ethanporcaro/eric-fulltext-meta huggingface dataset:
Proceedings Report from the Sustainability Education Summit, September 20-21, 2010
Author: Department of Education (ED), Office of the Under Secretary
Date: 2011-09-00
Type: Reports - Descriptive
Subjects: Higher Education,Environmental Education,Sustainability,Research Reports,Role of Education,Change Strategies,Educational Objectives,Strategic Planning,Stakeholders,Economic Change,Program Descriptions,Barriers,Performance Factors,Conference Papers,Conferences (Gatherings),Energy Education,Career Development,Labor Force Development,Regional Planning,Partnerships in Education,Systems Analysis,Educational Policy,Economic Development,Social Development,Position Papers,Politics of Education

The first-ever U. S. Department of Education summit on sustainability, &quot;Sustainability Education Summit: Citizenship and Pathways for a Green Economy,&quot; was held on Sept. 20-21, 2010, in Washington, D.C. The Sustainability Education Summit (the Summit) brought together leaders from higher education, business and industry, labor, government, and non-governmental organizations (NGOs) to build shared visions and strategies for education's role in developing a sustainable and green economy. The Summit was mandated by the 110th Congress in the &quot;Higher Education Opportunity Act&quot; (Public Law 110-315, enacted Aug. 14, 2008). The overall goal of the Summit was to articulate a set of action steps for education, business and industry, government, and the environmental community to promote the transition to a sustainable, green economy. The dual themes of citizenship and pathways acknowledged that sustainability is valued in education both as a motivator for responsible behavior and as a factor in preparing tomorrow's workforce to meet the economic imperatives for sustainable industries. To capture the key points from thought leaders at the plenary and panel sessions and the actionable recommendations resulting from the breakout group sessions, the U.S. Department of Education commissioned this proceedings report. The information from this report was taken from notes, speeches, and transcripts of the plenary and panel sessions. The challenges and recommendations were taken from flipchart notes used in the breakout sessions. This report provides a brief synopsis of the Summit and is broken into three major sections, which include: (1) Brief descriptions of all Summit plenary and panel sessions, including highlights from key speakers; (2) Documentation of the challenges and barriers to advancing sustainability and sustainability education, as identified by groups in the breakout sessions; and (3) Specific actionable recommendations identified by the breakout groups. (Contains 7 endnotes.)
Strategic Plan to Ensure Racial and Ethnic Diversity in Connecticut Public Higher Education, 2006. Annual Report
Author: Connecticut Department of Higher Education
Date: 2006-03-00
Type: Numerical/Quantitative Data
Subjects: Undergraduate Students,Strategic Planning,Higher Education,Public Colleges,American Indians,Academic Achievement,Asian Americans,Minority Groups,Hispanic American Students,Minority Group Teachers,Enrollment,Statistical Data,Disproportionate Representation,Colleges,African American Students,Student Diversity,Professional Personnel,College Faculty,Affirmative Action,Graduation Rate,Student Recruitment,Academic Persistence

Increasing the participation of minority groups at public colleges and universities is a longstanding goal of the Board of Governors for Higher Education, as first outlined in its 1983 &quot;Strategic Plan to Ensure Racial and Ethnic Diversity in Connecticut Public Higher Education.&quot; The minority groups defined by the plan are: Hispanic/Latino, African American, Asian American and Native American--listed in order of their current proportional presence in the state's population. Subsequently, the Board's &quot;Strategic Plan&quot; was enacted by the state legislature, which since 1986 has provided the Board with an annual allocation to promote achievement of the plan's diversity goals. Although the plan mandates no numeric goals, it holds campuses to the ideal that the racial and ethnic make-up of their students, graduates and professional staff should reflect the diversity of the state's residents. The overall trends are: (1) In fall 2005, minorities numbered 23,537 or 24.9 percent of all undergraduate students enrolled in the state's public institutions of higher education, exceeding their proportional presence in the state's population for the eighth consecutive year; (2) During the 2004-05 academic year, minority students received 2,202 or 17.9 percent of all undergraduate degrees (associate and bachelor's degrees) conferred by the state's public colleges and universities; and (3) Among full-time professionals employed by the state's public institutions of higher education, 1,564 or 17.8 percent were minority group members at the end of 2005. This report summarizes the activities and progress achieved in 2005 to ensure that Connecticut's public colleges and universities are representative of the state's racial and ethnic diversity. Appended are: (1) Undergraduate Enrollment; (2) Undergraduate Degree Recipients; and (3) Projections. (Contains 22 tables and 6 graphs.)
Higher Education Counts: Achieving Results. 2006 Executive Summary
Author: Connecticut Department of Higher Education
Date: 2006-00-00
Type: Numerical/Quantitative Data
Subjects: Higher Education,Public Colleges,Graduation Rate,Elementary Secondary Education,In State Students,Teacher Certification,Early Intervention,College Preparation,Access to Education,Student Costs,Minority Group Students,Student Financial Aid,Economic Development,College Graduates,Research and Development,Educational Attainment,School Holding Power,Enrollment,Licensing Examinations (Professions),Expenditures,Labor Force Development,Teacher Shortage

&quot;Higher Education Counts&quot; is the annual accountability report on Connecticut's system of higher education. Since 2000, the report has been the principle vehicle for reporting higher education's progress toward achieving six, statutorily-defined state goals: (1) To enhance student learning and promote academic excellence; (2) To join with elementary and secondary schools to improve teaching and learning at all levels; (3) To ensure access to and affordability of higher education; (4) To promote the economic development of the state to help business and industry sustain strong economic growth; (5) To respond to the needs and problems of society; and (6) To ensure the efficient use of resources. This report is intended to provide state policy makers with specific information on a number of important indicators of progress measured against specific goals and/or peer institutional benchmarks, and to serve as a backdrop for key state policy discussions on the importance of educational attainment for the future welfare and economic development of the state. This year's results are somewhat mixed, with goals reached or strong progress made on several measures such as licensure pass rates, reducing the brain drain, retention and real price per student. Other areas, however, have shown little improvement or have actually declined over the last five years. Among those warranting particular concern are minority participation, unmet financial aid need, degree productivity in key workforce cluster fields, educational attainment, academic research intensity and educational cost per student. [For related reports, see &quot;Higher Education Counts: Achieving Results. 2006 Report&quot; (ED528617); and &quot;Higher Education Counts: Achieving Results&quot; (ED528616).]
Higher Education Counts: Achieving Results
Author: Connecticut Department of Higher Education
Date: 2006-02-00
Type: Numerical/Quantitative Data
Subjects: Higher Education,Public Colleges,Graduation Rate,Academic Degrees,Licensing Examinations (Professions),Elementary Secondary Education,Brain Drain,In State Students,Minority Group Students,Enrollment,Access to Education,Student Costs,Student Financial Aid,Financial Needs,Online Courses,Economic Development,Labor Force Development,Research and Development,Educational Attainment,Expenditures,School Holding Power

This brochure highlights some of the performance indicators used by Connecticut's public higher education institution to demonstrate accountability. This paper reports on the results of these goals: (1) Student Learning; (2) Learning in K-12; (3) Access and Affordability; (4) Economic Development; (5) Societal Needs; and (6) Resource Efficiency. [For related reports, see &quot;Higher Education Counts: Achieving Results. 2006 Report&quot; (ED528617); and &quot;Higher Education Counts: Achieving Results. 2006 Executive Summary&quot; (ED528615).]
Higher Education Counts: Achieving Results. 2006 Report
Author: Connecticut Department of Higher Education
Date: 2006-00-00
Type: Numerical/Quantitative Data
Subjects: Higher Education,Public Colleges,Graduation Rate,Elementary Secondary Education,In State Students,Teacher Certification,Early Intervention,College Preparation,Access to Education,Student Costs,Minority Group Students,Student Financial Aid,Economic Development,College Graduates,Research and Development,Educational Attainment,School Holding Power,Enrollment,Licensing Examinations (Professions),Expenditures,Labor Force Development,Teacher Shortage,Financial Needs,Education Work Relationship,Bachelors Degrees,College Faculty,Teacher Salaries,Employment,College School Cooperation,Outreach Programs,College Freshmen,Remedial Mathematics,State Aid,Student Educational Objectives,Distance Education,Student Attitudes,Satisfaction,College Students,Accreditation (Institutions),School Community Relationship

&quot;Higher Education Counts&quot; is the annual accountability report on Connecticut's state system of higher education, as required under Connecticut General Statutes Section 10a-6a. The report contains accountability measures developed through the Performance Measures Task Force and approved by the Board of Governors for Higher Education. The measures reported are intended to provide external parties with answers to some basic questions about institutional performance and return on investments in Connecticut's higher education system. The report contains measures designed to assess progress on six statutorily-defined state goals: (1) To enhance student learning and promote academic excellence; (2) To join with elementary and secondary schools to improve teaching and learning at all levels; (3) To ensure access to and affordability of higher education; (4) To promote the economic development of the state to help business and industry sustain strong economic growth; (5) To respond to the needs and problems of society; and (6) To ensure the efficient use of resources. There are no major changes in reporting format this year. The report is organized around a structure which includes three levels of indicators: (1) State-Level Indicators; (2) Common Core of Institutional Measures; and (3) Constituent Unit Specific Indicators. An index is included. [For related reports, see &quot;Higher Education Counts: Achieving Results&quot; (ED528616); and &quot;Higher Education Counts: Achieving Results. 2006 Executive Summary&quot; (ED528615).]
A National Education Standards Exit Strategy for States. WebMemo. No. 3437
Author: Burke, Lindsey M.
Date: 2011-12-21
Type: Reports - Descriptive
Subjects: Federal Legislation,State Standards,National Standards,Educational Change,Academic Standards,Change Strategies,Politics of Education,Educational Policy,Policy Formation,Program Attitudes,Federal State Relationship,Government Role,Resistance to Change

The push for centralized control over what every child should learn has never had more momentum. The Obama Administration has pressured states to adopt the Common Core State Standards Initiative, conditioning more than $4 billion in Race to the Top grants on its adoption. The Administration's blueprint for the rewrite of No Child Left Behind also called for Title I dollars to be contingent on states' adoption of the nationalized standards. Some state leaders have jumped on the bandwagon to nationalize the standards and content taught in local schools. With little public notice, any states have agreed to adopt the Common Core national standards. This movement is a challenge to educational freedom in America and is costly in terms of liberty, not to mention dollars. State leaders who believe in limited government and liberty should resist this imposition of centralized standards. Adopting national standards and tests through the Common Core State Standards Initiative surrenders control of standard-setting to distant national organizations and Washington bureaucrats. Education reform should give control over education to those closest to students. Conservatives have the opportunity to reverse course and reject this latest centralizing overreach. It is time for states to reject the nationalization of standards, tests, and ultimately, curricula, and instead work to strengthen and improve excellence in their local schools through state and local policy. (Contains 1 footnote.)
InTASC Model Core Teaching Standards: A Resource for State Dialogue
Author: Council of Chief State School Officers
Date: 2011-04-00
Type: Reports - Descriptive
Subjects: Teacher Education Programs,State Standards,National Standards,Instructional Leadership,Models,Administrative Principles,Educational Principles,Pedagogical Content Knowledge,Curriculum Implementation,Educational Practices,Educational Strategies,Teaching Methods,Lesson Plans,Professional Development,Teacher Collaboration,Evaluation,Educational Environment,Student Development,Academic Standards,Alignment (Education),Educational Resources

The purpose of this document is to serve as a resource for states, districts, professional organizations, teacher education programs, teachers, and others as they develop policies and programs to prepare, license, support, evaluate, and reward today's teachers. A systemic approach and supportive infrastructure are essential to successful implementation of these standards. In addition to this standards document, the Council of Chief State School Officers (CCSSO) has also released a complementary policy discussion document that outlines key considerations, recommendations, and cautions for using the standards to inform policy. This paper builds off of CCSSO's Education Workforce white paper (www.ccsso.org/intasc), which outlines the chiefs' strategic goals in building an educator development and support system of which these standards are the first step. In updating the InTASC model standards, efforts were made to ensure they align with other national and state standards documents that were recently revised or released. Specifically, this document has been reviewed to ensure compatibility with the recently-released Common Core State Standards for students in mathematics and English language arts, the National Board for Professional Teaching Standards (NBPTS) accomplished teaching core principles, the National Council for Accreditation of Teacher Education (NCATE) accreditation standards, the National Staff Development Council (NSDC) (now called Learning Forward) professional development standards, and the Interstate School Leader Licensure Consortium (ISLLC) 2008 educational leadership policy standards and CCSSO's companion document of performance expectations and indicators for education leaders. A glossary is included.
Cut Score Analysis and Validity for Writing Prompts
Author: Socha, Alan
Date: 2005-11-00
Type: Reports - Research
Subjects: Writing Across the Curriculum,Test Validity,Program Effectiveness,Scoring,Cutting Scores,Pretests Posttests,Academic Discourse,Student Placement,Program Evaluation,Evaluation Research,Outcomes of Education,College Entrance Examinations,Test Use,College Instruction,Curriculum Implementation,College Freshmen,Writing Evaluation,Writing Instruction

A cut score validity analysis for a pretest writing prompt and the SAT Verbal and Math assessments was performed for academic writing course placement. This study was carried out as part of a broader program of assessment aimed at understanding the impact of the writing course and eventually set the baseline for assessing the impact of 'writing across the curriculum' initiatives on student learning. The discussion and report will review pertinent findings for the cut score validity analyses and discuss issues related to the scope of methods and presentation of findings. In particular, there are many guides in the literature on undertaking a cut-score analysis and the current study included a myriad of methods to inform its research. Appended is a scoring guide.
Revisiting the Age-Old Question: Does Money Matter in Education?
Author: Baker, Bruce D.
Date: 2012-00-00
Type: Reports - Evaluative
Subjects: State Schools,Educational Finance,Educational Quality,Educational Policy,Policy Analysis,Educational Resources,Finance Reform,Budgeting,Budgets,Economic Impact,Literature Reviews,Meta Analysis,Class Size,Teacher Effectiveness,Teacher Salaries,Teacher Student Ratio,Evidence,Rhetorical Criticism,Politics of Education,Position Papers,Educational Assessment,Educational Indicators

This policy brief revisits the long and storied literature on whether money matters in providing a quality education. Increasingly, political rhetoric adheres to the unfounded certainty that money doesn't make a difference in education, and that reduced funding is unlikely to harm educational quality. Such proclamations have even been used to justify large cuts to education budgets over the past few years. These positions, however, have little basis in the empirical research on the relationship between funding and school quality. In this brief, the author discusses selected major studies on three specific topics: (a) whether money in the aggregate matters; (b) whether specific schooling resources that cost money matter; and (c) whether substantive and sustained state school finance reforms matter. (Contains 75 endnotes.)
The Evidence on Charter Schools and Test Scores. Policy Brief
Author: Di Carlo, Matthew
Date: 2011-12-00
Type: Reports - Evaluative
Subjects: Evidence,Charter Schools,Testing,Educational Policy,Policy Analysis,Achievement Gains,Literature Reviews,Educational Quality,Best Practices,Educational Practices,School Expansion,School Effectiveness,Academic Achievement,Academic Standards,Achievement Rating,Comparative Analysis

The public debate about the success and expansion of charter schools often seems to gravitate toward a tiny handful of empirical studies, when there is, in fact, a relatively well-developed literature focused on whether these schools generate larger testing gains among their students relative to their counterparts in comparable regular public schools. This brief reviews this body of evidence, with a focus on high-quality state- and district-level analyses that address, directly or indirectly, three questions: (1) Do charter schools produce larger testing gains overall?; (2) What policies and practices seem to be associated with better performance? and (3) Can charter schools expand successfully within the same location? (Contains 8 footnotes and 3 notes.)
Why Rural Matters 2011-12: The Condition of Rural Education in the 50 States. A Report of the Rural School and Community Trust Policy Program
Author: Strange, Marty
Date: 2012-01-00
Type: Numerical/Quantitative Data
Subjects: Rural Schools,Rural Education,Educational Policy,Annual Reports,Educational Assessment,Barriers,Performance Factors,Community Needs,Educational Needs,Context Effect,Educational Change,Program Effectiveness,State Surveys,Ethnic Diversity,Student Characteristics,Outcomes of Education,Longitudinal Studies,Family Characteristics,Educational Finance,Expenditures,Classification,Achievement Rating,Research Methodology,Statistical Data,Statistical Distributions,School Statistics,Special Education,Poverty

&quot;Why Rural Matters 2011-12&quot; is the sixth in a series of biennial reports analyzing the contexts and conditions of rural education in each of the 50 states and calling attention to the need for policymakers to address rural education issues in their respective states. While it is the sixth in a series, this report is not simply an updating of data from earlier editions. On the contrary, from one report to the next, the authors have deliberately altered the statistical indicators and gauges to call attention to the variability and complexity of rural education. Their intent in these reports is not--as it is in many state-by-state analyses--to compare states in terms of their differing rates of progress toward an arbitrary goal. Rather, their intent is (1) to provide information and analyses that highlight the priority policy needs of rural public schools and the communities they serve, and (2) to describe the complexity of rural contexts in ways that can help policymakers better understand the challenges faced by their constituencies and formulate policies that are responsive to those challenges. (Contains 7 tables and 6 footnotes.)
ARL Supplementary Statistics, 2007-2008
Author: Bland, Les, Comp.
Date: 2009-00-00
Type: Numerical/Quantitative Data
Subjects: Research Libraries,Statistics,Library Services,Costs,Libraries,Books,Electronic Publishing,Media Adaptation,Web Sites,Library Materials,Archives

This report presents statistics on how Association of Research Libraries (ARL) member libraries spend money on electronic resources. This report indicates that 109 ARL libraries purchased 32,329,187 electronic books. In 2007-2008, there was a median of 28,319 acquisitions of electronic books by ARL libraries (this includes one institution that purchased 969,057 electronic books). Ninety-eight ARL libraries reported spending a total of $30,563,758 for electronic books in 2007-2008. A total of 1,072,452 virtual reference transactions were recorded by 100 ARL libraries. Seventy-five ARL libraries reported 184,481,145 log-ins to institutional networked e-resources. 180,009,988 virtual visits to the library catalog were noted by 69 ARL libraries. 131,792 total digital collections were reported, containing 50,393,720 items, which were accessed 876,787,949 times. In 2007-2008, ARL institutions reported $29,621,505 in the direct costs of digital collections personnel and $6,949,595 in the costs of digital collections equipment. The following are included in this report: (1) ARL Library Data Tables, 2007-2008; (2) Rank Order Tables, 2007-2008; (3) ARL Supplementary Statistics Worksheet, 2007-2008; (4) Footnotes to the ARL Supplementary Statistics, 2007-2008; and (5) ARL Member Libraries as of January 1, 2009. (Contains 4 tables.) [For the ARL Supplementary Statistics, 2006-2007, see ED528636.]