ethanporcaro/eric-fulltext-meta huggingface dataset:
Case Study of Utah Higher Education. National Center Report #05-1
Author: Bracco, Kathy Reeves
Date: 2005-04-00
Type: Reports - Evaluative
Subjects: Report Cards,Higher Education,Program Effectiveness,Public Policy,Costs,Access to Education,Interviews,Tuition,Enrollment Trends,Context Effect,Comparative Analysis,Performance,Financial Support,Two Year Colleges,Bachelors Degrees,Institutional Mission,Enrollment Management,Public Colleges,State Colleges,College Preparation,High School Graduates,Graduation Rate,Trend Analysis

This report examines state policies and performance in the areas of enrollment and affordability. The authors' goal was to better understand the Utah's generally good performance in &quot;Measuring Up 2004: The National Report Card on Higher Education.&quot; Utah's historically strong performance, especially in terms of providing affordable higher education, provided an incentive for the National Center for Public Policy and Higher Education to further investigate the public policies of Utah that might account for its good performance as documented in &quot;Measuring Up 2004.&quot; Interviews for the case study occurred between September 2003 and January 2004. Because Utah has been able to maintain a relatively affordable system at a time when enrollments were increasing, the authors were particularly interested in the relationship between state policies and performance in the areas of  enrollment/participation and affordability. The authors begin the case with a look at contextual factors, first for the state in general and then for higher education in particular. They then turn to a discussion of performance in higher education, looking specifically at how Utah performs relative to other states on some key performance measures. Next they look at  the array of policies that were discussed during their state interviews, and try to understand the relationship between those policies and Utah's results on the various performance measures. A list of the individuals interviewed for the Utah Case Study (September 2003-January 2004) is appended. (Contains 54 footnotes, 1 figures, and 3 tables.)
Measuring Up 2004: The National Report Card on Higher Education
Author: National Center for Public Policy and Higher Education
Date: 2004-09-00
Type: Collected Works - General
Subjects: Report Cards,Higher Education,Educational Change,Academic Persistence,College Preparation,Education Work Relationship,Educational Indicators,Enrollment,Global Approach,Outcomes of Education,Paying for College,Public Policy,Student Costs,Time Perspective,Comparative Analysis,Educational Assessment

This report card, third in a series of biennial report cards on higher education, consists of a national report card and 50 state report cards. Measuring Up 2004 evaluates state performance in six categories, and for the first time, compares each state's current results with its own performance a decade ago. Contents include: (1) Foreword (James B. Hunt, Jr. and Garrey Carruthers); (2) Message from Governor Mark R. Warner; (3) A Ten-Year Perspective: Higher Education Stalled Despite High School Improvement (Patrick M. Callan); (4) A National Overview: Improvement Over the Past Decade; (5) Grading Learning: Extending the Concept; (6) Questions and Answers about &quot;Measuring Up 2004&quot;; (7) How We Grade States and How We Measure Improvement; (8) The National Picture: 2004 Snapshot; (9) State Grades 2004; and (10) &quot;Measuring Up 2004&quot; Resources. (Contains 4 footnotes.) [Additional funding for the publication and dissemination of &quot;Measuring Up 2004&quot; was provided by the William R. Kenan, Jr. Charitable Trust. For &quot;Measuring Up 2002: The State-By-State Report Card for Higher Education,&quot; see ED468796.]
The Governance Divide: A Report on a Four-State Study on Improving College Readiness and Success. National Center Report #05-3
Author: Venezia, Andrea
Date: 2005-09-00
Type: Reports - Evaluative
Subjects: Postsecondary Education,Elementary Secondary Education,Governance,Educational Change,High Schools,Case Studies,Educational Policy,Change Strategies,Leadership Responsibility,High School Graduates,College Bound Students,Educational Improvement,College Preparation,High School Students,Curriculum Development,Educational Finance,Accountability,Equal Education,Data Collection,Politics of Education,Budgets,Barriers,Cooperative Planning,Educational History,State Legislation

This report, supported by case studies in Florida (ED508098), Georgia (ED508099), New York (ED508100), and Oregon (ED508101), identifies and examines policy options available to states that are interested in creating sustained K-16 reform. The findings move the K-16 agenda forward by proposing a set of state policy levers that can be used to create meaningful changes for students. In addition, this report identifies the role of other factors--  such as leadership and state culture and history--in implementing and sustaining K-16 reforms within states. The findings of this research demonstrate the real challenges--and opportunities--that states face as they seek to improve transitions between high school and college. This report provides state leaders with real-world policy choices, showing the kinds of steps several states have taken, and the implications of these policy decisions over time. The report also offers recommendations to help states transform ad hoc approaches into  sustained action and institutionalized, long-term K-16 reforms. Every state needs to increase the percentage of students who complete high school and finish some form of postsecondary education; existing governance structures and policies cannot meet this overwhelming need. For most states, these structures and policies must be revised in significant ways. As the findings reveal, the responsibility for reform cannot be carried by one sector, but rather must be shared across systems to reach common ground, focusing on improving K-12 and postsecondary education for all students. &quot;Education Performance in Four States&quot; is appended. (Contains 54 endnotes and 1 figure.)
The Governance Divide: The Case Study for Florida. National Center Report #05-4
Author: Venezia, Andrea
Date: 2006-05-00
Type: Reports - Descriptive
Subjects: Postsecondary Education,Elementary Secondary Education,Governance,Educational Change,Politics of Education,State Legislation,Case Studies,Educational Policy,Change Strategies,Enrollment Trends,Leadership Responsibility,Standardized Tests,Testing Programs,Student Evaluation,Financial Support,Dropouts,High School Graduates,College Bound Students,Educational Improvement,College Preparation,Curriculum Development,Educational Finance,Accountability,Access to Education,Data Collection,Budgets,Barriers,Cooperative Planning,Educational History,Scholarships

This case study is part of a broader research project examining state policies and governance structures that span K-12 and postsecondary education. Florida has implemented some of the most sweeping education governance changes of any state; all levels of education are housed in the Department of Education, which is overseen by a commissioner who reports to the governor. This study examines Florida's recent K-20 reforms, with a focus on state-level initiatives, governance, and related structures. The primary research questions included the following: (1) To what extent is K-20 reform perceived as a state policy concern? What are the incentives and disincentives for improved connections? (2) What are the main goals and objectives of current state-level K-20 reforms? Who is responsible for developing and implementing those changes? (3) What have been the main successes and failures to date? Interviews were conducted with state-level policymakers, administrators, business leaders, researchers, and others involved in reforms. This report begins with a summary of recent relevant political, governance, and education reforms in order to provide a context for later discussions of specific K-20 efforts. It outlines the previous policies and programs that contributed to the development of a K-20 foundation in the state. Next, the report summarizes the content of the current K-20 reforms, their effects, and the challenges they face in aligning K-12 and postsecondary education. The report concludes with reflections about the sustainability of the K-20 reforms and the role of the current governance structure in their development and implementation. The Florida Interview Protocol is appended. (Contains 20 endnotes.) [For &quot;The Governance Divide: A Report on a Four-State Study on Improving College Readiness and Success. National Center Report #05-3,&quot; see ED508097. For the Georgia case study, see ED508099. For the New York case study, see ED508100. For the Oregon case study, see ED508101.]
The Governance Divide: The Case Study for Georgia. National Center Report #05-5
Author: Venezia, Andrea
Date: 2006-04-00
Type: Reports - Descriptive
Subjects: Postsecondary Education,Elementary Secondary Education,Governance,Educational Change,Politics of Education,State Legislation,Case Studies,Agency Cooperation,Scholarships,Educational Policy,Change Strategies,College Admission,Student Placement,Dual Enrollment,Leadership Responsibility,Standardized Tests,Testing Programs,Student Evaluation,Financial Support,Dropouts,High School Graduates,College Bound Students,Educational Improvement,College Preparation,Curriculum Development,Educational Finance,Accountability,Access to Education,Data Collection,Budgets,Barriers,Cooperative Planning,Educational History

This case study is part of a broader research project examining state policies and governance structures that span K-12 and postsecondary education. Georgia was the first state to have state and regional P-16 councils, and its regents' office in the University System of Georgia oversees a variety of projects that focus on connecting K-12 and postsecondary education. The Georgia field research was conducted in September 2003. Two central questions that this report seeks to answer are: (1) What types of governance structures and related policies enable, or create difficulties for, P-16 reforms? (2) How necessary is a P-16 governance framework in order to create and institutionalize P-16 reform? To examine these questions and issues, this report describes the history of and context for P-16 reform and governance in Georgia. It then presents a summary of major P-16 projects and policies, and an analysis of the state's major P-16 accomplishments and challenges. The report concludes with thoughts about the present and future of P-16 reform in the state. The Georgia Interview Protocol is appended. (Contains 23 endnotes.) [For &quot;The Governance Divide: A Report on a Four-State Study on Improving College Readiness and Success. National Center Report #05-3,&quot; see ED508097. For the Florida case study, see ED508098. For the New York case study, see ED508100. For the Oregon case study, see ED508101.]
The Governance Divide: The Case Study for New York. National Center Report #05-6
Author: Venezia, Andrea
Date: 2006-05-00
Type: Reports - Descriptive
Subjects: Postsecondary Education,Elementary Secondary Education,Governance,Governing Boards,State Colleges,Public Colleges,Educational Change,Politics of Education,State Legislation,Case Studies,Educational Policy,Change Strategies,Enrollment Trends,Leadership Responsibility,State Standards,Financial Support,High School Graduates,College Bound Students,Educational Improvement,College Preparation,Curriculum Development,Educational Finance,Accountability,Access to Education,Data Collection,Budgets,Barriers,Educational History,Disabilities,Dual Enrollment

This case study is part of a broader research project examining state policies and governance structures that span K-12 and postsecondary education. The New York Board of Regents oversees all education in the state and has been in place for over 200 years; this lends the regents' office a legitimacy and tradition unlike any other state education governance structure in the nation. This report explores how connected New York's education policies and reforms are across pre-K, K-12, and postsecondary education (called PK-16), with a focus on state-level initiatives, governance, and related structures. Aside from research conducted in New York City, this project did not explore these issues in relation to local or regional issues. The New York field research was conducted in May 2004. The main research questions included the following: (1) To what extent is PK-16 reform perceived as a state policy concern? What are the incentives and disincentives for improved connections? (2) What are the main goals and objectives of current state-level PK-16 reforms? Who is responsible for developing and implementing those changes? and (3) What have been the main successes and failures to date? In presenting the findings, this report first describes the context of PK-16 reform and governance in New York. It then presents a summary of major PK-16 reforms, an analysis of PK-16 challenges, and a concluding overview of the opportunities for PK-16 reform in New York. The New York Interview Protocol is appended. (Contains 35 endnotes.) [For &quot;The Governance Divide: A Report on a Four-State Study on Improving College Readiness and Success. National Center Report #05-3,&quot; see ED508097. For the Oregon case study, see ED508101. For the Florida case study see, ED508098. For the Georgia case study, see ED508099.]
The Governance Divide: The Case Study for Oregon. National Center Report #05-7
Author: Venezia, Andrea
Date: 2006-04-00
Type: Reports - Descriptive
Subjects: Postsecondary Education,Elementary Secondary Education,Governance,Educational Change,Politics of Education,State Legislation,Case Studies,Educational Policy,Change Strategies,Enrollment Trends,Leadership Responsibility,Testing Programs,Student Evaluation,Financial Support,Dropouts,High School Graduates,College Bound Students,Educational Improvement,College Preparation,Educational Finance,Accountability,Access to Education,Data Collection,Budgets,Barriers,Educational History,Governing Boards,Boards of Education,State Standards,College Admission,Dual Enrollment,Teacher Education

This case study is part of a broader research project examining state policies and governance structures that span K-12 and postsecondary education. Oregon has been a leader in K-16 reform through its development of the Proficiency-based Admission Standards System (PASS), which articulated postsecondary expectations and linked them with K-12 reforms. This study, while being cognizant of these fast-paced changes, provides a snapshot of Oregon's K-16 reform efforts as of March 2004, with additional contextual and historical information collected from previous research from Stanford University's Bridge Project, and with follow-up interviews with selected participants in fall 2004 to identify key changes between March and August 2004. In presenting the findings, this report first describes the context of Oregon's education reforms, including descriptions of each relevant agency and public education entity. The report summarizes the major statewide K-16 reforms and outlines some of the key accomplishments as well as challenges to K-16 reform in the state. The report then offers a short summary of changes in the state from March to August 2004 before concluding with thoughts about the present and future of K-16 reform in Oregon. The Oregon Interview Protocol is appended. (Contains 32 endnotes.) [For &quot;The Governance Divide: A Report on a Four-State Study on Improving College Readiness and Success. National Center Report #05-3,&quot; see ED508097. For the New York case study, see ED508100. For the Florida case study, see ED508098. For the Georgia case study, see ED508099.]
Diversifying the STEM Pipeline: The Model Replication Institutions Program
Author: Cullinane, Jenna
Date: 2009-12-00
Type: Reports - Evaluative
Subjects: Science Course Improvement Projects,Science Education,Outreach Programs,Educational Improvement,Improvement Programs,Institutional Characteristics,Minority Groups,Undergraduate Study,Models,Best Practices,Program Descriptions,Program Effectiveness

In 2006, the National Science Foundation (NSF) began funding the Model Replication Institutions (MRI) program, which sought to improve the quality, availability, and diversity of science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) education. Faced with pressing national priorities in the STEM fields and chronic gaps in postsecondary achievement, the MRI project identified Minority Serving Institutions (MSIs) as key intermediaries to improve the quality, availability, and diversity of the STEM educational pipeline. This report begins by outlining MRI project activities, providing institutional information about participating campuses, and highlighting campus activities consistent with the components of the Model Institutions of Excellence (MIE) model. Subsequent sections analyze self-reported information from the MRIs regarding their evaluation of successful initiatives to improve STEM education, best practices for adopting and adapting lessons learned, and anticipated next steps in the implementation process. The report aims to disseminate the steps for replicating the MIE model to postsecondary institutions that are seeking to improve excellence and diversity in the STEM pipeline. Appended are: (1) MRI Partners; and (2) MRI Team Assignment: Introductory STEM Data Collection. (Contains 2 boxes, 2 footnotes and 1 figure.) [This report was written with the assistance of Lacey Leegwater.]
Global Policy Fellows Program: Lessons Learned
Author: Cunningham, Alisa F.
Date: 2009-06-00
Type: Reports - Descriptive
Subjects: Higher Education,Global Approach,Educational Policy,Partnerships in Education,Program Descriptions,Policy Formation,Models,Formative Evaluation,Improvement Programs,Access to Education,Outreach Programs,Foreign Countries,Change Strategies,Educational Research

Throughout the world, the demand for higher education is increasing exponentially, pushed forward by the realities of a global economy and accompanied by pressure to open up opportunities for prospective students from all backgrounds. The importance of a knowledgeable, highly skilled population has become clear and many countries have made great strides in increasing the numbers of students who attend and graduate from college. Although some of these policies have contributed to positive gains, gaps between traditional students and historically disadvantaged students remain in most countries. At the same time, there is often a lack of capacity to analyze these issues and recommend changes to existing policies or new programs altogether. Yet it is increasingly important to involve policymakers in discussions about what works well--or doesn't work at all--across borders. To address these challenges, the Institute for Higher Education Policy (IHEP) created the Global Policy Fellows Program (GPFP) to improve the knowledge and skills of the next generation of policy analysts and leaders. The goal of the program is to improve individual capacity to conduct research and analysis, and create a global network of policy analysts and researchers who are motivated to address challenges faced by underserved populations. This report describes the program, highlights some of its findings, and provides a framework for international collaboration. It hopes to spur future ideas for building policy development capacity worldwide, with a special emphasis on higher education, where strong measures are needed to address continuing gaps in access and success. The Global Policy Fellows Program provides a model for cultivating and nurturing a network of people who are interested in higher educational policy. Three appendices are included: (1) Global Fellows 2007-09; (2) Expert Speakers at Global Policy Fellows Program Meetings; and (3) Global Policy Fellows Program Advisory Committee. (Contains 1 figure and 4 footnotes.)
Impact of College Rankings on Institutional Decision Making: Four Country Case Studies. Issue Brief
Author: Institute for Higher Education Policy
Date: 2009-05-00
Type: Reports - Evaluative
Subjects: Higher Education,Foreign Countries,Decision Making,Case Studies,Interviews,Stakeholders,Classification,Institutional Characteristics,Influences,Focus Groups,Academic Standards,Organizational Culture,Program Attitudes,Strategic Planning

The ranking of higher education institutions is a growing phenomenon around the globe, with ranking systems in place in more than 40 countries and the emergence of international ranking systems that compare institutions across national lines. With this proliferation of rankings come questions about the goals, uses, and outcomes of these systems. This issue brief seeks to understand the role that rankings play in institutional decision making and how institutions in various countries use rankings in ways that might benefit higher education in the United States. The study is based on interviews with campus stakeholders at institutions in Australia, Canada, Germany, and Japan--countries that have their own national ranking systems as well as a presence in the international systems. A review of current research suggests that rankings influence institutional decision making in the following areas: strategic positioning and planning, staffing and organization, quality assurance, resource allocation and fundraising, and admissions and financial aid. To better understand these issues and how rankings affect them, Institute for Higher Education Policy (IHEP) discusses the ways by which institutions in the four countries incorporate rankings into their decision-making frameworks. (Contains 4 figures and 64 footnotes.)
Approaches to Research Priorities for Policy: A Comparative Study. Occasional Paper
Author: Wilkinson, Diana
Date: 2010-00-00
Type: Reports - Evaluative
Subjects: Foreign Countries,Comparative Analysis,Vocational Education,Educational Policy,Training,Educational Needs,Research Needs,Policy Formation,Investment,Case Studies,Government Role,Meetings,Conferences (Gatherings),Educational Research,Strategic Planning,Evidence,Stakeholders,Education Work Relationship

Diana Wilkinson, Chief Social Researcher with the Scottish Government, assisted National Centre for Vocational Education Research (NCVER) to facilitate a forum to discuss the development of national research priorities for the vocational education and training sector. This paper summarises Diana Wilkinson's impression of the forum and uses two contrasting case studies of Scotland and Australia to consider the extent to which it is feasible to align academic research investment with medium-term priority-setting. (Contains 13 footnotes and 1 table.)