ethanporcaro/eric-fulltext-meta huggingface dataset:
Cyberbullying
Author: Williamson, Ronald
Date: 2010-05-18
Type: Reports - Descriptive
Subjects: Evidence,School Personnel,Aggression,Crime,Internet,Discipline,Crime Prevention,Bullying,Computers,Social Networks,Gender Differences,Discipline Policy,Technology Uses in Education,Telecommunications,Handheld Devices,Incidence,Legal Problems,Court Litigation,Prevention,Cooperation,Safety

Cyberbullying involves repeated and unwanted aggressive behavior using the Internet, cell phones or other digital devices and is used to hurt or embarrass another person. The National Crime Prevention Council found that 43% of teens had experienced some form of cyberbullying in the past year and that cyberbullying is most common among 15-16 year olds and more common among females than males. Because cyberbullying often occurs off campus and does not involve the use of school resources it is unclear whether schools can discipline students. The exception is if school officials can demonstrate, with evidence, that the cyberbullying has &quot;substantially disrupted&quot; the school's operations. Cyberbullying that occurs on campus is subject to school regulations and discipline. The National Crime Prevention Council and the Center for Disease Control and Prevention both recommend that schools have clear policies about the use of technology including how school personnel will respond to activities that occur off-campus. They also recommend that schools be proactive and work with students and their families to educate them about the responsible use of all social media. Schools are encouraged to teach students about what to do if they are cyberbullied, and about the implications of irresponsible use of social media. Finally, it is recommended that staff receive training about cyberbullying and how to respond when it occurs. (Contains 19 online resources.)
Aboriginal Education Program, 2012
Author: British Columbia Teachers' Federation (BCTF) (Canada)
Date: 2012-00-00
Type: Reports - Descriptive
Subjects: Foreign Countries,Canada Natives,Residential Schools,American Indian Education,American Indian History,Land Settlement,Educational Policy,Organizations (Groups),Family Attitudes,Graduation Rate,Educational Resources,Workshops,Teacher Education,State Programs,American Indian Culture,Elementary Secondary Education

Since the beginning of time, Aboriginal people have had a high regard for education. Euro-Canadian contact with Aboriginal peoples has and continues to have devastating effects. The encroachment on their traditional territory has affected the lands and resources forever. Generations of experience within the residential school system have greatly impacted Aboriginal families and their attitudes toward schooling. This paper presents an overview of Aboriginal education. It also provides information on Aboriginal territory, Aboriginal students, and Aboriginal Education Partners Group. (Contains 4 resources.)
Accountability for Productivity
Author: Wellman, Jane
Date: 2010-11-00
Type: Reports - Descriptive
Subjects: Productivity,Higher Education,Accountability,Cost Effectiveness,Evidence,Educational Attainment,Strategic Planning,College Planning,Change Strategies,Educational Change,Educational Improvement,Academic Achievement,Decision Making,Outcomes of Education,Outcome Measures,Organizational Communication,Educational Objectives,Educational Policy,Benchmarking

Productivity gains in higher education won't be made just by improving cost effectiveness or even performance. They need to be documented, communicated, and integrated into a strategic agenda to increase attainment. This requires special attention to "accountability" for productivity, meaning public presentation and communication of evidence about productivity that relates it to the public agenda for higher education. Higher education and state government share culpability for fiscal habits that focus on revenues and budget balancing rather than on spending and outcomes. Changing this equation to value improvements in productivity will force changes in deeply embedded habits both within the institutions and in public policy. It will require a strategic approach to tackling the issues that need to be connected to create sustaining change: decision making; stakeholder perceptions and values; data; and communication. History shows that efforts to address productivity that lodge on just one or even two of these are likely to be scatter-shot and short-lived. Improvements in accountability for productivity need to be developed using metrics and language that help tell a story about the goals for productivity, which are to: (1) Increase educational attainment; (2) Improve credibility for sustained investments; (3) Reduce pressure on tuitions; (4) Focus spending in academic areas; and (5) Invest in student success. A glossary is included. (Contains 1 footnote.)
Education Funding: Highest Needs Ever. A Brief to the Select Standing Committee on Finance and Government Services
Author: British Columbia Teachers' Federation (BCTF) (Canada)
Date: 2010-09-16
Type: Reports - Evaluative
Subjects: Educational Finance,Special Needs Students,Educational Needs,Autism,Pervasive Developmental Disorders,Identification,Financial Support,Costs,Budgets,Teacher Persistence,Enrollment Trends,Foreign Countries,English Language Learners,Specialists,Individualized Education Programs,Special Education Teachers,Language Teachers,Public Schools,Expenditures

If our students are to be prepared for the demands of the 21st century, we must find ways to meet their educational needs. We have increasing numbers of students with special needs, in particular a dramatic increase in students identified with Autism Spectrum Disorder. In 2009-10 there were 2,548 more of these identified students than five years earlier. This increasing number of students with special needs means that we need smaller classes if we are to meet the legislated goal of no more than three students with special needs in a classroom. This paper urges the Select Standing Committee on Finance and Government Services to address: it is recommended that, at minimum, funding increases in the second decade of the 21st century restore educational services that were lost in the first decade of the 21st century. This paper's fundamental request is that the Committee recommends a revision to the education funding system so that the real costs are reflected in the real value of the funding for this next budget year. To support the case for this action, this paper shows the story in numbers. Number of students, 2000-01 to 2009-10 (Public only) is appended. (Contains 1 footnote.)
Education Funding in Crisis: Will the 2010-11 Budget Make a Difference? BCTF Research Report. Section V. 2010-EF-02
Author: White, Margaret
Date: 2010-03-00
Type: Reports - Research
Subjects: Educational Finance,Private Education,Public Education,Costs,Public Agencies,Financial Support,Budgets,Teachers,Kindergarten,Enrollment,School Districts,Foreign Countries

Each budget year the Ministry of Education responds to concerns about chronic underfunding of public education by asserting that the ministry is providing &quot;more funding than ever&quot; during a sustained period of declining student enrolment. While the nominal amount of education funding has increased, this increase has not been sufficient to fully fund publicly-mandated education programs and services. According to a 2010 report by the Saanich School District, new costs to school districts exceeded provincial block funding resulting in a $157 million shortfall in 2009-10, after accounting for savings due to declining enrolment. K to 12 education is actually receiving a diminishing share of the provincial budget. This paper shows that Ministry of Education funding as a percent of the provincial budget fell to 15.34% in 2009-10, down from 19.67% in 2001-02 and 26.36% in 1991-92. More of this funding has gone to private education. Since 2005-06, independent-school funding increased by 34%, while public education funding increased by only 13%. Budget 2010 restores $100 million of the $128 million in Education Programs funding for 2010-11 that was lost in the revised provincial budget introduced in September 2009. But this is still $28 million short of the amount originally allocated in the February 2009 Budget Plan. Public schools funding is the largest component of Education Programs, increasing from $4.699 billion to $4.82 billion for 2010-11. The new budget claims to provide funding for wage settlement costs for teachers, implementation of full-day K, and to partially restore $110 million of AFG funding spread over two years. (Contains 3 tables, 19 footnotes, and 1 chart.)
Budget Update: 2009-10 Operating Grant Estimates--What Changed between March Estimates and the Autumn Recalculation? BCTF Research Report. Section V. 2010-EF-01
Author: White, Margaret
Date: 2010-01-00
Type: Reports - Evaluative
Subjects: Student Needs,Educational Finance,Grants,Research Reports,Funding Formulas,Resource Allocation,Enrollment Projections,Enrollment Rate,Program Budgeting,Budgeting,School Accounting,School Administration,Budgets,Expenditures,Income,Costs,Cost Indexes,Salary Wage Differentials,Financial Policy,Foreign Countries

In March of each year, the ministry publishes the Operating Grants Manual showing estimated funding allocations for school districts for the upcoming school year. These estimates are based on enrolment projections. On September 30 of the new school year, enrolment is counted and the grants are recalculated based on actual enrolment. The ministry holds back a portion of funds to be released subject to enrolment changes. Summer learning funds are also included in the holdback. The final budget figures are published in December of the school-year in Recalculated Operating Grant tables. The Recalculated Operating Grant also shows the amount of the $71 million holdback that was released for enrolment adjustments. Enrolment for Distributed Learning and Special Needs students is counted several times a year, so the ministry retains some of the holdback to cover potential enrolment increases in these programs. The basic enrolment-based grant increased by $21 million and the Unique Student Needs supplement increased by $17.5 million. This increase is partially offset by a $3.6 million decrease in the Enrolment Decline supplement. About half of the holdback ($32 million) was released after the September enrolment count, of which $15.4 was allocated to the Summer Learning grant. This left $16.6 million to cover the $38.5 million increase required to fund the extra students (basic enrolment and special needs) who were not budgeted for in the March estimates. What was not expected was the $25.3 million decrease in the salary differential supplement between the March 2009-10 estimates and the Autumn 2009-10 recalculation. (Contains 6 tables and 3 footnotes.)
A Brief to the Budget 2010 Consultation Select Standing Committee on Finance and Government Services from the British Columbia Teachers' Federation
Author: British Columbia Teachers' Federation (BCTF) (Canada)
Date: 2009-10-00
Type: Reports - Evaluative
Subjects: Educational Finance,Foreign Countries,Poverty,Educational Improvement,Budgets,Government Role,Financial Support,Public Schools,Decision Making,Educational Change,Costs,School Districts,Resource Allocation

Protecting and improving education should be a top priority for the BC government. Unfortunately, much of this last decade has seen conditions in BC schools worsen, rather than improve. Recent government decisions have just added to existing shortfalls in funding for schools. Unless the BC government reverses direction, projections are for conditions to deteriorate further. BCTF staff urge significant changes in the funding of education in BC and offer four recommendations for these changes. They include: (1) Increase funding to reflect real increases in costs; (2) Maintain stability--keep promises made to school districts about funding; (3) Fully fund new requirements and new initiatives; and (4) Eradicate child poverty. In addition, they repeat their previous call for the government to take action to eliminate child poverty. &quot;Education program funding: A comparison of the September 2009 Budget Update to the February 2009 budget estimates&quot; is attached.
Employment Equity for Aboriginal Teachers
Author: British Columbia Teachers' Federation (BCTF) (Canada)
Date: 2012-00-00
Type: Reports - Descriptive
Subjects: Foreign Countries,Disproportionate Representation,Teacher Recruitment,Teacher Persistence,Cultural Pluralism,Minority Group Teachers,Employment,Canada Natives,Public Schools,Unions,Public Education,American Indian Education,Equal Opportunities (Jobs),Position Papers,Educational Policy,Public School Teachers,Teacher Associations

This paper is a letter of understanding between British Columbia Teachers' Federation (BCTF) and British Columbia Public School Employers' Association (BCPSEA) in response to Employment Equity for Aboriginal Teachers. The parties recognize that Aboriginal teachers are under-represented in the public education system. The parties are committed to redress the under-representation of Aboriginal teachers and therefore further agree that: (1) They will encourage local school boards and teacher unions to make application to the Human Rights Tribunal under section 42 of the &quot;Human Rights Code&quot; to obtain approval for a &quot;special program&quot; that would serve to attract and retain Aboriginal teachers; (2) The parties will assist local school boards and teacher unions as requested in the application for and implementation of a &quot;special program&quot; consistent with this Letter of Commitment. BCTF supports an Aboriginal Employment Equity program. In the &quot;Member's Guide to the BCTF&quot; it states (b) That the BCTF actively support an employment equity program for the public schools with the aim of achieving a teaching force that is reflective of the ethnic diversity of BC public schools.
Grades and Data Driven Decision Making: Issues of Variance and Student Patterns
Author: Bowers, Alex Jon
Date: 2007-00-00
Type: Dissertations/Theses - Doctoral Dissertations
Subjects: Student Evaluation,Grades (Scholastic),Course Content,Grading,Decision Making,Pattern Recognition,Data,Predictor Variables,Academic Achievement,Elementary Education,School Districts,Comparative Analysis,Longitudinal Studies,Standardized Tests,Educational Change,Teaching Methods,Educational Practices

This study addresses the question: &quot;To what extent are teacher assigned subject specific grades useful for data driven decision making in schools?&quot; Recently, schools have been urged to bring teachers and school leaders together around student-level data in an effort to increase dialogue, collaboration and professional communities to improve educational practice through data driven decision making. However, schools are inundated with data. While much attention has been paid to the use and reporting of standardized test scores in policy, school and district-level data driven decision making, much of the industry of schools is devoted to the generation and reporting of grades. Historically, little attention has been paid to student grades and grade patterns and their use in predicting student performance, standardized assessment scores and on-time graduation. This study analyzed the entire K-12 subject-specific grading and assessment histories of two cohorts in two separate school districts through correlations and a novel application of cluster analysis. Results suggest that longitudinal K-12 grading histories are useful. Grades and standardized assessments appear to be converging over time for one of the two school districts studied, suggesting that for one of the districts but not the other, current accountability policies and state curriculum frameworks may be pushing into classrooms and modifying teacher's daily practice, as measured through an increasing correlation of grades and standardized assessments. Moreover, using cluster analysis, K-12 subject specific grading patterns appear to show that early elementary school grade patterns predict future student grade patterns as well as qualitative student outcomes, such as on-time graduation. The findings of this study also suggest that K-12 subject specific grade patterning using cluster analysis is an advance over past methods of predicting students at-risk of dropping out of school. Additionally, the evidence supports a finding that grades may be an assessment of both academic knowledge and a student's ability to negotiate the social processes of school. A bibliography is included. (Contains 20 tables and 28 figures.)
Measuring the Education Pipeline: Critical Data Elements Indicating Readiness, Transition and Success. "High School to Postsecondary Education and Work"
Author: Data Quality Campaign
Date: 2012-03-00
Type: Reports - Descriptive
Subjects: School Readiness,Data,Student Development,Measures (Individuals),Alignment (Education),Articulation (Education),Educational Assessment,Student Evaluation,Elementary Secondary Education,Stakeholders,Career Readiness,College Readiness

The Data Quality Campaign (DQC) has identified a common set of data that capture students' progress through the education pipeline at three key transition points: high school readiness, high school success/postsecondary readiness, and postsecondary and workforce success. For each of these transition points, key questions to be addressed by policymakers and related data elements have been identified along with conversations you need to have to make sure that a complete data system is in place to answer these questions. These questions are by no means comprehensive and are meant to be a starting point for conversation. States should work with key stakeholders to identify additional questions that would address their specific needs.
Connecting Policy and Data: What Are Your State's Critical Policy Questions?
Author: Data Quality Campaign
Date: 2010-03-00
Type: Reports - Descriptive
Subjects: Educational Policy,Stakeholders,State Departments of Education,Evidence,Questioning Techniques,Decision Making,Access to Information,Data Collection,Group Dynamics,State Government,Expertise,Information Management,Data,Standards,Longitudinal Studies,Systems Approach

As states work to meet the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) requirement to follow individuals through the P-20 pipeline and into the workforce by 2011, their progress will be expedited and supported by using the following processes to guide the development and implementation of their cross-agency data sharing efforts: (1) Prioritize, through broad-based stakeholder input, the critical policy questions to drive the development and use of longitudinal data systems; (2) Ensure data systems are interoperable within and across agencies and sectors by adopting common data standards, definitions and language; and (3) Protect personally identifiable information through governance policies and practices that promote the privacy and security of the information while allowing appropriate data access and sharing. This paper further explores the need to have a common P-20/workforce vision and to develop key policy questions to drive the development of state data systems. It also provides a set of resources (appendices) to help states begin this task. Appended are: (1) Data Quality Campaign's 28 Policy Questions; (2) &quot;Killer Questions&quot; Template; (3) South Carolina's Critical Policy Questions; (4) Survey of DQC Partners on Critical Questions for States; and (5) Policy and Practitioner Questions Using Early Childhood Data.
Further Clarification Requested by States around the Application of FERPA to State Longitudinal Data Systems
Author: Data Quality Campaign
Date: 2011-03-00
Type: Reports - Descriptive
Subjects: State Agencies,Student Records,Privacy,Information Security,Confidentiality,Federal Legislation,Agency Cooperation,Educational Cooperation,Statewide Planning,Labor Force Development,Disclosure,Information Policy,Federal Regulation,State Regulation,School Districts,Social Services,Educational Improvement,Educational Policy,Data,Data Analysis,State Policy,Longitudinal Studies,State Programs,Postsecondary Education

Statewide Longitudinal Data Systems (SLDS) provide the information and tools needed to inform policies, practices and decisions at every level to improve student achievement and system performance. It is equally important that there are policies and practices to protect personally identifiable information and to ensure the confidentiality and security of this sensitive information. Linking limited data elements from different sectors is sometimes necessary to generate actionable information that can be used to realize efficiency, assess impact, and make informed decisions about education. Based on state experiences, comments, and ongoing conversations, the Data Quality Campaign (DQC) Partners have identified the following four areas of continuing confusion: (1) Sharing between Separate P-(or K-)12 and Postsecondary Data Systems; (2) Disclosures to a Former School/LEA for Evaluation and Accountability; (3) Research Studies Initiated by State Agencies; and (4) Disclosures to Workforce and Social Service Agencies.
Leveraging Federal Funding for Longitudinal Data Systems: A Roadmap for States. Fiscal Year 2011
Author: Data Quality Campaign
Date: 2011-00-00
Type: Reports - Descriptive
Subjects: Federal Aid,Identification,State Government,Data,Guidance,Longitudinal Studies,Educational Policy,Needs Assessment,Questioning Techniques,Technical Support,Elementary Secondary Education,Postsecondary Education,Human Capital

States should use this roadmap to identify and leverage federal funding sources for data-related activities. This roadmap presents such opportunities for FY 2011, and provides guidance on some of the ways the funds may be used.
ED's Proposed Changes to SFSF Data Collection and Reporting Requirements: DQC's Submitted Comments
Author: Data Quality Campaign
Date: 2011-10-24
Type: Reports - Evaluative
Subjects: Stakeholders,Federal Aid,Accountability,Educational Finance,State Agencies,Student Records,Privacy,Information Security,Confidentiality,Federal Legislation,Agency Cooperation,Educational Cooperation,Statewide Planning,Federal Regulation,State Regulation,Educational Improvement,Educational Policy,Data,Data Analysis,State Policy,State Programs,Federal Programs,Educational Indicators,Postsecondary Education,Federal State Relationship

This letter is submitted to comment on the U.S. Department of Education's (ED) proposed revisions to the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act's (ARRA) State Fiscal Stabilization Fund (SFSF), as published in the September 23, 2011, Federal Register. Overall, the Data Quality Campaign believes the proposed changes strike a sensible balance: they maintain a commitment to advancing states' efforts to collect and use data for continuous improvement and richer accountability while making adjustments that reflect states' realities on the ground. The proposed changes would give states the flexibility and time to ensure their data systems and reported metrics are high quality and useful to stakeholders. They also provide an opportunity for federal policymakers to further align federal policies, and for states to further leverage federal funding opportunities to address critical data capacity needs.