ethanporcaro/eric-fulltext-meta huggingface dataset:
A Study of Chief Academic Officers of Independent Colleges and Universities: Who Are They? Where Do They Come from? What Are They Doing? Where Do They Want to Go?
Author: Hartley, Harold V., III
Date: 2010-00-00
Type: Numerical/Quantitative Data
Subjects: Private Colleges,College Faculty,Deans,Data Analysis,Professional Development,Leadership Training,National Surveys,Comparative Analysis,Public Colleges,College Administration,Administrator Characteristics,Administrator Role,Small Colleges,Career Development

Chief academic officers (CAOs) of independent colleges and universities are the principal leaders and managers of the academic programs of the institutions they serve. The core functions of higher education--teaching students, conducting scholarly research, and service to the academic community--usually fall under their purview. Despite these important responsibilities, few comprehensive studies have been conducted to examine the characteristics and duties of CAOs, and of these studies, none has focused on the CAOs of the nation's small and mid-sized private colleges and universities. Since 2008, the Council of Independent Colleges (CIC) has pursued a research agenda to support professional development for leaders of small and mid-sized private colleges and universities. The purpose of this study is to understand the characteristics, roles, and career aspirations of chief academic officers of CIC member colleges and universities. Who are these chief academic leaders? What career paths did they follow to reach their senior leadership positions? What are their duties and responsibilities? What further professional aspirations do they have? And, do substantive differences exist between the CAOs of independent colleges and those serving in other higher education settings? Responses from 1,140 chief academic officers to the ACE survey conducted in 2008 were analyzed, including 358 CIC CAOs. Specifically, comparisons were made between CAOs of CIC member colleges and universities and CAOs of four major sub-sector groups: (1) public baccalaureate and master's (BA/MA) level institutions; (2) private doctoral universities; (3) public doctoral universities; and (4) public two-year colleges. An appendix is included. It provides background information from previous studies and a description of the data analyzed and methodology employed in this study. (Contains 30 figures, 12 tables and 10 footnotes.) [This report was funded by the American Academic Leadership Institute.]
School Districts' Perspectives on the Economic Stimulus Package: Teaching Jobs Saved in 2009-10 but Teacher Layoffs Loom for Next School Year
Author: Kober, Nancy
Date: 2010-07-00
Type: Reports - Research
Subjects: Educational Finance,School Districts,Educational Change,Politics of Education,Job Layoff,Program Implementation,Audits (Verification),Retrenchment,Educational Needs,Educational Assessment,Educational Indicators,Academic Standards,Educational Policy,Barriers,School Surveys,Federal Aid

In the summer of 2009, school districts began receiving the first wave of federal economic stimulus money from the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA). Totaling about $100 billion over two years--more than double the fiscal year 2009 budget for the U.S. Department of Education (ED)--the education portion of the stimulus package is intended to stave off teacher layoffs, stabilize declining state and local education budgets, and blunt other negative effects of the economic downturn for schools. This report by the Center on Education Policy (CEP), an independent nonprofit organization, describes the uses of ARRA education funding at the school district level and the progress of districts in implementing the main education components of ARRA. The data were drawn from responses to a survey administered to a nationally representative sample of school districts in the spring of 2010. This is the second CEP report on ARRA implementation; the first, which focused on state-level implementation, was released in December 2009 (CEP, 2009). The authors reached three main conclusions based on their district survey data. Taken together, these conclusions suggest that the broad purposes of the ARRA education funds--saving or creating jobs, stabilizing declining state and local education budgets, and promoting education reform--are being met at the district level. Their conclusions also suggest that districts are likely to face significant challenges in maintaining quality programs. (Contains 9 figures, 2 tables and 8 footnotes.)
Teachers Are the Center of Education: Writing, Learning and Leading in the Digital Age
Author: College Board
Date: 2010-00-00
Type: Collected Works - General
Subjects: Secondary School Teachers,Elementary School Teachers,Profiles,Teacher Effectiveness,Technology Uses in Education,Writing Instruction,Writing Skills,Teaching Methods,English Instruction,History Instruction,English (Second Language),Second Language Instruction,Instructional Innovation

This series of reports, &quot;Teachers Are the Center of Education,&quot; was developed to highlight the  importance of teachers and the quality of their work. This specific report, a partnership among the College Board, the National Writing Project and Phi Delta Kappa International, shines the spotlight on one aspect of teacher work: the revolutionary use of technology to teach writing skills. Teachers were nominated by the College Board and the National Writing Project and were selected to provide a diverse set of disciplines, locations, kinds of schools and student populations, all committed to excellence in education. The stories of all nine nominated teachers are in the report. In each case, a writer spent a day at each school observing the teacher, and then interviewing him or her and recording their conversation. A photographer also visited each school. The final stories reflect only a small portion of the conversations and observations. School data in each profile were obtained from the National Center for Education Statistics. The teachers profiled in this report are: (1) Joel Malley (Cheektowaga High School, Cheektowaga, New York); (2) Katherine Suyeyasu (ASCEND School, Oakland, California); (3) Paul Epstein (Ruffner Elementary School, Charleston, West Virginia); (4) Paige Cole (Apalachee High School, Winder, Georgia); (5) Alejandro Sosa (World Journalism Preparatory, Queens, New York); (6) David Brown (John H. Webster Elementary School, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania); (7) Erin Wilkey (F.L. Schlagle High School, Kansas City, Kansas); and (8) Alina Adonyi and Jennifer Woollven (Eastside Memorial Green Tech High School, Austin, Texas).
Kids' Share 2010: Report on Federal Expenditures on Children through 2009
Author: Isaacs, Julia
Date: 2010-07-00
Type: Numerical/Quantitative Data
Subjects: Expenditures,Federal Aid,Federal Programs,Children,Federal Legislation,Economic Climate,Educational Policy,Program Budgeting,Budgets,Resource Allocation,Taxes,Trend Analysis,State Aid,Local Government,Public Policy

Federal budget outlays totaled $3.5 trillion in 2009, of which somewhat less than 10 percent ($334 billion) was devoted to children. Despite increased spending on children under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA), the kids' share of total outlays actually fell modestly to 9.5 percent in 2009, down from 9.8 percent the previous year. The children's share of the tax expenditure budget also declined between 2008 and 2009, from roughly 9 to 8 percent. This fourth annual "Kids' Share" report examines federal expenditures on children during an unusual year, when unemployment averaged 8.5 percent and total federal spending hit a post-World War II high of nearly 25 percent of the economy. This year's report adds a special focus on the effects of ARRA, with new analyses showing how the infusion of funds appropriated in 2009 will spend down over the next few years under current law. As their analysis shows, many children's programs are projected to reach peak spending in 2010, after which outlays will drop off--assuming that temporary ARRA outlays end as scheduled and other policies continue unchanged. Their analysis does not include the projected effects of the health reform legislation passed in 2010, which are not yet incorporated in Congressional Budget Office (CBO) projections. After an initial section explaining the methodology for estimating children's expenditures across more than 100 federal programs and tax provisions, the report presents findings in three major areas, corresponding to the present, the past, and the future. For the present, they examine outlays and tax expenditures in 2009, relying on the detailed budget data released in February 2010. (Contains 17 figures, 4 tables and 16 endnotes.)
The Impact of Advanced Placement Incentive Programs. Education Policy Brief. Volume 8, Number 1, Winter 2010
Author: Holstead, Michael S.
Date: 2010-00-00
Type: Collected Works - Serial
Subjects: Advanced Placement,Incentives,Advanced Placement Programs,Program Effectiveness,Educational Policy,Educational History,Program Descriptions,Case Studies,Accountability,Scholarships,Models,State Federal Aid,Politics of Education,Transitional Programs

In December of 2009, Indiana Governor Mitch Daniels announced that the latest state revenue forecasts predict that the state of Indiana will spend $1.8 billion more than it receives in tax revenue collections through July 2011. Therefore, Governor Daniels announced that he will cut at least $300 million from K-12 education spending in the next year, and another $150 million in funding for state colleges and universities. In this current economic environment both students and school administrators alike are feeling the need for education to become more efficient and effective. Programs such as the International Baccalaureate program, the Advanced Placement program, and dual credit courses, which can streamline and improve the transition between high school and college, have thus become increasingly appealing. This Education Policy Brief will examine, in particular, the incentive programs for the most popular and widespread of the accelerated education programs, the Advanced Placement (AP) program. After a brief historical overview of the AP program and a discussion of its merits, the brief will look into the various types of incentive programs found in the U.S. today, highlighting, in particular, several prominent or notable incentive programs. The Policy Brief will also examine some of the scholarly research that has been conducted regarding the effectiveness of the various incentive programs. Finally, conclusions and recommendations will be made to improve AP incentive programs. (Contains 4 figures, 3 tables and 7 online resources.)
School Referenda in Indiana. Education Policy Brief. Volume 8, Number 2, Summer 2010
Author: Hiller, Stephen C.
Date: 2010-00-00
Type: Collected Works - Serial
Subjects: Public Schools,Educational Finance,Taxes,School Construction,School Budget Elections,School Funds,State Legislation,School Law,Bond Issues

Past reports by the Center for Evaluation &amp; Education Policy (CEEP) have sought to examine various aspects of Indiana public school funding such as the mechanisms for funding, school revenues and expenditures, as well as numerous other reports whose subjects have implications on school and program funding. This report focuses on another mechanism of public school funding which, while common in most other states, has only recently emerged in Indiana: school referenda. Before 2008, school referenda were rare, used only in specific cases for General Fund tax levies. As there were no referenda for school construction, opposition to school construction projects went through Indiana's unique petition and remonstrance process, although such projects often went unopposed. This report will closely examine the results of General Fund and construction referenda which were voted upon in the communities of 14 school corporations in Indiana during the May 4, 2010 primary election. As part of this analysis, the total amounts and increases in property taxes sought in the referenda are identified, as well as basic demographic information of the school corporations. To conclude the analysis of the May 2010 referenda, the perspectives from the 14 superintendents who oversaw the 16 referenda will then be presented which will reveal the primary reasons the referenda passed or failed. (Contains 3 tables and 5 online resources.)
Alternative Schools: What's in a Name? Education Policy Brief. Volume 7, Number 4, Winter 2009
Author: Cable, Kelly E.
Date: 2009-00-00
Type: Collected Works - Serial
Subjects: Nontraditional Education,Equal Education,Educational Policy,Institutional Characteristics,Educational Development,Educational History,Educational Change,Excellence in Education,Program Descriptions,Program Effectiveness,Educational Methods,Educational Philosophy

The first public schools established in America were originally created with the intent to give all children access to an education. An equal education for all meant that a child's parentage and social standing did not, theoretically, dictate his or her future. Today the American public school system has greatly expanded and diverged from the once strictly followed &quot;common school&quot; model to include nontraditional options such as alternative, magnet, charter, virtual, and vocational schools. Amidst so many educational options, a contentious point is whether or not these additional schooling opportunities such as alternative schools better support the egalitarian mission, or if they actually further encourage the stratification of students. There are issues and questions regarding alternative schools for both those who commend and those who critique it. Generalizing advantages and disadvantages is difficult because alternative schools and programs differ widely in theoretical structure and purpose. This brief will describe the origins of alternative schools, different structures of alternative schools and programs, and student achievement, particularly in Indiana. Furthermore, this brief addresses how stereotypes affect alternative schools and their students as well as whether alternative schools support and/or segregate specific group of students. Finally, recommendations are offered concerning the future of alternative education for educators and policymakers to consider. (Contains 4 figures and 7 online resources.)
Report Card to the Public: 2005-2006 School Year
Author: Alaska Department of Education and Early Development
Date: 2006-00-00
Type: Numerical/Quantitative Data
Subjects: Boards of Education,College Admission,Public Education,Educational Policy,State Legislation,School Districts,College Entrance Examinations,Attendance Patterns,Low Income Groups,Racial Differences,Enrollment Trends,Ethnicity,State Standards,Student Evaluation,Institutional Mission,Trend Analysis,High School Graduates,Graduation Rate,Academic Achievement,Teacher Qualifications,Educational Quality,Mentors,Accreditation (Institutions),Dropout Rate,Reading Achievement,Mathematics Achievement,Alaska Natives,American Indians,Asian Americans,Pacific Islanders,African Americans,Hispanic Americans,Whites,Multiracial Persons,Special Education,Migrant Education,Limited English Speaking,Special Needs Students,Accountability,Professional Development,Writing Achievement,Gender Differences,Exit Examinations,Language Arts,Disabilities

This &quot;Report Card to the Public, a Summary of Statistics from Alaska's Public Schools,&quot; is published in accordance with Alaska Statute 14.03.120 for the school year 2005-2006. This publication reports the status of public education in Alaska. It is a source of information for Alaska's educational policymakers, including legislators, the Governor, the State Board of Education &amp; Early development, local boards of education, parents and communities. Under state law, each school district is required to report information about its plans and performance to its community. This publication is a statewide summary of those reports. Readers can learn information about Alaska education at a glance; see the vision and mission statements that energize the Alaska Department of Education &amp; Early development; and review the performance and participation rate of students statewide on assessments in reading, writing and math from grades 3 to 10 and in their state's high school graduation qualifying examination. The report also shows how Alaskan students perform on college admission tests such as the SATs and the ACTs. The report also provides information about graduation and attendance rates statewide. (Contains 11 tables.) [For the 2004-2005 School Year report, see ED510972.]
Report Card to the Public: 2006-2007 School Year
Author: Alaska Department of Education and Early Development
Date: 2007-00-00
Type: Numerical/Quantitative Data
Subjects: Boards of Education,College Admission,Public Education,Educational Policy,State Legislation,School Districts,College Entrance Examinations,Attendance Patterns,Low Income Groups,Racial Differences,Enrollment Trends,Ethnicity,State Standards,Student Evaluation,Institutional Mission,Trend Analysis,High School Graduates,Graduation Rate,Academic Achievement,Teacher Qualifications,Educational Quality,Mentors,Accreditation (Institutions),Dropout Rate,Reading Achievement,Mathematics Achievement,Alaska Natives,American Indians,Asian Americans,Pacific Islanders,African Americans,Hispanic Americans,Whites,Multiracial Persons,Special Education,Migrant Education,Limited English Speaking,Special Needs Students,Accountability,Professional Development,Writing Achievement,Gender Differences,Exit Examinations,Language Arts,Disabilities

This &quot;Report Card to the Public, a Summary of Statistics from Alaska's Schools,&quot; is published in accordance with Alaska Statute 14.03.120 for the school year 2006-2007. This publication reports the status of public education in Alaska. It is a source of information for Alaska's educational policymakers, including legislators, the Governor, the State Board of Education &amp; Early development, local boards of education, parents and communities. Under state law, each school district is required to report information about its plans and performance to its community. This publication is a statewide summary of performance results. Readers can learn information about Alaska education at a glance; see the vision and mission statements that energize the Alaska Department of Education &amp; Early development; and review the performance and participation rate of students statewide on assessments in reading, writing and math from grades 3 to 10 and in their state's high school graduation qualifying examination. The report also shows how Alaskan students perform on college admission tests such as the SATs and the ACTs. The report also provides information about graduation and attendance rates statewide. In addition, public knowledge of their schools is an important part of Alaska's school accountability system. (Contains 11 tables.) [For the 2005-2006 School Year report, see ED510970.]
Report Card to the Public: 2004-2005 School Year
Author: Alaska Department of Education and Early Development
Date: 2005-00-00
Type: Numerical/Quantitative Data
Subjects: Boards of Education,College Admission,Public Education,Educational Policy,State Legislation,School Districts,College Entrance Examinations,Attendance Patterns,Low Income Groups,Racial Differences,Enrollment Trends,Ethnicity,State Standards,Student Evaluation,Institutional Mission,Trend Analysis,High School Graduates,Graduation Rate,Academic Achievement,Teacher Qualifications,Educational Quality,Mentors,Accreditation (Institutions),Dropout Rate,Reading Achievement,Mathematics Achievement,Alaska Natives,American Indians,Asian Americans,Pacific Islanders,African Americans,Hispanic Americans,Whites,Multiracial Persons,Special Education,Migrant Education,Limited English Speaking,Special Needs Students,Accountability,Professional Development,Writing Achievement,Gender Differences,Exit Examinations,Language Arts,Disabilities

This &quot;Report Card to the Public, a Summary of Statistics from Alaska's Public Schools,&quot; is published in accordance with Alaska Statute 14.03.120 for the school year 2004-2005. This publication reports the status of public education. It is a source of information for Alaska's educational policy makers, including legislators, the Governor, the State Board of Education &amp; Early Development, local boards of education, parents, and communities. Under state law, each school district is required to report to its community information about its plans and performance. This publication is a statewide summary of those reports. The full &quot;Report Card&quot; now includes school-level data for every school in the state. It also has been revised in this year's edition to incorporate elements required by the federal No Child Left Behind Act. The publication is part of a more detailed Report Card provided to school districts, schools, legislators, the governor, the State Board of Education &amp; Early Development, and to the Alaska public on the Department of Education &amp; Early Development's website. The entire report card includes a report card for each school district in spreadsheets, a school report card summary for each school, and data on state and local accountability. In addition, the Report Card is an important part of Alaska's school accountability system and the Murkowski's Administration's education initiatives. (Contains 12 tables.)
Report Card Handbook, For the Implementation of AS 14.03.120, 20 U.S.C. 6301-7941 PL 107-110 Reauthorization of ESEA (No Child Left Behind Act) and 4 AAC 06.895. 2005-2006 School Year
Author: Alaska Department of Education and Early Development
Date: 2006-03-29
Type: Numerical/Quantitative Data
Subjects: State Legislation,Federal Legislation,State Regulation,Accountability,School Districts,Guides,Definitions,School Administration,Academic Achievement,School Effectiveness,Educational Assessment,Records (Forms),Scores,Data,Parent Materials

NCLB, Alaska Statute 14.03.120 and State Regulation 4 AAC 06.895 require each school and district to disseminate a report card to parents before the school opens for instruction in the fall. Each school site, working with the district, is responsible for determining the format of the report. This handbook has been developed to assist districts in meeting the requirements of education planning and in collecting, reporting and verifying the information required to comply with AS 14.03.120 in the &quot;Public School Report Card to the Public,&quot; &quot;NCLB&quot; and &quot;4 AAC 06.895.&quot; Alaska Statute requires districts to submit information for the &quot;Report Card&quot; on forms provided by the Department. The department will collect data from districts on Excel spreadsheet forms. School districts are encouraged to design their own forms for reporting district and school information to parents and the public. Appended are: (1) Selected Definitions; (2) Alaska Statute Sections 14.03.120; (3) Title 4 Education and Early Development Chapter 06. Government of Schools; (4) Protocol for Reporting Results--Two Categories of Achievement ; (5) Protocol for Reporting Results--Four Categories of Achievement; (6) NCLB Report Card Reporting Requirements; and (7) Scale Score Table.  [For the 2004-2005 School Year report, see ED484844.]