ethanporcaro/eric-fulltext-meta huggingface dataset:
Failure after Farrell: Violence and Inadequate Mental Health Care in California's Division of Juvenile Justice
Author: Ajmani, Nisha
Date: 2016-08-00
Type: Reports - Research
Subjects: Juvenile Justice,Mental Health,Violence,Access to Health Care,Correctional Institutions,Institutionalized Persons,Environmental Influences,Change Strategies,Safety,Juvenile Gangs,Crime,Court Litigation,Recidivism

From its inception in 1891 to present day, California's state youth corrections system has been mired in violence and abuse. In 1914, IQ testing and eugenics at state juvenile facilities resulted in the forced sterilization of poor, primarily non-white youth. In 1939, the suspicious suicide of a 13-year-old boy, the maltreatment of Latino youth, and systemic violence prompted a statewide investigation. In the 1960s, the California Youth Authority's (CYA) own internal studies concluded that their facilities bred violence and failed to keep youth safe (Macallair, 2015). In 2003, after the media and juvenile justice advocates exposed decades of physical and sexual abuse, dangerous working conditions for staff, capitulation to gangs, and multiple youth suicides, the Prison Law Office (PLO) sued the CYA, which was renamed to the Division of Juvenile Justice (DJJ) in 2005 (CJCJ, 2013). This lawsuit, &quot;Farrell v. Kernan&quot; (&quot;the Farrell lawsuit&quot;), forced DJJ to improve conditions within its facilities. As a result of &quot;Farrell,&quot; in 2004, the Alameda County Superior Court of California issued a consent decree that required DJJ to implement six remedial plans overhauling its safety, health, mental health treatment, sex behavior treatment, disabilities services, and education systems. After twelve years of oversight, in February 2016, the court released DJJ from the lawsuit, stating that it had satisfied a majority of the consent decree's mandates, though acknowledging two remedial plans had not yet been fully implemented. Despite the dismissal, data show that DJJ is far from reformed: violence, gang culture, and poor mental health care are continuing problems. Analyses of court documents monitoring &quot;Farrell's&quot; two remaining remedial plans--the Safety and Welfare Remedial Plan and the Mental Health Remedial Plan--reveal that DJJ continues to be a dangerous and traumatic place that fails to provide adequate mental health treatment, therapeutic services, and evidence-based programming for California's young people. Because the court ended its oversight of the additional remedial plans in or before 2013, in order to analyze more recent trends at DJJ prior to the dismissal of the &quot;Farrell&quot; lawsuit, this report can only examine the implementation of the safety and mental health reforms. However, institutional violence and lack of access to mental health care affect multiple aspects of daily life at DJJ and may be indicative of other problems. This report presents the following sections: (1) An Overview of DJJ; (2) Unfulfilled Reforms of the &quot;Farrell&quot; Lawsuit; (3) DJJ Fails to Keep Youth Safe; (4) DJJ is Unable to Provide Mental Health Care; and (5) Recidivism Rates Remain High.
Organizational Culture as Determinant of Knowledge Sharing Practices of Teachers Working in Higher Education Sector
Author: Areekkuzhiyil, Santhosh
Date: 2016-08-00
Type: Journal Articles
Subjects: Organizational Culture,College Faculty,Sharing Behavior,Knowledge Management,Educational Practices,Teacher Surveys,Least Squares Statistics,Performance Factors,Hypothesis Testing,Likert Scales,Teacher Attitudes,Foreign Countries

The current study aims to explore the influence of organisational culture on the knowledge sharing practices of teachers working in higher education sector. The study hypothesized the impact of various aspects of organisational culture on the knowledge sharing practices of teachers working in higher education sector. The data required for the study has been conveniently collected from 250 teachers working in various higher educational institutions in the Kerala state. The study used PSL SEM for analysis and found that the organisational culture explain 35.9% the knowledge sharing practices of the teachers working in the higher education sector of the state. Out of the factors of organisational culture, communication, trust and organizational structure influence significantly the knowledge sharing practice of teachers.
The Measurement Paradigm and Role of Mediators in Dynamic Assessment: A Qualitative Meta-Synthesis
Author: Rezaee, Abbas Ali
Date: 2016-10-00
Type: Information Analyses
Subjects: Alternative Assessment,Qualitative Research,Synthesis,Evaluation Research,Second Language Learning,Language Tests,Achievement Tests,Measurement,Role,Literature Reviews

As dynamic assessment (DA) continues to come to prominence as a procedure that endeavors to ameliorate learner performance and further development through mediators' assistance with the intent of discerning learning potential, a plethora of research has delved into the applicability of DA in second/foreign language education. This article employed methodical procedures for qualitative meta-synthesis of the target research domain to synthesize available quantitative and qualitative primary research reports. The discursive reading and systematic review of research findings and discussions across study reports revealed a primary theme, that is, &quot;DA: Shifting Focus from Postpositivism to Pragmatism&quot;, and a shared set of 2 secondary themes, that is, &quot;Classroom-Based L2 DA: Post-Achievement Test Condition&quot; and &quot;Mediators' Sense of Accountability&quot; that can provide a refined worldview on DA and a window on contemporary opinions on the relevance of assessment to classroom context and can develop a more informed understanding of the ascendancy of mediators over the effectiveness of DA.
The Gauntlet: Think Tanks and Federally Funded Centers Misrepresent and Suppress Other Education Research
Author: Phelps, Richard P.
Date: 2014-00-00
Type: Journal Articles
Subjects: Educational Research,Educational Testing,Standardized Tests,Public Agencies,Nonprofit Organizations,Educational Policy,National Organizations,Information Dissemination

Currently, too few people have too much influence over those who control the education research purse strings. And, those who control the purse strings have too much influence over policy decisions. Until folk at the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and the US Education Department--to mention just a couple of consistent funders of education policy debacles--broaden their networks, expand their reading lists, and open their minds to more intellectual diversity, they will continue to produce education policy failure. It would help if they would fund a wider pool of education researchers, evidence, and information. In recent years, they have, instead, encouraged the converse--funding a saturating dissemination of a narrow pool of information--thereby contributing to US education policy's number 1 problem: pervasive misinformation. So what? The aggressive, career-strategic behavior of researchers in federally funded centers and think tanks creates many problems, including a loss of useful information and bad public policies based on skewed information. But, two adverse consequences worry me the most. First, these badly behaved researchers are the only ones that most journalists and policy-makers pay any attention to. Second, the effects of their bad behavior are spreading overseas. The education testing research function at the World Bank, for example, has been handed down over the past few decades from one scholar affiliated with Boston College's School of Education to another. True to form, they cite the research they like, some of which is their own, most of the rest of which comes from Center for Research and Exploration in Space Science &amp; Technology (CRESST), and imply that the vast majority of relevant research does not exist. More recently, the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) published a completely one-sided study on educational assessment that ignores most of the relevant research literature and highlights that conducted at a certain US federal research center and several US think tanks (Phelps 2013, 2014). Their skewed recommendations are now the world's.
Working on the &quot;Write&quot; Path: Improving EFL Students' Argumentative-Writing Performance through L1-Mediated Structural Cognitive Modification
Author: Salmani Nodoushan, Mohammad Ali
Date: 2016-10-20
Type: Journal Articles
Subjects: Experimental Groups,Control Groups,Critical Thinking,Persuasive Discourse,Writing Tests,Writing Workshops,English (Second Language),English Instruction,Teaching Methods,Intermode Differences,Instructional Effectiveness,Cognitive Development,College Students,Multiple Choice Tests,Language Proficiency,Task Analysis,Writing Achievement,Foreign Countries,Scoring Rubrics,Pretests Posttests,Cognitive Tests,Thinking Skills

Based on their scores on a proficiency test, the 894 participants in this study were grouped into three experimental groups (EG) and three control groups (CG). They attempted an argumentative writing task and the Cornell Critical Thinking Test, Form Z (CCTT-Form Z) as the pre-test. While CG participants received no treatment or placebo, EG participants received a three-week workshop treatment aimed at reconstructing their critical thinking and argumentation abilities. Two weeks after the workshop, all participants in all EG and CG groups attempted the same writing task and the Cornell Critical Thinking Test, Form Z (CCTT-Form Z) as the post test. SPANOVA analyses revealed that EFL writing performance will boost if EFL students' are helped to deconstruct, and then reconstruct, their cognitive and thought patterns for appropriate argumentation. The Multiple Trait Scoring Rubric for scoring students' writing (based on Hyland, 2003, p231) is appended.
Inequality Is the Problem: Prioritizing Research on Reducing Inequality. Annual Report
Author: Gamoran, Adam
Date: 2013-00-00
Type: Reports - Descriptive
Subjects: Research Proposals,Research Needs,Equal Education,Social Justice,Youth Programs,Youth Opportunities,Academic Achievement,Achievement Gap,Social Science Research,Social Change,Disadvantaged Youth,Youth Problems,Problem Solving,Change Strategies,Child Development,Adolescent Development,Annual Reports

Inequality in education and other domains of life stands in the way of economic and civic progress in the United States. It forestalls social mobility and economic productivity and impairs social cohesion. As a result, national and international leaders--from big-city mayors to Pope Francis--recognize that, as President Obama (2013) put it, inequality is &quot;the defining challenge of our time.&quot; Although inequality is pervasive, it can be addressed. One way to reduce inequality over time is to lessen the effects of inequality in one generation on the outcomes of the next. To address this challenge, the William T. Grant Foundation announced a new initiative to support research on programs, policies, and practices that reduce inequality in youth outcomes in the academic, social, behavioral, and economic realms. The Foundation's interest in inequality extends to many areas of youth development, reflecting disparities in arenas beyond education such as mental health, criminal justice, and workforce development (Alegria, Vallas, and Pumariega 2010; Fader, Kurlychek, and Morgan 2014; Schwartz, Ferguson, and Symonds 2010). This essay uses educational inequality to highlight new ways of thinking about inequality, key leverage points for reducing inequality, and the potential for research to develop more effective responses to inequality.
Encouraging Evidence on a Sector-Focused Advancement Strategy: Two-Year Impacts from the WorkAdvance Demonstration
Author: Hendra, Richard
Date: 2016-08-00
Type: Reports - Research
Subjects: Employment Programs,Job Training,Program Implementation,Costs,Participation,Economic Impact,Program Effectiveness,Followup Studies,Labor Force Development,Demonstration Programs,Adult Education,Program Evaluation,Statistical Analysis,Surveys,Interviews,Focus Groups,Qualitative Research

This report summarizes the two-year findings of a rigorous random assignment evaluation of the WorkAdvance model, a sectoral training, and advancement initiative. Launched in 2011, WorkAdvance goes beyond the previous generation of employment programs by introducing demand-driven skills training and a focus on jobs that have career pathways. The model is heavily influenced by the positive findings from the Sectoral Employment Impact Study (SEIS) completed in 2010. A major component of the WorkAdvance model, in common with the programs studied in the SEIS, is formal training offering industry-recognized certifications, reflecting the hypothesis that skills acquisition is necessary for advancement. The model also requires providers to be far more employer-facing than traditional training programs, taking into account multiple employers' changing skill requirements, employee assessment practices, and personnel needs. This report presents the implementation, cost, participation, and two-year economic impacts of WorkAdvance. The evaluation as a whole provides important information for workforce development providers interested in pursuing a sector strategy. The analysis considers the role played by providers' sector-specific training and preparation and the role played by the nature of the sectors themselves. Future priorities that emerge from the results are (1) understanding how to help the more disadvantaged access the programs; and (2) learning how to build service capacity, given how complex the model is to run. The economic results are based on unemployment insurance earnings records and a second-year follow-up survey. The WorkAdvance program operations and evaluation are funded through the federal Social Innovation Fund (SIF), a public-private partnership administered by the Corporation for National and Community Service. This SIF project is led by the Mayor's Fund to Advance New York City and the NYC Center for Economic Opportunity in collaboration with MDRC. The following are appended: (1) Data Collection, Analysis Methods, and Methodological Issues; (2) Supplementary Exhibits for Chapter 1; (3) Supplementary Exhibits for Chapter 2; (4) Supplementary Exhibits for Chapter 3; (5) Net Cost Thought Experiment; (6) Supplementary Exhibits for Chapter 5; and (7) Further Analysis of Sources of Variation in the Economic Impacts.
Research-Practice Partnerships: A Strategy for Leveraging Research for Educational Improvement in School Districts
Author: Coburn, Cynthia E.
Date: 2013-01-00
Type: Reports - Evaluative
Subjects: Partnerships in Education,Educational Improvement,School Districts,Theory Practice Relationship,Barriers,Change Strategies,Interviews,Educational Research,Educational Researchers,Group Dynamics,Performance Factors,School Community Programs,Educational Practices,Educational Strategies

Pressures are increasing on educational policy and practice to use research to guide improvement. Recently there have been concerted efforts to forge new and different kinds of relationships between researchers and practitioners. School districts across the country are developing a new kind of partnership with researchers. These research-practice partnerships are long-term collaborations, which are organized to investigate problems of practice and generate solutions for improving district outcomes. This white paper will: (1) Define research-practice partnerships; (2) Identify the major types of partnerships that operate at the district level; and (3) Describe challenges partnerships face and strategies for addressing these challenges. To do so, the authors draw on a review of existing research and interviews with participants in research-practice partnerships across the country. Throughout, they illustrate the work of research-practice partnerships with portraits of partnerships in action.
Case Study III: The University of Washington and Bellevue School District Partnership
Author: Coburn, Cynthia E.
Date: 2015-10-08
Type: Reports - Research
Subjects: Partnerships in Education,College School Cooperation,School Districts,Case Studies,Curriculum Enrichment,Academic Achievement,Scientific Principles,Test Construction,Educational History,Organizational Objectives,Barriers,Curriculum Development,Science Course Improvement Projects,Secondary School Curriculum

This design-research partnership involves learning scientists, design researchers, and graduate students from the Learning in Informal and Formal Environments (LIFE) Center and the College of Education at the University of Washington (UW), and district staff, teachers, and students from the Bellevue School District (BSD). The goal of their work is to improve curriculum, increase student achievement, and test design and learning science principles. The partnership has several projects underway. This case study will discuss &quot;Agency in Sustained Problem-Based Inquiry: Learning Science Through and As Innovation.&quot; Additional work includes a Knowledge in Action project revising high school AP environmental and government curriculum using project-based learning, and an Investing in Innovation (I3) grant to redesign a high school with a STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics) focus. The report is organized into the following brief sections: (1) History; (2) Nature of the Partnership; (3) Challenges; and (4) Benefits. [This case study is a supplement to &quot;Research-Practice Partnerships: A Strategy for Leveraging Research for Educational Improvement in School Districts,&quot; ED568396.]
Case Study IV: Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching's Networked Improvement Communities (NICs)
Author: Coburn, Cynthia E.
Date: 2015-10-08
Type: Reports - Research
Subjects: Case Studies,Partnerships in Education,Educational History,Organizational Objectives,Barriers,Faculty Development,Teacher Improvement,Community Colleges,Educational Cooperation,Improvement Programs

The Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching is a nonprofit, operating foundation with a long tradition of developing and studying ways to improve teaching practice. For the past three years, the Carnegie Foundation has initiated three different Networked Improvement Communities (NICs). The first, Quantway, is addressing the high failure rate of students in developmental mathematics. Eight community colleges in three states are part of this network, as are several intermediary organizations whose work focuses on curriculum, faculty development, and student support. The second NIC, Statway, is also focused on community colleges. It involves 19 colleges in five states and is a pathway to college statistics. The third NIC, Building a Teacher Effectiveness Network (BTEN), is working on teacher quality, specifically on developing and retaining teachers in the first three years of teaching. The BTEN network members include the Carnegie Foundation, the Institute for Healthcare Improvement (IHI), the American Federation of Teachers (AFT), New Visions for Public Schools (NVPS), the Austin Independent School District (AISD), and the Baltimore City Schools (BCS). Carnegie staff act as the primary facilitators of the work, guiding the improvement process. IHI and AFT also help facilitate the improvement work. AISD, BCS, and NVPS are sites that test ideas. This case study discusses the partnership and is organized into the following sections: (1) History; (2) Nature of the Partnership; (3) Challenges; and (4) Benefits. [This case study is a supplement to &quot;Research-Practice Partnerships: A Strategy for Leveraging Research for Educational Improvement in School Districts,&quot; ED568396.]
Intersecting Inequalities: Research to Reduce Inequality for Immigrant-Origin Children and Youth
Author: Suárez-Orozco, Carola
Date: 2015-02-00
Type: Reports - Evaluative
Subjects: Immigrants,Children,Disadvantaged Youth,Parent Background,Educational Attainment,Employment,Poverty,Racial Bias,Status,English Language Learners,Undocumented Immigrants,Equal Education,Poverty Programs,Human Capital,Inclusion,Second Language Instruction,English (Second Language),Educational Assessment,Access to Education,Postsecondary Education,Educational Policy,Student Adjustment,Research,Elementary Secondary Education

As immigration has reached historic numbers in the United States, immigrant children have become an integral part of the national tapestry. While immigration has grown across all post-industrial nations, inequality has risen at a steep rate on a variety of indicators, including income distribution, child poverty, residential segregation, and numerous academic outcomes. Among the children of immigrants, inequality is manifested against a backdrop of wide disparity in post-migration conditions faced by new immigrants. While many immigrant-origin youth successfully acclimate to their new land, faring as well as or even better than their native same-ethnicity peers, others face significant challenges in their educational and psychosocial adaptation. Most at risk are youth at the intersection of multiple types of disadvantage, namely low parent education and employment, poverty, newcomer status, language barriers, racialization, and undocumented status. This paper reviews what current research tells us about how inequality of opportunities and outcomes plays out along these six dimensions for immigrant-origin children and youth. The paper focuses on two proximal contexts of development that are key to alleviating unequal opportunities and outcomes: education and family. The authors recommend areas of future research that may inform policies, programs, and practices to reduce inequality for immigrant-origin children and youth.
After the Post-9/11 GI Bill: A Profile of Military Service Members and Veterans Enrolled in Undergraduate and Graduate Education. Stats in Brief. NCES 2016-435
Author: Radford, Alexandria Walton
Date: 2016-08-00
Type: Reports - Research
Subjects: Federal Legislation,Veterans,Military Personnel,Enrollment,Undergraduate Students,Graduate Students,Public Colleges,Private Colleges,Proprietary Schools,Associate Degrees,Bachelors Degrees,Certification,Masters Programs,Doctoral Programs,Student Financial Aid,Two Year Colleges,Student Characteristics,Disabilities,Online Courses,Tables (Data),Comparative Analysis,National Surveys,Student Surveys

The Post-9/11 GI Bill took effect on August 1, 2009, increasing the education benefits available to military service members who served after September 10, 2001. A previous National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) study used national data collected in 2007-08 to profile military undergraduate and graduate students who received benefits prior to the Post-9/11 GI Bill's implementation. The current study adds analogous data from 2011-12 to profile students receiving Veterans' education benefits after the Post-9/11 GI Bill's implementation. This Statistics in Brief compares key statistics on military students' demographic characteristics, enrollment experiences, and benefit participation in both 2007-08 and 2011-12. Note that veterans who left service before 9/11 are not eligible for the Post-9/11 GI Bill, and that those who served after 9/11 (September 11, 2001) can choose whether to use Post-9/11 GI Bill benefits or other Veterans' education benefits. During the 2013 fiscal year, 69 percent of all beneficiaries of Veterans' education programs received their benefits through the Post-9/11 GI Bill, while the remainder received their benefits through other Veterans Affairs education programs such as the Montgomery GI Bill, Survivors' and Dependents' Education Assistance (DEA), or the Reserve Education Assistance Program (REAP) (U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs 2013). Thus, in this report, not all 2011-12 students awarded Veterans' benefits will have received them through the Post-9/11 GI Bill. The National Postsecondary Student Aid Studies (NPSAS:08 and NPSAS:12), on which this analysis is based, did not collect information on the specific type of Veterans' education benefits recipients used. The following are appended: (1) Data Tables; and (2) Standard Error Tables.