ethanporcaro/eric-fulltext-meta huggingface dataset:
Building State Capacity for Leadership in K-12 Computer Science Education: A National Summit. Evaluation and Research Report
Author: Goldsmith, Lynn T.
Date: 2020-00-00
Type: Reports - Research
Subjects: Capacity Building,Leadership,Elementary Secondary Education,Computer Science Education,Conferences (Gatherings),Strategic Planning,State Officials,Stakeholders,School Business Relationship,Equal Education,Government School Relationship,Program Evaluation,Educational Change,Administrator Attitudes,Program Implementation

This report presents results of Education Development Center's (EDC) &quot;Building State Capacity for Leadership in K-12 Computer Science Education Summit.&quot; The Summit addressed the need for more strategic and systemic approaches to computer science (CS) education. The Summit was organized around four &quot;pillars&quot; -- key areas critical for crafting and sustaining statewide strategies relating to K-12 CS education: (1) engaging business and industry; (2) developing statewide leadership coalitions; (3) ensuring that the work is grounded in equality; and (4) engaging government leadership. During the two-day event, 10 teams shared best practices, addressed common challenges, and worked on action plans to build their capacity for continued leadership. Participants were asked to complete a short online evaluation at the end of the Summit. In addition, during the summer and fall of 2017, follow-up interviews were conducted with key leaders of each state's team to learn about their ongoing efforts on behalf of statewide CS education and the ways in which the Summit had supported these effects. The perceived success of the Summit suggests that a national coordinated effort could play an important role in advancing the CS education for states, regardless of whether states have made substantial progress toward developing and implementing strategic policies (as had the 10 states participating in the Summit) or are earlier in the process of giving statewide attention to CS education. [This report was prepared with the Massachusetts Computing Attainment Network. Additional support for this paper was provided in part by the Commonwealth of Massachusetts in the FY18 State Budget Department of Housing and Economic Development, Line 7007-1202.]
What Year Was the Rule Created? 50-State Comparison: State Financial Aid Barriers for Students Impacted by the Justice System
Author: Education Commission of the States
Date: 2020-01-00
Type: Numerical/Quantitative Data
Subjects: Student Financial Aid,Barriers,State Aid,State Policy,Educational Policy,Justice,Criminals,Drug Use,Institutionalized Persons,Proximity

The eligibility rules of state financial aid programs vary widely by state and by program. This is also true of eligibility rules pertaining to students impacted by the justice system. This goal of this resource is to enable stakeholders to compare eligibility requirements pertaining to justice system impact across major aid programs and states. This 50-State Comparison contains the 100 state financial aid grant programs found in the &quot;50-State Comparison: Need- and Merit-Based Financial Aid.&quot; These programs represent the two largest programs in each state or jurisdiction. For historical context, this resource identifies the year the program was created (year in which state legislators passed a law to create the program), the year the eligibility rule was created (year in which state legislators or agency officials created an eligibility rule that affects system-impacted students), and the system-impacted student population (four categories of conditions that affect aid eligibility (e.g., Incarceration, Criminal Convictions, Drug Convictions, None)). [For a related resource, see &quot;What Restrictions Exist for Justice-System Impacted Populations within the State's Two Largest State Aid Programs? 50-State Comparison: State Financial Aid Barriers for Students Impacted by the Justice System&quot; (ED607321).]
Functional Overview Tuition Fees
Author: Golovic, Rajko
Date: 2020-03-03
Type: Reports - Descriptive
Subjects: Higher Education,Tuition,Paying for College,Barriers,Foreign Students,Foreign Countries,Costs,Educational Quality,Access to Education,Educational Equity (Finance),Educational Policy,Equal Education,Global Approach

The role of higher education towards social, economic and cultural development of our societies is certainly unquestionable from various aspects. In that sense, synergy and mutual dependence of higher education and society &amp; vice-versa is a constant of modern times. However, one must acknowledge that all these aspects very often are highly affected by economic policies and financial matters. The influence of individual socio-economic conditions and financial pressure on the accessibility of higher education is evident. In times of limited financial resources, countries are implementing several measures to ensure the financial sustainability of their higher education systems. The most widely represented measure is the implementation of tuition fees, which equal the financial obligation of students to pay for being enrolled in higher education while higher education institutions profit from this additional source of income. In this context it is obvious that tuition fees are a significant financial burden for students, especially bearing in mind the heterogeneous socio-economic background of students. Consequently, this means that tuition fees are highly socially selective and one of the most severe barriers to overcome when accessing and taking part in higher education. One group of students is in a specifically complex situation and frequently subject to unequal treatment. International students (non EU/EEA students) are often charged differently - the studies show that in most European countries, international students have to pay higher tuition fees than domestic students. This overview shows how international students in Europe are charged differently for their tuition fees compared to home students and that the fees they pay are higher than those paid by domestic students. The national information provided outlines a huge difference existing between the financial treatment of domestic and international students.
What Restrictions Exist for Justice-System Impacted Populations within the State&apos;s Two Largest State Aid Programs? 50-State Comparison: State Financial Aid Barriers for Students Impacted by the Justice System
Author: Education Commission of the States
Date: 2020-01-00
Type: Numerical/Quantitative Data
Subjects: Student Financial Aid,Barriers,State Aid,State Policy,Educational Policy,Justice,Drug Use Testing,Institutionalized Persons,Criminals,Federal Aid,Grants,State Legislation

The eligibility rules of state financial aid programs vary widely by state and by program. This is also true of eligibility rules pertaining to students impacted by the justice system. This goal of this resource is to enable stakeholders to compare eligibility requirements pertaining to justice system impact across major aid programs and states.This 50-State Comparison contains the 100 state financial aid grant programs found in the &quot;50-State Comparison: Need- and Merit-Based Financial Aid.&quot; These programs represent the two largest programs in each state or jurisdiction. New data pertaining to these programs' eligibility requirements -- specifically, written rules and agency practices that result in aid ineligibility for students impacted by the justice system -- were collected for this resource. This resource identifies the following per state: (1) system-impacted population (four categories of conditions that affect aid eligibility (e.g., Incarceration, Criminal Convictions, Drug Convictions, None)); (2) statute citation (citation for the eligibility rule in state laws); (3) statute text (text of the statutory eligibility rule that affects system-impacted students); (4) regulation citation (citation for the eligibility rule in state regulations or administrative codes); (5) regulation text (text of the regulatory eligibility rule that affects system-impacted students); (6) agency rule citation (citation for the agency (i.e., state higher education department, financial aid agency) practice that results in system-impacted students being denied state aid); and (7) agency rule text (text of an agency rule or a description of the practice employed by agency officials that results in system-impacted students being denied state aid). [For a related resource, see &quot;What Year Was the Rule Created? 50-State Comparison: State Financial Aid Barriers for Students Impacted by the Justice System&quot; (ED607318).]
&quot;...And They Cared&quot;: How to Create Better, Safer Learning Environments for Girls of Color
Author: Patrick, Kayla
Date: 2020-08-20
Type: Guides - General
Subjects: Females,Minority Group Students,Barriers,Equal Education,African American Students,Racial Bias,Gender Bias,Educational Change,Discipline Policy,Educational Environment,Suspension,Social Development,Emotional Development,Social Justice,Elementary Secondary Education

Embedded within school discipline policies, dress codes, or codes of conduct are gender and racial biases that manifest in exclusionary punishments that have more to do with who girls are rather than what they do. Girls of color face some of the greatest barriers to educational opportunities and social emotional growth inside schools with poor school climates. Black girls especially face scrutiny, often encountering rules, such as hair codes, that target their cultural identity. This guide was created amidst the economic uncertainty of a global pandemic and the beginning of a historic public reckoning on racism in America. School districts are at a turning point in which they must make intentional and specific policy and financial decisions that address the legacy of 400 years of systemic anti-Blackness, including rectifying disparate discipline and criminalization experienced by Black girls in schools across the county. This guide aims to respond to this moment and provide decision-makers with a common language and practices that can be used to reform exclusionary discipline policies and improve school climate to help address the needs of girls of color -- especially Black girls. It highlights steps taken in Oakland and Chicago at the district level and in Massachusetts at the state level. It includes the voices of girls who have experienced these changes firsthand and highlights where there is room for improvement -- particularly the urgent need to shift resources away from law enforcement to restorative justice, counseling, mental health services, and/or other evidence-based approaches. There is also a checklist, so decision-makers can assess what changes they can make to create positive school climates at the school, district, or state level.
Taxing the African-American Student: The Impact and Mitigation of Structural Stigma on Test Performance and School Success. Policy Notes. Volume 27, Number 1, Winter 2020
Author: Seibel, David
Date: 2020-00-00
Type: Reports - Descriptive
Subjects: African American Students,Racial Bias,Barriers,Ethnic Stereotypes,Tests,Scores,Intervention,Educational Environment,Elementary Secondary Education,Postsecondary Education,Educational Policy

In the United States, African-American students often face challenges that arise from structural stigma, which can inhibit their ability to learn and grow in the classroom and in their daily lives. Structural stigma, along with centuries of racist attitudes and policies, can impede student progress and is a challenge for policymakers, business professionals and all of us to overcome. From April 15 to 17, 2019, Educational Testing Service (ETS) convened the Taxing the African-American Student: The Impact and Mitigation of Structural Stigma on Test Performance and School Success symposium, bringing together more than 65 leading researchers, practitioners and policymakers from different professions and perspectives. The goal of the meeting was for participants to share and learn about the challenges African-American students and their educators and community members face and to identify actions in research, policy and practice that can change the conditions for them and other stigmatized groups.
Quantitative and Qualitative Evaluation of Transforming to Flipped-Classroom from Instruction Teaching Using Micro Feedback Loops
Author: Mastmeyer, Andre
Date: 2020-08-27
Type: Reports - Research
Subjects: Program Evaluation,Educational Change,Blended Learning,Active Learning,Feedback (Response),STEM Education,Advanced Courses,Teaching Styles,Outcomes of Education,College Instruction,Learner Engagement,Independent Study,Cooperative Learning,Foreign Countries,Graduate Students,Conventional Instruction

Recently, the institutionalized transformation of frontal instruction classrooms into active learning spaces to foster the concept of (inter-)active learning has gained increasing attention. To investigate the impact of elements of active learning on learning reception of students in an advanced small sized MSc STEM course (&lt;25 students), a traditional instructor teaching style class was transformed to flipped-classroom teaching. Before and after each lecture, anonymized evaluation Likert items from the students were recorded. Thus, both teaching styles for every given lecture were covered equally. In both classrooms, some didactic and methodological elements were kept constant, while others were changed when flipped-classroom took over semester midterm. Qualitative and quantitative results indicated that the flipped-classroom format generated greater learning effects as well as classroom enjoyment, fostered students' self-regulated learning, enhanced group interaction, stimulated group activity and guaranteed a more synergistic learning behavior.
&apos;Segregation Forever&apos;?: The Continued Underrepresentation of Black and Latino Undergraduates at the Nation&apos;s 101 Most Selective Public Colleges and Universities
Author: Nichols, Andrew Howard
Date: 2020-00-00
Type: Reports - Evaluative
Subjects: African American Students,Hispanic American Students,Selective Admission,Access to Education,Undergraduate Students,Disproportionate Representation,Racial Bias,Minority Group Students,Demography,Enrollment Trends,Racial Composition,Educational Change,Change Strategies

This report examines the state of access for Black and Latino students at 101 of the nation's most selective public colleges and universities. More specifically, it examines how access for Black and Latino students at these institutions has changed since 2000 and whether these institutions are serving an undergraduate student body that represents the racial and ethnic diversity of their particular state's population. Each of these 101 institutions are graded on their commitment to access for both Black and Latino students and a list of some of the least accessible selective public institutions in the country is provided. The findings make it clear that despite some marginal gains in access for Latino students since the turn of the century, both Black and Latino students continue to be woefully underrepresented at these institutions. And in many instances, access has even regressed. The conclusion of the report provides campus leaders and policymakers with 10 recommendations that can help increase the representation of Black and Latino students at the 101 colleges highlighted herein. While taking action is long overdue, the need to act now is even more necessary, given the expected impact the COVID-19 pandemic will have on the enrollment patterns of students of color.
Focused on the Future: Innovation and Investment at HBCUs. A Co-Convening of ETS and the National Urban League. Policy Notes. Volume 26, Number 1, Spring 2019
Author: Kenyon, Susan
Date: 2019-00-00
Type: Reports - Descriptive
Subjects: Black Colleges,Conferences (Gatherings),Educational Finance,Financial Support,Federal Aid,Access to Education,Graduation,Educational Demand,Distance Education,Electronic Learning,Preservice Teacher Education,African American Education,Partnerships in Education,School Community Relationship

This issue of ETS Policy Notes provides highlights from the second in a planned series of conferences jointly convened by the National Urban League (NUL) and Educational Testing Service (ETS) to foster collaboration among, and further the mission of, Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCUs). On October 24-25, 2018, 65 presidents and representatives of HBCUs, leading associations, research organizations and civil rights organizations came together to brainstorm and strategize about strengthening the role of HBCUs in U.S. higher education and the new economy. Michael Nettles, Senior Vice President at ETS, described this meeting as an opportunity to &quot;reflect on the historic strength of HBCUs while also challenging ourselves to prosper in the future.&quot; Topics included funding sources and strategies; leveraging federal funds for student access and completion; leveraging federal financing to institutions; meeting demand through distance education and alternate delivery; preparing teachers for 21st-century classrooms; and collaboration partnerships.
How Are Funds Distributed to Schools and Districts? 50-State Comparison: Secondary Career and Technical Education
Author: Education Commission of the States
Date: 2020-04-00
Type: Numerical/Quantitative Data
Subjects: Secondary Education,Vocational Education,State Policy,Educational Finance,Financial Support,Funding Formulas,Resource Allocation

This resource provides a national comparison of state policies and activities related to secondary career and technical education (CTE). States use a range of federal, state and local funding sources to support secondary CTE. &quot;How Are Funds Distributed to Schools and Districts? 50-State Comparison: Secondary Career and Technical Education&quot; focuses on how states fund CTE through categorical and foundational funding mechanisms in their K-12 education system. Categorical funding to districts for CTE generally falls into three categories: (1) student-based; (2) unit-based; or (3) cost-based formulas. This resource does not include CTE information at the postsecondary level. [View the full &quot;50-State Comparison: Secondary Career and Technical Education&quot; here: https://www.ecs.org/50-state-comparison-secondary-career-and-technical-education/.]
Introduction to the Special Section: The Research Domain Criteria&apos;s Units of Analysis and Cross-Unit Correspondence in Youth Mental Health Research
Author: De Los Reyes, Andres
Date: 2020-05-00
Type: Reports - Descriptive
Subjects: Mental Health,Neurological Impairments,Biological Influences,Psychological Patterns,Social Influences,Research Needs,Youth,Research Methodology,Evaluation Criteria

In 2010, the National Institute of Mental Health launched the Research Domain Criteria (RDoC). The RDoC seeks to enhance research on the &quot;active ingredients&quot; of mental health concerns, and conceptualizes these concerns as disorders of neural circuitry. A key focus of the RDoC involves understanding mental health across biopsychosocial domains that traverse traditional diagnostic categories, such as impairments in affect, cognition, regulatory systems, and social processing. The RDoC advanced a framework for understanding these impairments as they manifest across multiple &quot;units of analysis&quot;: measured variables for which activity reflects functioning across biopsychosocial systems (e.g., subjective reports, behavioral performance, neural activity, cellular assays). However, scholars whose work focuses on children and adolescents encounter challenges with adopting the RDoC's units of analysis framework, which requires a developmental adaptation. In particular, 50 years of research points to a key reality: the RDoC's units of analysis will yield low correspondence, and this low correspondence will translate to inconsistent research findings. Yet, no guidelines exist for interpreting low correspondence among these units or integrating them for research purposes. Prior work on clinical assessments of children and adolescents points to theoretical and methodological models that facilitate interpreting and integrating multi-source assessments. In this introductory article to an RDoC-informed Special Section, we discuss how researchers might apply these models to interpreting and integrating the RDoC's units of analysis using a developmental perspective. This Special Section reveals new lines of RDoC-informed research, particularly the development of paradigms for &quot;strategically&quot; integrating activity from multiple units of analysis. [This paper was published in &quot;Journal of Clinical Child and Adolescent Psychology&quot; v49 p279-296 May 2020.]
50-State Comparison: Secondary Career and Technical Education
Author: Education Commission of the States
Date: 2020-04-00
Type: Numerical/Quantitative Data
Subjects: Secondary Education,Vocational Education,State Policy,Educational Policy,Educational Finance,Vocational Education Teachers,Teacher Certification,Credentials,Vocational Directors,Program Validation,Careers,Graduation

This resource provides a national comparison of state policies and activities related to secondary career and technical education (CTE). It includes data for all 50 states in seven categories: (1) state CTE Directors; (2) funding secondary CTE; (3) CTE program establishment or approval; (4) career clusters; (5) CTE diploma and diploma designations; (6) credentials; and (7) CTE teacher certification and licensure requirements. CTE information at the postsecondary level is not included. [View the full &quot;50-State Comparison: Secondary Career and Technical Education&quot; here: https://www.ecs.org/50-state-comparison-secondary-career-and-technical-education/.]
What Are the Certication and Licensure Requirements for CTE Teachers? 50-State Comparison: Secondary Career and Technical Education
Author: Education Commission of the States
Date: 2020-04-00
Type: Numerical/Quantitative Data
Subjects: Secondary Education,Vocational Education,Teacher Certification,Secondary School Teachers,Vocational Education Teachers,State Policy,Teacher Qualifications

This resource provides a national comparison of state policies and activities related to secondary career and technical education (CTE). &quot;What Are the Certication and Licensure Requirements for CTE Teachers? 50-State Comparison: Secondary Career and Technical Education&quot; provides information on what range of qualifications states require for teachers seeking CTE certification or licensure. In some states, requirements differ by specific CTE subject area or by existing educational or work experience. These qualifications include: (1) education; (2) work experience; (3) certification; (4) assesments; and (5) teacher or CTE training. This resource does not include CTE information at the postsecondary level. [View the full &quot;50-State Comparison: Secondary Career and Technical Education&quot; here: https://www.ecs.org/50-state-comparison-secondary-career-and-technical-education/.]