ethanporcaro/eric-fulltext-meta huggingface dataset:
The Study of Child Language Brokering: Past, Current and Emerging Research
Author: Antonini, Rachele
Date: 2010-00-00
Type: Journal Articles
Subjects: Translation,Children,Immigrants,Parent Child Relationship,Interviews,Adolescents,Acculturation,Language Attitudes,Bilingualism,Conflict,Family Relationship,Language Usage,Cultural Differences,Foreign Countries

This special issue of &quot;mediAzioni,&quot; the online journal of the Department of Interdisciplinary Studies on Translation, Languages and Culture (SITLeC) of the University of Bologna at Forli, derives from the &quot;Study Day on Child Language Brokering&quot; held in Forli in 2008. The Study Day began with a morning session during which established scholars in the field of child language brokering (henceforth CLB) from different countries were invited to talk about their research and studies and share the experience and expertise they have gained within different disciplines and with a variety of methodological approaches. The morning session was then followed by a round table in the afternoon entitled &quot;Child Language Brokering: The point of view of institutions and former child brokers&quot; aimed at presenting the point of view of the representatives of various public institutions as well as former language brokers who had acted as interpreters for their families in their young age. The issues described and discussed by the contributors and participants to both the morning and afternoon sessions where so varied and relevant to the topic of child language brokering that we decided to put together a volume that would provide an overview of how research on interpreting and translation activities performed by children and adolescents began, and of the development of current and future research in this field of study. For this reason, this volume includes not only contributions by the participants to the Study Day but also from other distinguished and established scholars in this field of research, as well as articles by new and emerging researchers. (Contains 4 footnotes.)
Top Cited Scholars in Multicultural Counseling: A Citation Analysis of Journal Articles in PsycINFO
Author: Piotrowski, Chris
Date: 2013-01-05
Type: Reports - Research
Subjects: Counseling,Journal Articles,Citation Analysis,Researchers

The area of multicultural counseling is a sub-field of the counseling profession and research in this specialty has proliferated at a rapid pace over the past 20 years. In order to gauge emergent trends in multicultural counseling, researchers have conducted content analyses of scholarly documents like journals and books. A related methodology used to achieve such findings has been citation analysis; usually targeting authors, topical issues, journals, and educational institutions. Ponterotto et al. (2012) reported findings on the top cited scholars in the sub-field, based on an analysis of textbooks in the area. The current study was an attempt to corroborate the findings of Ponterotto et al. by conducting a citation analysis of research from journal articles of the top authors in multicultural counseling. To that end, a keyword search in the database PsycINFO was performed. The results showed that the rank-order list of the top cited scholars in this area, presented in Table 1, was somewhat dissimilar than that reported by Ponterotto et al. (2012). These findings confirm prior research that cautions researchers to be tepid about the robustness of citation analysis results since cited-reference findings are largely a function of method of analysis. (Contains 1 table.)
Reliability of Using Piaget's Logic of Meanings to Analyze Pre-Service Teachers' Understanding of Conceptual Problems in Earth Science
Author: Wavering, Michael
Date: 2013-05-29
Type: Reports - Research
Subjects: Logical Thinking,Reliability,Coding,Data Analysis,Preservice Teachers,Secondary School Teachers,Earth Science,Misconceptions,Interviews,Interrater Reliability

A dissertation study looking at preservice teachers' alternative conceptions in earth science was completed by one of the authors. The data used for this study from the dissertation were a series of eleven interviews.  (Purpose) The authors of this manuscript wanted to provide more in-depth analysis of these interviews, specifically to provide a detailed look at the logical structures used by the interviewees. The means to perform this analysis was Piaget's Logic of Meanings. One of the issues in this data analysis was the reliability of coding reasoning using Logic of Meanings.    (Methodology) To overcome the reliability problem, the Binary Coding Protocol for Analysis of Interviews was developed.  (Results) Using this protocol enabled the authors to achieve excellent inter-rater reliability.  (Conclusion) Use of the protocol enabled the researchers to use Piaget's Logic of Meanings reliably for the analysis of text for the use of reasoning structures.  (Additional data) (Contains 3 tables.)
Summary of States&apos; Strategies and Consequences for ESEA Focus Schools. Solutions. Issue No. 2
Author: Perlman, Carole
Date: 2013-01-00
Type: Reports - Descriptive
Subjects: Elementary Secondary Education,Federal Legislation,Educational Legislation,Accountability,Disadvantaged Schools,Achievement Gap,Graduation Rate,Educational Improvement,School Turnaround,Needs Assessment,Program Development,Program Implementation,Technical Assistance,Budgets,Financial Support,Educational Finance,Disabilities,English Language Learners

As of January 1, 2013, 34 states and the District of Columbia have been granted waivers from certain provisions of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA). Part of each successful flexibility application was a state accountability system that could identify priority schools (the lowest performing 5% of Title 1 schools) and focus schools (those with the greatest achievement gaps or in which subgroups are furthest behind). This document was written in response to a request made of the Building State Capacity and Productivity Center by a state education agency for information on what other states are doing to assist focus schools and what consequences will be imposed if focus schools fail to improve. This document is an attempt to summarize the states' strategies and consequences for focus schools, primarily from their responses to section 2.3.iii of the flexibility request. The strategies used with focus schools generally include a needs assessment, development and implementation of a school improvement plan that specifically targets the groups with the greatest achievement gaps, monitoring implementation of the plan, and the provision of technical assistance by the state education agency (SEA), local education agency (LEA), regional service center, or outside partner. States vary considerably in the consequences imposed on focus schools that fail to reduce the achievement gaps or increase the graduation rates that resulted in their being classified as focus schools. Of the 34 states and District of Columbia, just over a third (13) do not specify any penalties for focus schools that fail to meet exit criteria within a specified amount of time. (Contains 35 tables and 4 footnotes.)
Discovering and Implementing Best Practices to Strengthen SEAs: Collaborative Benchmarking
Author: Edvance Research, Inc., Building State Capacity and Productivity Center (BSCP Center)
Date: 2013-01-00
Type: Reports - Descriptive
Subjects: Benchmarking,Best Practices,State Agencies,Program Implementation,Agency Cooperation,Group Dynamics,Organizational Objectives,Educational Needs,Educational Resources,Change Strategies,Participant Characteristics,Educational Administration,Program Administration

This paper is written for state educational agency (SEA) leaders who are considering the benefits of collaborative benchmarking, and it addresses the following questions: (1) What does benchmarking of best practices entail?; (2) How does "collaborative benchmarking" enhance the process?; (3) How do SEAs control the process so that "their" needs remain the focus?; and (4) What is the resource commitment required of SEAs? Based on the information gained from the collaborative benchmarking process, there are two key outcomes. The first is the rich experience of the SEA participants who garner more specific information pertaining to their own needs and feed it into a specific work plan outlining steps to improve their processes. A second, broader key outcome, "Benchmarking Best Practices Report," is a summary of the best practices and related recommendations included in a report of project findings for broad dissemination. Also provided in this paper is a more detailed description of the collaborative benchmarking process, including an established set of steps and the related time and effort for each step. (Contains 3 footnotes.)
Developing and Implementing Effective Communications Systems: Improving SEA Communication with LEAs, Partners/Vendors, and the Public. Benchmark. No. 2
Author: Brasiel, S.
Date: 2013-02-00
Type: Reports - Descriptive
Subjects: Program Implementation,State Departments of Education,Communication Strategies,Organizational Communication,State Agencies,Institutional Advancement,Program Improvement,Stakeholders

State education agencies (SEAs) are central players in initiating and leading new reform efforts and in supporting and implementing Federal initiatives. Traditional approaches to providing public information are not adequate for producing public awareness and support and in supporting program implementation at the local level. With limited resources for communication, SEAs often have very few staff devoted to communication systems. As SEAs seek to communicate information about new programs, policies and outcomes, there is a need to have a strategic vision and a proactive, coordinated plan for communication rather than a reactive response. Many SEAs are seeking support in developing the capacity to be more strategic and effective in developing and implementing a communication system.
New Challenges, New Mindsets, New Disciplines: Transforming the SEA into a Modern Performance Organization. Solutions. Issue No. 1
Author: Gross, Betheny
Date: 2013-01-00
Type: Reports - Descriptive
Subjects: Organizational Change,Organizational Objectives,Organizational Theories,State Agencies,Performance Technology,Program Improvement,Performance Factors,Program Administration,Program Implementation,Trend Analysis,Change Strategies,Expectation,State Policy,Productivity,Capacity Building

State education agencies (SEAs) are under fire and face new expectations from all sides. The federal government, state legislatures and governors, and citizens themselves are calling upon the SEA to do "more"--more to improve outcomes for students, more to close the achievement gap, and more to meet the diverse instructional needs of students. These new expectations do not come with new funding. SEAs must learn to work with "less." It is within this context that the Building State Capacity and Productivity Center (BSCP Center) will help SEAs to improve their performance and productivity. This work will address today's "productivity challenge" by emphasizing a new, performance-oriented way for states to structure their work, make decisions, and re-imagine and transform their institutions. The new BSCP Center will help states better implement strategies and also make smart decisions about what strategies to implement in a diverse and rapidly changing policy environment. (Contains 2 tables and 3 footnotes.)
Aligning the SEA's Compliance Responsibilities and Performance Objectives. Benchmark. No. 3
Author: Nafziger, D.
Date: 2013-02-00
Type: Reports - Descriptive
Subjects: State Programs,Benchmarking,Alignment (Education),Compliance (Legal),Leadership Responsibility,Agency Cooperation,Performance,Organizational Objectives

Assuring that state and local agencies comply with the requirements of Federal and state programs has been a central feature of SEAs. The purposes of compliance requirements--ensuring both fiscal integrity and that targeted groups receive intended benefits--are important. While such requirements are often well-intentioned, too often they can act to unnecessarily restrict SEAs and districts from serving the very groups such programs are intended to benefit. A compliance-focused mentality results in: (1) Organizational silos that impede teamwork and problem solving; (2) Administrative, rather than substantive, focus on school improvement; (3) Redundant compliance efforts across program areas; (4) Unnecessary restrictions on the use of funds that impede managerial flexibility; and (5) Poor alignment across components of the strategic plan.
Implementing Efficiencies in SEA Systems to Provide Differentiated Services to Support District and School Improvement. Benchmark. No. 1
Author: Redding, S.
Date: 2013-02-00
Type: Reports - Descriptive
Subjects: Educational Improvement,Improvement Programs,Program Improvement,Program Implementation,Performance Technology,Efficiency,Needs Assessment,State Agencies,State Departments of Education,Benchmarking

Differentiating state services to support district and school improvement makes sense for two reasons: (1) support is most effective when targeted to the specific needs of the district or school, based on both performance data and diagnostic data about prevailing operational and professional practice; and (2) state resources of time and money are more efficiently allocated when targeted to the specific needs of the district or school rather than applied in a blanket manner to all districts or schools in a common strata of improvement status. In more recent years, many states have established means for differentiating districts and schools based on finer-grained analysis of student performance and diagnostically determining gaps in operational and professional practice that contribute to student outcomes. Likewise, the protocol for diagnosis has become more sophisticated: higher functioning districts and schools are provided instruments, tools, and procedures for self-diagnosis.
Collaborative Benchmarking: Discovering and Implementing Best Practices to Strengthen SEAs
Author: Edvance Research, Inc., Building State Capacity and Productivity Center (BSCP Center)
Date: 2013-01-00
Type: Reports - Descriptive
Subjects: Stakeholders,Benchmarking,Best Practices,State Agencies,State Boards of Education,Agency Cooperation,Program Development,Program Improvement

To help state educational agencies (SEAs) learn about and adapt best practices that exist in other SEAs and other organizations, the Building State Capacity and Productivity Center (BSCP Center) working closely with the Regional Comprehensive Centers will create multi-state groups, through a "Collaborative Benchmarking Best Practices Process" that allows SEAs, as critical stakeholders, to develop a deep understanding of best practices targeting matters of common interest. Based on the information gained from the collaborative benchmarking process, there are two key outcomes: (1) The rich experience of the SEA participants who garner more specific information pertaining to their own needs, and feed it into a specific work plan outlining steps to improve their processes; and (2) "Benchmarking Best Practices Report," a summary of the best practices and related recommendations included in a report of project findings for broad dissemination. (Contains 1 footnote.)
Developing and Managing Talent in the SEA. Benchmark. No. 4
Author: Gross, B.
Date: 2013-02-00
Type: Reports - Descriptive
Subjects: Educational Change,Talent Development,Benchmarking,State Agencies,Educational Strategies,Educational Opportunities

State education agencies (SEAs) are reframing their work to be more coordinated and strategic but talent in most SEAs continues to be in large part defined by federal programs and oriented toward the routines of compliance. Existing talent pipelines in SEAs are rooted in the historic functions of administering federal programs and doing little more. But, in an era of education reform, tight state budgets, and increasing public expectations, SEAs face new demands to: (1) More efficiently manage SEA initiatives and assess progress toward goals; (2) Improve data systems to more precisely track performance of students in local education agencies (LEAs) and schools; (3) Intensify and diversify efforts to support the improvement of LEAs and schools; and (4) Encourage and evaluate innovative models of teaching, learning, and school design.
Statistics of State Universities and Other Institutions of Higher Education Partially Supported by the State for the Year Ended June 30, 1910. Bulletin, 1910, No. 6. Whole Number 445
Author: Department of the Interior, United States Bureau of Education (ED)
Date: 1911-00-00
Type: Historical Materials
Subjects: Higher Education,Enrollment,Teaching Methods,Statistical Data,Methods,State Universities,State Aid,Private Financial Support,Educational Facilities,Educational Facilities Improvement,Income,Educational Change,College Faculty,Tables (Data)

This bulletin reports statistics of state universities and other institutions of higher education partially supported by the State. The topics covered in this report include: (1) Changes in courses and methods of instruction; (2) Gifts, buildings, and improvements; (3) The teaching force in State universities and other State-aided institutions of higher education; (4) Student enrollment in State universities and other State-aided institutions of higher education; and (5) Property and income in State universities and other State-aided institutions of higher education. (Contains 3 tables.) [Best copy available has been provided.]
Bibliography of Science Teaching. Bulletin, 1911, No. 1. Whole Number 446
Author: Dodge, Richard Elwood, Ed.
Date: 1911-00-00
Type: Historical Materials
Subjects: Foreign Countries,Educational History,Annotated Bibliographies,Science Education,Science Instruction,Elementary School Science,Secondary School Science,College Science,International Education,Teaching Methods,Instructional Materials,Educational Policy,Science Teachers,Teacher Education,Biological Sciences,Physical Sciences,Environmental Education,Geography,Mathematics,Science Laboratories,Science Experiments

This bulletin presents a bibliography of science teaching. This bibliography contains the following categories: (1) Biology; (2) Chemistry; (3) Geography; (4) Mathematics; (5) Nature study; and (6) Physics. [Compiled by a Committee of the American Federation of Teachers of the Mathematical and the Natural Sciences. Best copy available has been provided.]
Opportunities for Graduate Study in Agriculture in the United States. Bulletin, 1911, No. 2. Whole Number 447
Author: Monahan, A. C.
Date: 1911-00-00
Type: Historical Materials
Subjects: Educational History,Agricultural Education,College Curriculum,College Instruction,Agriculture,Agricultural Colleges,Graduate Study,State Universities,Land Grant Universities,Engineering Education,Farm Management,Agricultural Engineering,Rural Economics,Rural Sociology,Agronomy,Soil Science,Gardening,Animal Husbandry,Horticulture,Biological Sciences,Physical Sciences,Scientific Research

This bulletin, describing the opportunities in the United States for graduate study in agriculture and those closely allied sciences which have a direct application in agriculture, is the result of an inquiry made by the Bureau of Education in cooperation with the committee on graduate study of the Association of American Agricultural Colleges and Experiment Stations. The inquiry was confined to the agricultural and mechanical colleges, the State universities, and the institutions represented in the Association of American Universities. The bulletin lists courses offered for graduate students only and also those courses open to advanced undergraduates which may be taken by graduate students as major subjects for advanced degrees. No course is listed from any institution whose entrance requirements for 1911 are less than 14 units of high-school work--that is, the equivalent of the standard four-year high-school course--with the exception of the agricultural colleges of the University of Tennessee and Ohio State University, both of which require 12 units for admission. The subject matter of this bulletin is grouped under 19 headings, under which are included the names of the institutions offering courses on some phase of the subjects indicated in the headings. Following the names of the institutions are statements intended to indicate the scope of the work offered by the institution rather than the exact titles of the individual courses. As a supplementary statement to the courses listed, it may be said that opportunity for original study, investigation, and research on special topics is given under certain restrictions by most of these colleges. Under the headings botany, zoology, and the other general sciences, only such courses are listed as seem to have a direct bearing upon agriculture and may therefore be regarded as agricultural-science courses. Many courses are given under two separate headings where such cross reference seems likely to be helpful. [Best copy available has been provided.]
Agencies for the Improvement of Teachers in Service. Bulletin, 1911, No. 3. Whole Number 449
Author: Ruediger, William Carl
Date: 1911-00-00
Type: Historical Materials
Subjects: Organizations (Groups),Teacher Improvement,School Law,State Schools,Institutes (Training Programs),Teacher Education,Summer Programs,Meetings,Professional Associations,Educational Legislation,Teacher Effectiveness,Teacher Certification,Teacher Promotion,Financial Support,Extension Education,Correspondence Study,Colleges,Universities

In discussing agencies for the improvement of teachers in service, one's mind naturally turns first to those periodical meetings of teachers, such as institutes, that are established by law. The data pertaining to meetings of this nature that have been collected are summarized in this paper. These were gathered primarily from State and Territorial school laws, but this source was liberally supplemented by State educational reports, by institute and summer-school bulletins, and by correspondence with State school officers. This monograph is intended to present what is actually being done, and not merely to give an outline of the legal provisions. The word "institute" has not a very, definite meaning in educational literature. It is a blanket word that is applied indiscriminately to any officially established gathering of teachers. Because of this fact, these gatherings have been divided, so far as possible, into classes according to their nature, regardless of the names used in the laws to designate them. On this basis three classes have been made, as follows: (1) Teachers' institutes; (2) summer normal or summer training schools; and (3) teachers' meetings. Perhaps a fourth class--teachers' associations--should have been added, but the legally established gathering in only one State--Maine--approaches the nature of the customary teachers' association. The criteria that distinguish institutes, summer normal schools, teachers' meetings, and teachers' associations are discussed in this paper. An index is included. Individual sections contain footnotes. [Best copy available has been provided.]