ethanporcaro/eric-fulltext-meta huggingface dataset:
Parent Training Interventions for Attention Deficity Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) in Children Aged 5 to 18 Years. Campbell Systematic Reviews. 2012:2
Author: Zwi, Morris
Date: 2011-03-13
Type: Reports - Research
Subjects: Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder,Parents,Expertise,Parent Education,Children,Adolescents,Behavior Problems,Intervention,Symptoms (Individual Disorders),Comparative Analysis,Literature Reviews,Child Behavior,Behavior Modification,Program Effectiveness,Gender Differences,Drug Therapy,Meta Analysis

Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) is a neurodevelopmental disorder characterised by high levels of inattention, hyperactivity and impulsivity that are present before the age of seven years, seen in a range of situations, inconsistent with the child's developmental level and causing social or academic impairment. Parent training programmes are psychosocial interventions aimed at training parents in techniques to enable them to manage their children's challenging behaviour. The purpose of this study is to determine whether parent training interventions are effective in reducing ADHD symptoms and associated problems in children aged between five and eighteen years with a diagnosis of ADHD, compared to controls with no parent training intervention. The authors searched the following electronic databases (for all available years until September 2010): CENTRAL (2010, Issue 3), MEDLINE (1950 to 10 September 2010), EMBASE (1980 to 2010 Week 36), CINAHL (1937 to 13 September 2010), PsycINFO (1806 to September Week 1 2010), Dissertation Abstracts International (14 September 2010) and the metaRegister of Controlled Trials (14 September 2010). They contacted experts in the field to ask for details of unpublished or ongoing research. Findings reveal that parent training may have a positive effect on the behaviour of children with ADHD. It may also reduce parental stress and enhance parental confidence. However, the poor methodological quality of the included studies increases the risk of bias in the results. Data concerning ADHD-specific behaviour are ambiguous. For many important outcomes, including school achievement and adverse effects, data are lacking. Evidence from this review is not strong enough to form a basis for clinical practice guidelines. Future research should ensure better reporting of the study procedures and results. Appended are: (1) Search strategies 2002, 2004, 2006, 2008; (2) Search strategies used May 2009; (3) Search strategies used September 2010; and (4) Additional methods for future update. (Contains 2 figures.) [Additional funding for this paper was provided by a grant from PPH Healthcare Medical Trust and SFI Campbell, The Danish National Centre for Social Research, Denmark.]
Home-Based Child Development Interventions for Preschool Children from Socially Disadvantaged Families. Campbell Systematic Reviews. 2012:1
Author: Miller, Sarah
Date: 2011-04-06
Type: Reports - Evaluative
Subjects: Disadvantaged,Child Development,Intervention,Preschool Children,Cognitive Development,Meta Analysis,Control Groups,Experimental Groups,Literature Reviews,Program Effectiveness,Program Descriptions,Behavioral Objectives,Evidence,Home Programs,Developmentally Appropriate Practices,Foreign Countries

The purpose of this research is to determine the effects of home-based programmes aimed specifically at improving developmental outcomes for preschool children from socially disadvantaged families. The authors searched the following databases between 7 October and 12 October 2010: Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (2010, Issue 4), MEDLINE (1950 to week 4, September 2010), EMBASE (1980 to Week 39, 2010), CINAHL (1937 to current), PsycINFO (1887 to current), ERIC (1966 to current), ASSIA (1987 to current), Sociological Abstracts (1952 to current), Social Science Citation Index (1970 to current). They also searched reference lists of articles. The authors included seven studies, which involved 723 participants. They assessed four of the seven studies as being at high risk of bias and three had an unclear risk of bias; the quality of the evidence was difficult to assess as there was often insufficient detail reported to enable any conclusions to be drawn about the methodological rigour of the studies. Four trials involving 285 participants measured cognitive development and they synthesised these data in a meta-analysis. Compared to the control group, there was no statistically significant impact of the intervention on cognitive development (standardised mean difference (SMD) 0.30; 95% confidence interval -0.18 to 0.78). Only three studies reported socioemotional outcomes and there was insufficient data to combine into a meta-analysis. No study reported on adverse effects. This review does not provide evidence of the effectiveness of home-based interventions that are specifically targeted at improving developmental outcomes for preschool children from socially disadvantaged families. Future studies should endeavour to better document and report their methodological processes. Search Strategies are appended. (Contains 1 figure.) [Funding for this paper was provided by the Queen's University Belfast Centre for Effective Education and the Research and Development Office, Northern Ireland.]
Dropout Prevention and Intervention Programs: Effects on School Completion and Dropout among School-Aged Children and Youth. Campbell Systematic Reviews.  2011:8
Author: Wilson, Sandra Jo
Date: 2011-11-14
Type: Reports - Evaluative
Subjects: Dropouts,Intervention,Participant Characteristics,Dropout Prevention,Meta Analysis,Program Effectiveness,Elementary School Students,Secondary School Students,Program Content,Dropout Research,Cost Effectiveness,Adolescents,Early Parenthood

The objectives of this systematic review were to summarize the available evidence on the effects of prevention and intervention programs aimed at primary and secondary students for increasing school completion or reducing school dropout. The primary focus of the meta-analysis was to examine the comparative effectiveness of different programs and program approaches in an effort to identify those with the largest and most reliable effects on school completion and dropout outcomes. The authors also sought to summarize the effects of programs designed for pregnant and parenting teens. A comprehensive and diverse international search strategy was used to locate qualifying studies reported between 1985 and 2010. A wide range of electronic bibliographic databases were searched, along with research registers, other grey literature databases, reference lists of all previous meta-analyses and reviews on the topic, as well as citations in research reports. The authors also maintained correspondence with researchers in the field of school dropout prevention. The literature search yielded a total of 23,677 reports, 2,794 which were deemed potentially relevant and retrieved for eligibility determination. Of those, 548 reports describing 167 different studies were included in the final review. Random-effects inverse variance weighted meta-analytic methods were used to synthesize odds ratios for the school dropout outcomes. Meta-regression models were used to examine the effects of program characteristics, methodological characteristics, and participant characteristics on the dropout odds ratios. Funnel plots, regression tests for small sample bias, and trim and fill analyses were used to assess the possibility of publication bias. Overall, results indicated that most school- and community-based programs were effective in decreasing school dropout. Given the minimal variation in effects across program types, the main conclusion from this review is that dropout prevention and intervention programs, regardless of type, will likely be effective if they are implemented well and are appropriate for the local environment. The authors recommend that policy makers and practitioners choosing dropout prevention programs consider the cost-effectiveness of programs, and choose those that fit best with local needs as well as implementer abilities and resources. Appended are: (1) Additional Tables; and (2) Additional Figures. (Contains 11 tables, 5 figures and 3 footnotes.) [Funding for this paper was provided by the Peabody Research Institute, Vanderbilt University.]
Curriculum Design, Development, and Implementation in an Era of Common Core State Standards. Summary Report of a Conference (Arlington, Virginia, August 1-3, 2010)
Author: Confrey, Jere
Date: 2010-08-00
Type: Reports - Descriptive
Subjects: Curriculum Design,Curriculum Development,Curriculum Implementation,State Standards,Conferences (Gatherings),Mathematics Curriculum,Mathematics Education,Stakeholders,Material Development,Change Strategies,Educational Change,Science Course Improvement Projects,State Action,State Policy,Elementary Secondary Education,Meetings

In June 2010, the National Governor's Association and the Council of Chief State School Officers published "Common Core State Standards" (CCSS) for K-12 mathematics. Forty-eight states collaborated in the development of CCSS and, to date, 34 states have officially adopted CCSS to replace existing state standards. CCSS presents an opportunity for critical stakeholders to focus on curriculum as a means of improving teaching and student learning. In order to help state and local school systems design thoughtful curriculum guides and select instructional materials (text, e-text, and ancillaries) that are essential supports for implementation of the CCSS, it is necessary to connect those who have constructed the "Common Core State Standards" in mathematics with those members of the educational community who are expert in designing, developing, and implementing mathematics curriculum resources and instructional programs. Collaborations across these communities will help identify the work that needs to be done to provide strong resources for the field in the future. Therefore, a meeting of key stakeholders was convened August 1-3, 2010 to discuss curriculum-related work needed in response to the "Common Core State Standards for Mathematics." The goals of the meeting were to: (a) provide guidance on future mathematics materials development efforts, K-12, and (b) address issues of curriculum design and production that arise in an environment of Common Core State Standards. This report serves as a public dissemination of conference discussions, recommendations, and items for action. (Contains 2 figures and 3 footnotes.)
Report of a Survey of State Mathematics Supervisors: What Influence Has NCTM's "Curriculum Focal Points" Had on State-Level Specification of Learning Goals?
Author: Center for the Study of Mathematics Curriculum
Date: 2007-09-00
Type: Reports - Research
Subjects: Familiarity,Academic Standards,Online Surveys,State Surveys,Mathematics Curriculum,Mathematics Education,State Supervisors,Educational Objectives,Position Papers,Administrator Attitudes,Program Attitudes,Teacher Associations,State Standards

An e-mail survey was conducted in the summer of 2007 to obtain information from state supervisors of mathematics (employees of state departments of education with primary responsibility for K-12 curriculum leadership) regarding the impact of the National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (NCTM) 2006 publication, "Curriculum Focal Points (CFP) for Prekindergarten through Grade 8 Mathematics." The survey sought information on the use and impact of CFP on current or future editions of state-level K-8 mathematics learning goals (commonly referred to as grade-level learning expectations or GLEs). Forty-three of 52 state representatives (including DoE and DoDEA) responded to the survey (83% response rate). A list of states that responded is included in this report. All but two of the 43 respondents indicated familiarity with CFP. In fact, 33 respondents indicated they are "very familiar" with the document and eight indicated they are "somewhat familiar" with the document. Appended are: (1) Survey; and (2) States whose representatives responded to survey. (Contains 2 tables.)
High School Mathematics: State-Level Curriculum Standards and Graduation Requirements
Author: Reys, Barbara J.
Date: 2007-04-00
Type: Reports - Descriptive
Subjects: Academic Standards,State Standards,Graduation Requirements,Mathematics Curriculum,State Curriculum Guides,High Schools,State Policy,Position Papers,Program Design,Required Courses,Time Factors (Learning),Placement

In a continuing effort to improve student-learning opportunities in mathematics, state departments of education have focused on articulating standards or learning goals at all levels, including high school mathematics. A review of K-8 mathematics curriculum standards (many of which have been published since 2002) compiled by staff from the Center for the Study of Mathematics Curriculum (CSMC) documents variation in the organization, specification, and grade placement of important learning goals across states (Reys, 2006). Mathematics curriculum standards for high school, while less common than for grades K-8, are receiving increased attention as a means to strengthen the rigor and raise expectations for what counts as a high school diploma in the U.S. In addition, many states are increasing the number of credits of mathematics required for students to receive a high school diploma, and are also specifying particular mathematics course requirements that students must complete, such as Algebra I and Geometry (The American Diploma Project, 2004). This report provides a summary of the format and organization of state-level curriculum standards, graduation requirements for high school mathematics. The information was gathered through searches of state departments of education websites as of 9/1/06. The information was current at the time of the release of this report but due to the continued work of states, some changes may have occurred since then. Therefore, it is recommended that those interested in particular state requirements consult the appropriate website for the latest and most complete set of information. State-Level Standards, Required Years and Courses for High School Mathematics are appended. (Contains 3 tables and 8 footnotes.)
K-12 Mathematics: What Should Students Learn and When Should They Learn It? Conference Highlights
Author: Center for the Study of Mathematics Curriculum
Date: 2007-02-00
Type: Collected Works - Proceedings
Subjects: Higher Education,Academic Standards,Course Content,National Standards,Curriculum Development,Elementary School Mathematics,Secondary School Mathematics,Mathematics Curriculum,Mathematics Education,Elementary Secondary Education,Conferences (Gatherings),Educational History

In the fall of 2006 several influential national groups (Achieve, American Statistical Association, College Board, and the National Council of Teachers of Mathematics) developed and released documents that recommended curriculum standards or focal points for K-12 mathematics. The timing of the release of these documents provided a unique and important window of opportunity to promote and stimulate collaboration among producers and users of standards. In response, the Center for the Study of Mathematics Curriculum (CSMC) organized several meetings of representatives of each group to discuss the nature of their work and possible collaboration. As a result of those meetings, the groups agreed to cosponsor a national conference to highlight the recommendations and to engage &quot;users&quot; of standards (state and district curriculum specialists, textbook and assessment publishers, K-12 district and teacher leaders, and representatives from higher education and business) in discussions about implications for their work. The conference was held on February 5-6, 2007 at the Rural Electric Cooperative Association Conference Center in Arlington, Virginia. Participants included about 200 representatives from schools, state departments of education, institutions of higher education, textbook and assessment publishers, professional organizations, and major research and development centers. The conference format allowed the cosponsoring organizations to explain the rationale, process and product of their work. It also provided opportunities for participants to engage with each other and with the cosponsors in conversations about the implications of the work. The conference was also webcast and archived sessions are available at: http://cltnet.org/cltnet/misc/csmcmath07/. This document provides another record of the conference. This document presents the following papers: (1) Tracing the Evolution of Mathematics Content Standards in the United States: Looking Back and Projecting Forward towards National Standards (Jere Confrey); (2) Some Common Themes and Notable Differences Across Recent National Mathematics Curriculum Documents (Chris Hirsch with Dana Cox, Lisa Kasmer, Sandy Madden, and Diane Moore); and (3) K-12 Mathematics: What should students learn and when should they learn it--&quot;Challenges, Good Bets, and Context&quot; (Joan Ferrini-Mundy). Individual papers contain tables, figures, footnotes and references.
The Future of STEM Curriculum and Instructional Design: A Research and Development Agenda for Learning Designers. Report of a Workshop Series
Author: Center for the Study of Mathematics Curriculum
Date: 2012-00-00
Type: Reports - Descriptive
Subjects: Instructional Design,STEM Education,Research and Development,Curriculum Development,Educational Policy,Educational Environment,Technology Integration,Technology Uses in Education,Material Development,Educational Innovation,Workshops,Science Course Improvement Projects,Educational Needs,Needs Assessment,Educational Opportunities,Change Strategies,Educational Strategies,Educational Change,Educational Technology,Teacher Role,Educational Resources,Electronic Publishing,Reflection,Policy Formation

In 2009-10 a series of Workshops was organized to focus on STEM (science, technology, engineering, and mathematics) learning design for young students and adolescents. The objective was to provide visionary leadership to the education community by: (a) identifying and analyzing the needs and opportunities for future STEM curriculum development and instructional design given current and emerging technologies; and, (b) recommend policy positions and actions by funding agencies and the STEM research and development community regarding STEM instructional resources. Specific questions addressed included: (1) What will a high-impact, technology-intensive STEM learning environment look like in the near and long-term future?; (2) What materials development and research are required to make this vision possible?; and (3) What design, development, and diffusion processes are most likely to produce new approaches to STEM education? To address these questions, two workshops were convened to identify and analyze the needs and opportunities for innovative work. The goal was to identify strategies, directions and recommendations about the future of STEM instructional design. Participants included education futurists, researchers in the STEM content and education disciplines and specialists in instructional technology, cognitive psychology, policy, museum and educational media. This report provides a summary of the ideas generated by Workshop participants and offered to the STEM instructional design community and to agencies that fund this work. List of Workshop Participants is appended. (Contains 2 figures and 7 footnotes.)
From Compliance to Service: Evolving the State Role to Support District Data Efforts to Improve Student Achievement
Author: Shah, Rebecca
Date: 2011-11-00
Type: Reports - Descriptive
Subjects: Academic Achievement,Educational Improvement,Elementary Secondary Education,Partnerships in Education,Educational Finance,Stakeholders,State Departments of Education,Teacher Effectiveness,Career Readiness,College Readiness,Data,Information Technology

As a result of state, national and federal leadership and political will, states have dramatically increased their capacity to collect robust longitudinal education data. However, without an equally ambitious effort to ensure access and build stakeholders' capacity to use data to increase student achievement, these infrastructure investments cannot be fully realized. Because districts are the agents that directly affect teaching and learning, states cannot succeed in this evolution in policy and practice unless they actively engage their districts. This engagement requires state education agencies to evolve from their traditional role of primarily ensuring compliance with state and federal laws to a new role as service providers that meet the diverse needs of all districts in the state. Appended are: (1) 10 State Actions to Ensure Effective Data Use; (2) How Is Your State Supporting Local Data Use?; and (3) Promising State Practices. (Contains 25 endnotes.) [This paper was written with support from David Goldstein. For "From Compliance to Service: Evolving the State Role to Support District Data Efforts to Improve Student Achievement. Summary," see ED535226.]
From Compliance to Service: Evolving the State Role to Support District Data Efforts to Improve Student Achievement. Summary
Author: Data Quality Campaign
Date: 2011-11-00
Type: Reports - Descriptive
Subjects: Educational Improvement,Academic Achievement,Stakeholders,State Departments of Education,Data,School Districts,Cooperation

As a result of state, national and federal leadership and political will, states have dramatically increased their capacity to collect robust longitudinal education data. However, without an equally ambitious effort to ensure access and build stakeholders' capacity to use data to increase student achievement, these infrastructure investments cannot be fully realized. Because districts are the agents that directly affect teaching and learning, states cannot succeed in this evolution in policy and practice unless they actively engage their districts. This engagement requires state education agencies to evolve from their traditional role of primarily ensuring compliance with state and federal laws to a new role as service providers that meet the diverse needs of all districts in the state. [For full report, "From Compliance to Service: Evolving the State Role to Support District Data Efforts to Improve Student Achievement," see ED535225.]
Supporting Education Policy and Practice through Common Data Standards: A Policymaker's Guide
Author: Data Quality Campaign
Date: 2012-04-00
Type: Reports - Descriptive
Subjects: Educational Policy,Teacher Effectiveness,State Standards,Stakeholders,Elementary Secondary Education,Core Curriculum,Alignment (Education),Accountability,Data,Postsecondary Education,Resource Allocation

Consider the high-priority challenges facing education stakeholders today, such as measuring teacher effectiveness, implementing the Common Core State Standards, aligning K-12 and postsecondary education efforts with workforce demands, efficiently allocating resources, and ensuring that students stay on track to success. These efforts all rely on the efficient collection, management, and use of education data--and stakeholder confidence in those data, particularly if they will be used for high-stakes personnel, accountability, or other decisions. Over the last decade, state, federal, and private investments of political will and resources have contributed to significant progress in building robust statewide longitudinal data systems. Attention is now shifting--as it should be--to the work of ensuring that data are used by stakeholders to answer critical questions and inform decisionmaking from the kitchen table to the classroom to the state capitol. In the absence of common data standards that ensure the quality, comparability, and efficient sharing of data, these efforts' impact will be limited and their implementation costly and ineffective. (Contains 8 endnotes.)