

Every week in the United States, nearly 11 million children younger than age 5 are in some type of child care arrangement. On average, these children spend 36 hours a week in child care. While parents are children's first and most important teachers, child care programs provide early learning for millions of young children daily, having a profound impact on their development and readiness for school. For many parents, one of the initial shocks in becoming a parent is discovering the high price of child care. &quot;Parents and the High Cost of Child Care: 2013 Report&quot; uses 2012 data to show the average fees families are charged for legally operating child care centers and family child care homes in every state and the District of Columbia. The report looks at why child care is so expensive and families' options for paying for child care. The following tabular appendixes are included: (1) 2012 Average Annual Cost of Full-Time Care by State; (2) 2012 Ranking of Least-Affordable Child Care for an Infant in a Center; (3) 2012 Ranking of Least-Affordable Child Care for a 4-Year-Old Child in a Center; (4) 2012 Ranking of Least-Affordable Child Care for a School-Aged Child in a Center; (5) 2012 Average Child Care Center Costs and Median Housing Costs by State; (6) 2012 Average Annual Costs of Full-Time Child Care in a Center and Public College Tuition and Fees by State; (7) 2012 Average Costs for Center-Based Care for an Infant Compared to Varying Poverty Levels; (8) 2012 Average Costs for Center-Based Care for a 4-Year-Old Compared to Varying Poverty Levels; (9) 2012 Average Costs for an Infant in a Family Child Care Home Compared to Varying Poverty Levels; (10) 2012 Average Costs for a 4-Year-Old in a Family Child Care Home Compared to Varying Poverty Levels; (11) 2012 Ranking of Affordability of Center-Based Care for Single Mothers; (12) 2012 Urban-Rural Cost Difference for Center-Based Care, by State; and (13) 2012 Urban-Rural Cost Difference for Family Child Care, by State. A list of resources for families and a glossary are also provided. [For the 2012 report, see ED559910.]
Parents and the High Cost of Child Care: 2012 Report
Author: Child Care Aware of America
Date: 2012-00-00
Type: Reports - Research
Subjects: Child Care,Costs,Parents,Family Income,Expenditures,Student Costs,Infant Care,Rural Urban Differences,Poverty,Financial Support,One Parent Family,Child Care Centers

&quot;Parents and the High Cost of Child Care: 2012 Report&quot; presents 2011 data reflecting what parents pay for full-time child care in America. It includes average fees for both child care centers and family child care homes. Information was collected through a survey conducted in January 2012 that asked for the average costs charged for child care for infants, 4-year-old children and school-age children in child care centers and in family child care homes in every state. The information was provided by State Child Care Resource and Referral (CCR&amp;R) Network offices and local agencies that maintain data about child care programs in the communities they serve, or it was drawn from the most recent state market rate surveys. Eleven tabular appendices are included: (1) 2011 Average Annual Cost of Full-Time Care by State; (2) 2011 Ranking of Least-Affordable Child Care for an Infant in a Center; (3) 2011 Ranking of Least-Affordable Child Care for a 4-Year-Old Child in a Center; (4) 2011 Ranking of Least-Affordable Child Care for a School-Aged Child in a Center; (5) 2011 Average Child Care Center Costs and Median Housing Costs by State; (6) 2011 Average Annual Costs of Full-Time Child Care in a Center and Public College Tuition and Fees by State; (7) 2011 Ranking of Affordability of Center Care for Single Mothers; (8) 2011 Average Costs for Center-Based Care for an Infant Compared to Varying Poverty Levels; (9) 2011 Average Costs for Center-Based Care for a 4-Year-Old Compared to Varying Poverty Levels; (10) 2011 Urban-Rural Cost Difference for Center Care, by State and 2011 Urban-Rural Cost Difference for Family Child Care, by State; and (11) Licensing Threshold for Family Child Care Home Caring for Unrelated Children.
Usage of Policies and Practices Promoted by Race to the Top. NCEE 2015-4018
Author: Dragoset, Lisa
Date: 2015-09-00
Type: Reports - Research
Subjects: Educational Legislation,Federal Legislation,Federal Programs,Federal Aid,State Policy,Educational Policy,Educational Practices,Grants,Academic Standards,Student Evaluation,Data,Information Systems,Teacher Certification,Teacher Evaluation,Principals,Certification,Administrator Evaluation,School Turnaround,Charter Schools,English Language Learners,Interviews,Elementary Secondary Education,State Standards,Educational Improvement,Capacity Building

The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 injected $7 billion into two of the Obama administration's signature competitive education grant programs: Race to the Top (RTT) and School Improvement Grants (SIG). While RTT focused on state policies and SIG focused on school practices, both programs promoted related policies and practices, including an emphasis on turning around the nation's lowest-performing schools. Despite the sizable investment in both of these programs, comprehensive evidence on their implementation and impact has been limited to date. This report focuses on two implementation questions: (1) Do states and schools that received grants actually use the policies and practices promoted by these two programs? (2) Does their usage of these policies and practices differ from states and schools that did not receive grants? Answers to these questions provide context for interpreting impact findings that will be presented in a future report. The first volume of this report details our RTT findings, which are based on spring 2012 interviews with 49 states and the District of Columbia. Key findings include: (1) Early (Round 1 and 2) RTT states reported using more policies and practices promoted by RTT than non-RTT states in five of the six major areas examined: state capacity, standards and assessments, data systems, teachers and leaders, and charter schools (school turnaround was the exception). Later (Round 3) RTT states reported using more policies and practices promoted by RTT than non-RTT states in just one area: teachers and leaders; (2) Across all states, usage of policies and practices promoted by RTT was highest in the state capacity and data systems areas (66 and 68 percent of policies and practices examined) and lowest in the teachers and leaders area (24 percent or policies and practices examined); and (3) There were no differences between RTT and non-RTT states in usage of English Language Learner (ELL)-focused policies and practices promoted by RTT. States with higher percentages of ELLs used more ELL-focused policies and practices than states with lower percentages of ELLs, but there were no differences in usage between states with higher and lower ELL/non-ELL achievement gaps. Four appendices include: (1) Additional Figures Based on State Interviews; (2) Detailed Findings from State Interviews; (3) Interview Questions Aligned with RTT Policies and Practices; and (4) Additional Information about English Language Learner-Focused Analysis for the RTT Component of the Evaluation. [For the executive summary, see ED559918.]
Usage of Policies and Practices Promoted by Race to the Top and School Improvement Grants: Executive Summary. NCEE 2015-4017
Author: James-Burdumy, Susanne
Date: 2015-09-00
Type: Reports - Descriptive
Subjects: Educational Legislation,Federal Legislation,Federal Programs,Federal Aid,State Policy,Educational Policy,Educational Practices,Grants,Academic Standards,Student Evaluation,Data,Information Systems,Teacher Certification,Teacher Evaluation,Principals,Certification,Administrator Evaluation,School Turnaround,Charter Schools,English Language Learners,Interviews,Elementary Secondary Education,State Standards,Educational Improvement,Capacity Building

The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 injected $7 billion into two of the Obama administration's signature competitive education grant programs: Race to the Top (RTT) and School Improvement Grants (SIG). While RTT focused on state policies and SIG focused on school practices, both programs promoted related policies and practices, including an emphasis on turning around the nation's lowest-performing schools. Despite the sizable investment in both of these programs, comprehensive evidence on their implementation and impact has been limited to date. This report focuses on two implementation questions: (1) Do states and schools that received grants actually use the policies and practices promoted by these two programs? (2) Does their usage of these policies and practices differ from states and schools that did not receive grants? Answers to these questions provide context for interpreting impact findings that will be presented in a future report. [For the full report, see ED559916.]
The Process of Discovery: The CLIR Postdoctoral Fellowship Program and the Future of the Academy
Author: Maclachlan, John C., Ed.
Date: 2015-09-00
Type: Collected Works - General
Subjects: Postdoctoral Education,Fellowships,Library Education,Futures (of Society),Educational Trends,Student Experience,Educational History,Higher Education,College Instruction,Surveys,Graduate Students,Cooperation,Academic Libraries,Exhibits,Library Materials,Electronic Libraries,Research,Data,Information Management,Doctoral Programs,Careers

This volume celebrates the first decade of Council on Library and Information Resources' (CLIR) Postdoctoral Fellowship Program by bringing together 20 past and present CLIR postdoctoral fellows to share their thoughts on their experiences, and more broadly, on the direction of academia. Each essay is a look into the working conditions associated with creating a new profession of expertise and responsibilities in response to emerging forms of scholarly communication and pedagogy. Following a foreword by Charles Henry and an introduction about the publication (John C. Maclachlan, Elizabeth A. Waraksa, and Christa Williford), this volume contains the following essays: (1) A Brief History of the CLIR Postdoctoral Fellowship Program (2004-the present) (Elizabeth A. Waraksa); (2) Postdoctoral Pedagogy (Lauren Coats and Elliott Shore); (3) The CLIR Postdoctoral Fellowship 10th Anniversary Survey (Jason J. Brodeur, John C. Maclachlan, and Jennifer M. Parrot); (4) Collaboration in the Evolving Academy: Experiences from the CLIR Postdoctoral Fellowship Program (Tamsyn Rose-Steel, Inna Kouper, Jennifer M. Parrott, and Katie Rawson) [Contains an appendix: Sample Job Descriptions.]; (5) Changing and Expanding Libraries: Exhibitions, Institutional Repositories, and the Future of Academia (Amy Chen, Sarah Pickle, and Heather Waldroup); (6) Libraries and the Research Data Management Landscape (Jodi Reeves Flores, Jason J. Brodeur, Morgan G. Daniels, Natsuko Nicholls, and Ece Turnator); (7) Toward a Trackless Future: Moving beyond &quot;Alt-Ac&quot; and &quot;Post-Ac&quot; (Meridith Beck Sayre, Marta Brunner, Brian Croxall, and Emily McGinn); and (8) Where Next? (Christa Williford). The following are appended: (1) Postdoctoral Fellows Host Institutions; and (2) Contributors to the CLIR Postdoctoral Fellowship Educational Program 2004-2015. [Individual essays contain references.]
Usage of Practices Promoted by School Improvement Grants. NCEE 2015-4019
Author: Dragoset, Lisa
Date: 2015-09-00
Type: Reports - Research
Subjects: Grants,Educational Improvement,Federal Legislation,Federal Aid,Educational Legislation,Federal Programs,School Turnaround,Evidence,School Surveys,Educational Change,Educational Policy,Educational Practices,Program Implementation,Models,English Language Learners,Achievement Gap,Alignment (Education),Interviews,Comparative Analysis,Online Surveys,Teacher Effectiveness,Administrator Effectiveness,Educational Administration

The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 injected $7 billion into two of the Obama administration's signature competitive education grant programs: Race to the Top (RTT) and School Improvement Grants (SIG). While RTT focused on state policies and SIG focused on school practices, both programs promoted related policies and practices, including an emphasis on turning around the nation's lowest-performing schools. Despite the sizable investment in both of these programs, comprehensive evidence on their implementation and impact has been limited to date. This report focuses on two implementation questions: (1) Do states and schools that received grants actually use the policies and practices promoted by these two programs? (2) Does their usage of these policies and practices differ from states and schools that did not receive grants? Answers to these questions provide context for interpreting impact findings that will be presented in a future report. The second volume of this report details our SIG findings, which are based on spring 2012 surveys of approximately 470 schools in 60 districts and 22 states. Key findings include: (1) Schools implementing a SIG-funded model reported using more practices promoted by SIG than schools not implementing such models in all four areas examined: comprehensive instructional reforms, teacher and principal effectiveness, learning time and community-oriented schools, and operational flexibility and support; (2) Across all schools, usage of practices promoted by SIG was highest in the comprehensive instructional reforms area (90 percent of practices examined) and lowest in the operational flexibility and support area (46 percent of practices examined); and (3) There were no differences between schools implementing a SIG-funded model and schools not implementing one in usage of ELL-focused practices promoted by SIG. Schools with higher percentages of ELLs used more ELL-focused practices than schools with lower percentages of ELLs, but there were no differences in usage between schools with higher and lower ELL/non-ELL achievement gaps. Five appendices are included: (1) Additional Figures Based on School Surveys; (2) District-Reported Practices Aligned with the SIG Application Criteria; (3) Detailed Findings from Interviews and Surveys; (4) Survey Questions Aligned with SIG Practices; and (5) Additional Information about English Language Learner-Focused Analyses for the SIG Component of the Evaluation.
State, District, and School Implementation of Reforms Promoted under the Recovery Act: 2009-10 through 2011-12. The Final Report from Charting the Progress of Education Reform: An Evaluation of the Recovery Act's Role. NCEE 2015-4016
Author: Troppe, Patricia
Date: 2015-09-00
Type: Reports - Research
Subjects: Federal Aid,Federal Legislation,Educational Change,Academic Standards,Student Evaluation,Data,Information Systems,Faculty Development,Educational Improvement,School Turnaround,School Districts,Schools,State Standards,State Departments of Education,Elementary Secondary Education,Program Implementation

This report, based on surveys completed by all 50 State Education Agencies (SEAs) and the District of Columbia (DC) and nationally representative samples of districts and schools during spring 2011 and 2012, examines implementation of the key education reform strategies promoted by the Recovery Act in 2011-12, the extent to which implementation reflected progress since Recovery Act funds were first distributed, and challenges with implementation. Findings showed variation in the prevalence and progress of reform activities across the areas of reform assessed and by state, district, or school level. Implementation progress was most consistent across the areas of reform at the state level. At all levels, implementation challenges related to educator evaluation and compensation were common. The following are appended: (1) Methodology; (2) Indicators, Components, and Recovery Act Program Requirements; (3) Detailed Tables for Standards and Assessments Chapter; (4) Detailed Tables for Data Systems Chapter; (5) Detailed Tables for Educator Workforce Development Chapter; (6) Detailed Tables for Improving Low-Performing Schools Chapter; and (6) Detailed Tables for Reforms Across Assurance Areas Chapter.
Advancing Arts Education through an Expanded School Day: Lessons from Five Schools
Author: Farbman, David
Date: 2015-00-00
Type: Reports - Research
Subjects: Art Education,Extended School Day,Case Studies,Charter Schools,Middle Schools,High Schools,Elementary Schools

In schools across the country, educators recognize the power of the arts to change young lives. They know that students' sustained engagement with enriching, high-quality experiences in the arts promotes essential skills and perspectives--like the capacity to solve problems, express ideas, harness and hone creativity, and persevere toward a job well done. And yet today, educators at many schools that operate with conventional schedules are forced to choose between offering their students valuable opportunities to pursue the arts and focusing on other rigorous core classes that also are necessary for success in the 21st century. This report presents case studies of five schools utilizing the longer student and teacher days to prioritize time for arts education as they work to improve overall academic instruction and focus on individual student achievement. The five schools are: (1) Berkshire Arts &amp; Technology Charter Public School (BART); (2) Clarence Edwards Middle School; (3) Metropolitan Arts and Technology Charter High School (Metro); (4) Cole Arts and Sciences Academy (CASA); and (5) Roger Williams Middle School.
The Skills to Pay the Bills: An Evaluation of an Effort to Help Nonprofits Manage Their Finances
Author: Walker, Karen
Date: 2015-02-00
Type: Reports - Research
Subjects: Nonprofit Organizations,After School Programs,Money Management,Program Evaluation,Skill Development,Training,Coaching (Performance),Models,Professional Development,Program Improvement,Planning,Financial Support,Human Services,Organizational Development

This study examines a Wallace Foundation-sponsored initiative aimed at improving the financial management skills and practices of 25 Chicago afterschool providers through training and coaching. Two models for this professional development were provided and each produced long-lasting improvements. Moreover, organizations receiving the less-expensive group training and coaching improved almost as much as those receiving more intensive customized coaching. The following are appended: (1) Outcome Measure Definitions; and (2) Chicago Organizations That Participated in the Strengthening Financial Management Initiative.
Induction and Mentoring of New Teachers: Q&amp;A with Ellen Moir. REL Mid-Atlantic Teacher Effectiveness Webinar Series
Author: Regional Educational Laboratory Mid-Atlantic (ED)
Date: 2013-04-25
Type: Opinion Papers
Subjects: Mentors,Teacher Effectiveness,Beginning Teacher Induction,Evidence,Educational Research,Academic Achievement,Teacher Persistence,Program Effectiveness,Course Organization,Supervisory Training,Teacher Selection,Teacher Evaluation,Program Development,Program Design,Online Courses

In this webinar, Ellen Moir, CEO and founder of the New Teacher Center, shared research that shows evidence of the effectiveness of the NTC induction model in raising student achievement and its potential for reducing teacher attrition (Moir, 2009). This Q&amp;A addressed the questions participants had for Ellen Moir following the webinar. The webinar recording and PowerPoint presentation are also available through hyperlinks in the document.
We Can Do Better: Child Care Aware® of America's Ranking of State Child Care Center Regulations and Oversight. 2013 Update
Author: Child Care Aware of America
Date: 2013-00-00
Type: Reports - Research
Subjects: Child Care,Young Children,Preschool Children,Certification,Benchmarking,Program Effectiveness,Program Administration,Scores,Family Environment,Child Care Centers,Training,Child Health,Child Safety,Parent Participation,Geographic Location,Quality Assurance,State Standards,State Policy,Child Development,Background,Educational Attainment,Administrators,Teachers,Educational Quality,Professional Development,Learning Activities,Communication Strategies,Teacher Student Ratio

Each week, nearly 11 million children under age 5 are in some type of child care setting for an average of 35 hours. Parents, as consumers of child care, equate a child care license with state approval--a gold seal for those businesses to which a state grants a license. Child Care Aware® of America reviews state licensing policies, which include both program requirements and oversight, to better understand the settings that states have given approval to for the care of our nation's children. The 2013 &quot;We Can Do Better&quot; report scores 51 states (including the District of Columbia) and the Department of Defense (DoD) on key aspects of their child care centers. Child Care Aware® of America used 15 benchmarks that represent the most basic research based criteria. Eleven program requirements were scored as were four oversight elements. Scores were used to develop three rankings: (1) An overall ranking combining the scores for both program requirements and oversight; (2) A ranking for child care center program requirements; and (3) A ranking for child care center oversight. The average score was 92-61 percent of all possible points, a grade of D for many school children. Although changes in this updated report prevent direct comparison with Child Care Aware ® of America's previous years' child care center reports, it is more conceptually in line with the scoring of small family child care home regulations. Some adjustments made to the child care center scoring include: (1) Additional topics scored for initial training; (2) Additional items scored for developmental domains; (3) The health and safety benchmark was split into two benchmarks and additional items were scored; and (4) Additional item scored for parent involvement. Progress has been made in many states since Child Care Aware® of America's 2007 report, however, more progress is needed to really ensure that children are safe and in a quality setting. The benchmarks selected by Child Care Aware® of America represent basic, minimal criteria. As this report shows, state licensing requirements vary greatly, and few really set policies to ensure that children are safe and in a setting to promote their healthy development. The following are appended: (1) Child Care Center Requirements and Oversight in Individual States and The Department of Defense; (2) State Tables for Criteria Scored; and (3) Methodology. [To access &quot;Parents and the High Cost of Child Care: 2013 Report&quot; in ERIC, see ED559908.]
Professional Development: What Works? Q&amp;A with Dr. Hilda Borko. REL Mid-Atlantic Teacher Effectiveness Webinar Series
Author: Regional Educational Laboratory Mid-Atlantic (ED)
Date: 2013-05-23
Type: Reports - Descriptive
Subjects: Teacher Effectiveness,Best Practices,Faculty Development,Online Courses,Program Effectiveness,Praxis,Fidelity,Sustainability,Change Strategies,Instructional Leadership,Institutes (Training Programs),Elementary Secondary Education,Mathematics Teachers,Mathematics Instruction,Educational Practices

In this webinar, Dr. Hilda Borko, professor, Stanford University Graduate School of Education, presented examples of promising models of professional development, including the Problem-Solving Cycle, Learning and Teaching Geometry, and the use of videos as tools for teacher learning. This Q&amp;A addressed the questions participants had for Dr. Borko following the webinar. The webinar recording and PowerPoint presentation are also available.