ethanporcaro/eric-fulltext-meta huggingface dataset:
English Learners in States&apos; Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA) Plans: Scan of Consolidated State Plans Submitted May 2017. CSAI Report
Author: Center on Standards and Assessments Implementation (CSAI)
Date: 2017-12-00
Type: Reports - Descriptive
Subjects: English Language Learners,Elementary Secondary Education,Educational Legislation,Federal Legislation,Academic Standards,State Standards,Educational Assessment,Public Schools,Native Language,Language Tests,Language Proficiency,English (Second Language),Professional Development,Student Evaluation

This report provides a summary of the 17 Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA) plans submitted by May 31, 2017 to the U.S. Department of Education. The purpose of this report is to provide an at-a-glance look at how states articulated decisions related to standards, assessment, accountability, and instruction of English learners in their submitted consolidated state plans.
LEA Status: Why It Matters for Schools Returning to Local Control. Issue Brief No. 7
Author: Hand, Dave
Date: 2016-06-00
Type: Reports - Descriptive
Subjects: School Districts,School Turnaround,Board of Education Role,Elementary Secondary Education,Charter Schools,Governance,Educational Finance,State Aid,Federal Aid,Local Government,Government Role,Special Education,Educational Legislation,Disabilities,Federal Legislation,Equal Education

The Recovery School District (RSD) was created by Louisiana legislators in 2003 for the purpose of transforming schools with a history of failure by placing them under state control and oversight. The RSD's scope was expanded in 2005 to allow it to take over the lowest performing schools in Louisiana. This had its most profound impact on New Orleans, which, at the time, was one of the lowest performing school districts in the state. The RSD assumed responsibility for the majority of city schools, leaving only the highest-performing under the local control of the Orleans Parish School Board (OPSB). The RSD subsequently turned over operations of all schools under its purview to independent charter school operators. According to policy set forth and approved by the Louisiana Board of Elementary and Secondary Education (BESE), charter schools can return to Orleans Parish School Board (OSPB) governance a er a minimum of five years with the RSD providing specific performance measures are met.1 In 2015, the first eligible school decided to return from the RSD to OPSB. In the 2015-16 school year, all 52 RSD schools in New Orleans operated as Type 5 charter schools, of which 33 were currently eligible to return. All Type 5 schools operate as their own Local Education Agency (LEA). While it holds special meaning under federal and state policy, LEA is o en used as a synonym for a school district. LEAs have the authority to apply for grants and other funds, while a traditional school district allocates these funds to schools. LEAs are also responsible for ensuring compliance with special education requirements. It is important to note that Type 5 charter schools operate as their own LEAs, regardless of their status as a single-site operator or one of many schools that operate as part of a Charter Management Organization (CMO). As schools begin to return to the OPSB, a crucial decision for school leaders and charter boards is whether each school retain its own LEA, or instead join the LEA of OPSB. This brief discusses why this decision is so important, and what financial and operational implications ought to be considered.
English Language Proficiency Assessment: Assessment Administration for Newly Arrived Students under ESSA. CSAI Update
Author: Center on Standards and Assessments Implementation (CSAI)
Date: 2017-12-00
Type: Reports - Descriptive
Subjects: English (Second Language),English Language Learners,Language Proficiency,Immigrants,Federal Legislation,Educational Legislation,State Standards,Student Evaluation,Evaluation Methods,Screening Tests

School and district officials responsible for assessing the English Language Proficiency (ELP) of newcomer students (those who are new to formal schooling in the United States) face a dilemma with regards to timing and multiple assessments when those newcomers arrive later in the school year. To determine what states are providing in their Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA) State Plans regarding newly arrived students that come later in the year (beyond the first 30 days of instruction), but need to be assessed for English Language Proficiency, the Center on Standards and Assessment Implementation (CSAI) conducted a scan of fifteen approved ESSA state plans. This update documents how the fifteen states with approved ESSA plans handle the assessment of newly arrived students who enroll late in the school year. It includes each state's definition of ELP, the timing of the state's ELP assessments, as well as statutory language from the U.S. Department of Education regarding these assessments.
Drivers of the Rising Price of a College Education
Author: Archibald, Robert B.
Date: 2018-08-00
Type: Reports - Evaluative
Subjects: Tuition,Paying for College,Economic Factors,Salaries,Public Colleges,Private Colleges,Educational Policy,Student Financial Aid,Educational Finance,Costs,Grants

This brief explores forces that have affected college tuition over the postwar period. College costs, general subsidies, and changes in the national distribution of income have all affected the trajectory of college tuition over time. The idea that more generous federal grants and loans cause upward pressure on list-price tuition has only been demonstrated conclusively at for-profit colleges. Public universities tend to pass most or all of any increase in federal aid back to students as a lower net price. At public and private colleges alike, list price tuition has risen more rapidly than the net price the average student pays. Rising list price reflects increasing affluence among high-income families relative to median-income and low-income families. This reflects the increasing use of tuition discounts, not soaring costs. Among the policy options, federal/state partnership programs offer one way to diminish or reverse state disinvestment in higher education, thereby tempering tuition increases over time. They are designed to give states stronger incentives to increase direct appropriations to public universities. One approach is to give states predictable block grants based on their level of spending per full-time equivalent student. This would reward states that have a demonstrated commitment to higher education while offering a monetary incentive to those that currently spend less.
47th Annual Survey Report on State-Sponsored Student Financial Aid: 2015-2016 Academic Year
Author: National Association of State Student Grant and Aid Programs (NASSGAP)
Date: 2016-00-00
Type: Numerical/Quantitative Data
Subjects: Student Financial Aid,Grants,College Students,State Aid,Student Needs,Undergraduate Study,Student Loan Programs,Work Study Programs,Tuition,Merit Scholarships,Geographic Location,Graduate Study

Each year, the National Association of State Student Grant and Aid Programs completes a survey regarding state-funded expenditures for postsecondary student financial aid. This report, the 47th annual survey, represents data from academic year 2015-16, offering data regarding state-funded expenditures for student financial aid and illustrating the extent of efforts made by the states to assist postsecondary students. Highlights include: (1) In the 2015-16 academic year, the states awarded about $12.5 billion in total state funded student financial aid, an increase of less than 1 percent in nominal terms and almost level in constant dollar terms from the $12.4 billion in aid awarded in 2014-15; (2) The majority of state aid (86 percent) remains in the form of grants. In 2015-16, more than 4.1 million grant awards were made representing about $10.7 billion in need and nonneed-based grant aid. This represents an increase of about 2.2 percent from the $10.5 billion in grants awarded in 2014-15. Of the grant money awarded in 2015-16, 76 percent was need-based and 24 percent was nonneed-based, about the same as last year; (3) Funding for undergraduate need-based grant aid increased nationwide from about $7.8 billion in 2014-15 to about $8 billion in 2015-16, an increase of about 1.9 percent in nominal terms; (4) Eight states (California, New York, Texas, Pennsylvania, New Jersey, Washington, Illinois, and North Carolina) collectively awarded about $5.5 billion in undergraduate need-based grant aid, accounting for about 70 percent of all aid of this type; and (5) States provided about $1.7 billion in nongrant student aid, including loans, loan assumptions, conditional grants, work-study, and tuition waivers, a drop from last year. Loans and tuition waivers accounted for 72 percent of nongrant funds awarded. Most states reported state-funded undergraduate programs with a need component, however, two states (Georgia and New Hampshire) reported no need based aid programs. Twenty-six states identified undergraduate programs which made awards based only on merit. Exclusively need-based aid constituted 46.1 percent of all aid to undergraduates, exclusively merit-based aid accounted for 17.6 percent, with the rest, 36.3 percent, accounted for by other programs and by programs with both need and merit components. The amount of undergraduate aid awarded in 2015-16 through programs with a merit component increased to about $4.5 billion. This compares to $5.3 billion awarded to undergraduates through programs based only on need.
Broken Promises: The Underfunding of IDEA. IDEA Series
Author: National Council on Disability
Date: 2018-02-07
Type: Reports - Research
Subjects: Disabilities,Educational Legislation,Equal Education,Federal Legislation,Educational Finance,Financial Support,Grants,Maintenance,Costs,Special Education,Federal Aid,Resource Allocation,Preschool Education,Infants,Family Programs

This report is part of a five-report series on the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) that examines the past-to-current funding levels for all parts of IDEA, analyzes the impact that the lack of full-funding has had on states in meeting their obligations to provide a free and appropriate public education to students with disabilities, and provides recommendations regarding future funding. To better understand how the persistent underfunding of IDEA impacts students with disabilities, the National Council on Disability (NCD) undertook research for this report. Using a mixed methods study, key questions were used to examine the history of the IDEA funding, identifiable impacts in districts and schools resulting from a lack of full funding, and the effect a lack of funding has had on services to students. NCD found that the lack of federal support places considerable pressure on state and local budgets, resulting in a range of actions including one state placing an illegal cap on IDEA identification, districts and schools limiting hiring of personnel and providers, districts and schools restricting service hours, and districts and schools reducing or eliminating other general programs. There is unanimous support to increase annual federal IDEA funds and agreement that increases would allow districts to improve outcomes and use freed-up local funds to support all students. Finally, no large-scale national study has been conducted since the early 2000s, which limits researchers and policymakers' ability to understand the true costs of special education, and maintenance of effort (MOE) requirements can serve as a disincentive to districts piloting innovative or expanded services. To address these findings, NCD recommends the following to Congress, the Department of Education, and state policymakers: (1) Increase funding to the maximum authorized amount; (2) Provide flexibility in IDEA's MOE requirements that also protect student civil rights; and (3) Establish a funding threshold beyond which increases will be tied to improved results for students with disabilities.
English Learners and Students from Low-Income Families. IDEA Series
Author: National Council on Disability
Date: 2018-02-07
Type: Reports - Research
Subjects: Educational Legislation,Disabilities,Equal Education,Federal Legislation,English Language Learners,Student Needs,Low Income Groups,Public Education,Barriers,Student Placement,Disability Identification,Federal Government,Government Role,Parent Education,Disproportionate Representation,Family Involvement,Elementary Secondary Education,Grants

This report is part of a five-report series on the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) that identifies the challenges facing English learners with disabilities and their families, as well as the unique needs facing students with disabilities from low-income families, and it examines how they fare in the public education system. The National Council on Disability undertook a study to examine barriers these students face and how schools, districts, and states can better meet their needs. Six chapters focus on: (1) Rates of Identification and Placement; (2) Current Supports from the Department of Education; (3) Supports from Other Agencies; (4) Challenges in Addressing Needs of English Learners and Students from Low-Income Families; (5) Findings; and (6) Recommendations to Congress, the Department of Education, and State Policymakers. Results found that too often, educators have lower expectations for students with disabilities who are also English learners and students with disabilities from low-income families. Schools, districts, and states face challenges in effectively coordinating services and supports for these students as well as challenges in developing effective policies for determining entry and exit for language-based services for English learners with disabilities.
Every Student Succeeds Act and Students with Disabilities. IDEA Series
Author: National Council on Disability
Date: 2018-02-07
Type: Reports - Research
Subjects: Educational Legislation,Federal Legislation,Disabilities,Equal Education,Elementary Secondary Education,Student Attitudes,Parent Attitudes,Educational Policy,Inclusion,Accountability,Academic Accommodations (Disabilities),Academic Standards,Alternative Assessment,Computer Assisted Testing,State Standards,Charter Schools,School Choice

This report is part of a five-report series on the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) that examines the Every Student Succeeds Act's (ESSA's) amendments to IDEA, explains their likely impact on students with disabilities as ESSA implementation progresses, and provides recommendations. The National Council on Disability conducted research to gather relevant policy and qualitative and quantitative information. Researchers convened forums to examine parent and student perspectives and interviewed several local and state administrators and researchers. Four chapters focus on: (1) ESSA Provisions Specific to Students with Disabilities; (2) Other Policy Considerations; (3) Findings; and (4) Recommendations. The report finds that ESSA maintains key provisions to ensure the inclusion of students with disabilities in accountability systems. However, ESSA also affords states greater flexibility in how accountability systems are established. ESSA includes additional assessment provisions to utilize effectively accommodations for students with disabilities and additional provisions to better support students with the most significant cognitive disabilities. Finally, to improve opportunities for student learning, ESSA requires states to engage stakeholders in the state planning process and address school conditions for student learning and the overuse of harsh disciplinary tactics, including seclusion and restraint.
Federal Monitoring and Enforcement of IDEA Compliance. IDEA Series
Author: National Council on Disability
Date: 2018-02-07
Type: Reports - Research
Subjects: Disabilities,Educational Legislation,Federal Legislation,Equal Education,Compliance (Legal),Legal Responsibility,Government Role,Federal Government,Law Enforcement,State Government,School Districts,Conflict Resolution,Public Agencies,Civil Rights Legislation

This report is part of a five-report series on the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) that examines the history and current process of federal monitoring and enforcement of IDEA, the role of the U.S. Department of Education's Office for Civil Rights (OCR), the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ), and IDEA's options for resolving disputes and addressing systemic violations. the National Council on Disability commissioned this report to better understand the current system of IDEA monitoring and enforcement. Nine chapters focus on: (1) Examining the Federal Role in Education; (2) Evolution of Monitoring and Enforcement under IDEA; (3) Department of Education's Current Process; (4) State Monitoring of Local Education Agencies (LEAs); (5) IDEA Dispute Resolution Options; (6) Role of the Office for Civil Rights; (7) Role of the Department of Justice; (8) Perspectives of Key Stakeholders; and (9) Findings and Recommendations. Results of the study found the current system of monitoring and enforcement, while moving toward a more balanced approach of compliance and results, often fails to address noncompliance in a timely and effective manner and utilize all of the options available to address issues.
Make It Simple, Keep It Fair: A Proposal to Streamline and Improve Income-Driven Repayment of Federal Student Loans
Author: Cheng, Diane
Date: 2017-05-00
Type: Reports - Descriptive
Subjects: Student Loan Programs,Federal Aid,Federal Programs,Loan Repayment,Paying for College,Income Contingent Loans,Program Improvement

College has never been so necessary or so expensive for Americans. Rising costs, state disinvestment, declining household incomes, and grant aid that has not kept pace lead more students to borrow, and borrow more, to go to school. While federal student loans are the safest option for students who need to borrow, rising student loan debt has repercussions for both individuals and the broader economy. In addition to the severe consequences for those who default, student loan debt--even low debt when paired with low earnings--can hold borrowers back from starting a family, buying a home, saving for retirement, starting a business or farm, or saving for their own children's education. While not a solution for rising costs or debt, income-driven repayment (IDR) for federal student loans gained broad support over a decade ago from lenders, students, schools, and both Republicans and Democrats. Since Congress passed the first widely available plan in 2007, IDR has become an increasingly critical option for students who have to borrow to afford college, and it continues to have strong bipartisan support. IDR plans now help millions of borrowers stay on top of their loans and avoid default, providing the assurance of manageable monthly payments tied to their income and family size, as well as a light at the end of the tunnel so that student loan payments do not last the rest of their lives. In addition to providing repayment relief to borrowers struggling with low incomes relative to their debt, the availability of more affordable payments through IDR can help allay well-documented fears about college costs and debt that keep some students from ever attempting college and push others to drop out before completing. However, the range of IDR plans available today--five of them, each with varying eligibility requirements, costs, and benefits--is confusing and contributes to under-enrollment among the borrowers who may need IDR the most. To better serve both borrowers and taxpayers, IDR must be both streamlined and improved. Needed improvements include simplifying the annual income recertification process in IDR, better targeting the benefits of IDR, and preventing forgiven debt in IDR from being treated as taxable income. This report details a proposal to streamline the multiple IDR plans into one improved plan that caps monthly payments at 10% of income, provides tax-free loan forgiveness after 20 years of payments, targets benefits to borrowers who need help the most, and prevents borrowers with high incomes and high debt from receiving loan forgiveness when they could have afforded to pay more.
Choices &amp; Voices: A Survey of Michigan Charter School Parents. A Mackinac Center Report
Author: Mackinac Center for Public Policy
Date: 2018-00-00
Type: Reports - Research
Subjects: Charter Schools,Parent Attitudes,Satisfaction,School Choice,Barriers,Educational Quality,Expectation,School Safety,School Culture,Class Size,Discipline,Courses,Parent Participation

This report highlights the results of a survey of nearly 1,500 parents of charter school students in Michigan. Charter schools are state-funded, tuition-free schools of choice, authorized by public agencies such as universities and community colleges. The survey asks parents questions concerning their satisfaction with charter schools, why they chose to leave their district-run school, difficulties they may have faced enrolling in a charter school and ideas for improvements, among others. The goal of this survey is to better inform policymakers about the on-the-ground experience parents have with charter schools, so that they might pursue policies that improve Michigan's charter schools.
Beyond Financial Aid: How Colleges Can Strengthen the Financial Stability of Low-Income Students and Improve Student Outcomes
Author: Lumina Foundation
Date: 2018-03-00
Type: Guides - Non-Classroom
Subjects: College Students,Low Income Students,Paying for College,Educational Strategies,Educational Finance,Student Financial Aid,Student Needs,Financial Needs,College Administration,Partnerships in Education,Student Personnel Services,Academic Support Services,Educational Benefits,Nutrition,Transportation,Housing,Child Care,Identification,Self Evaluation (Groups)

This report is a compendium of best practices for assisting low-income students. It highlights work that has been underway for years but has not always been implemented at scale, especially within institutions that enroll significant numbers of low-income students. This toolkit offers leaders five concrete strategies they can use in two ways to increase student success: (1) it can help determine how, and how well, their institutions are serving low-income students; and (2) it can help them devise and implement plans to improve, expand and better coordinate services for greater impact. The report is divided in three sections: (1) Five Strategies to Increase the Success of Low-Income Students; (2) BFA Institutional Self-Assessment Guide; and (3) BFA Implementation Guide. Two appendices are included.