ethanporcaro/eric-fulltext-meta huggingface dataset:
Educational Directory 1919-1920
Author: Department of the Interior, United States Bureau of Education (ED)
Date: 1920-00-00
Type: Historical Materials
Subjects: Vocational Education,Fine Arts,Agriculture,Foreign Countries,Federal Government,Government Role,Public Agencies,War,State Departments of Education,Military Service,Educational Finance,Libraries,Museums,Elementary Secondary Education,Postsecondary Education,Rural Schools,Urban Schools,Public Schools,Superintendents,Educational Administration,Administrators,Boards of Education,Counties,Local Government,Urban Areas,Rural Areas,Higher Education,Kindergarten,Dentistry,Dental Schools,Medical Schools,Pharmacy,Teacher Education Programs,College Presidents,Two Year Colleges,Deans,Department Heads,Theological Education,Engineering Education,Law Related Education,Medical Education,Veterinary Medicine,Private Schools,Special Schools,State Schools,Blindness,Deafness,Intellectual Disability,School Districts,Summer Schools,Colleges,Universities,Secondary Schools,Elementary Schools,Training,Special Needs Students,State Government,Government Libraries,Library Schools,Library Materials,Public Libraries,Educational History,Teacher Associations,Organizations (Groups),Jews,Religious Schools,Directories,Philanthropic Foundations,Trustees,Governing Boards,Professional Associations,Females,Clubs,Parent Associations,Periodicals,Church Programs,Nonprofit Organizations,Catholic Schools,International Education,African American Organizations,Faculty Organizations,International Organizations,National Organizations,Religious Organizations,Student Organizations

Part 1 of the education directories for 1919 and 1920 includes U.S. Department of Interior government educational activities. The contents include various government departments and independent establishments including the Library of Congress and the Commission of Fine Arts. Part 2 describes public school systems. The contents include principal state school officers, executive officers of state boards of education, county and other local superintendents of schools, and superintendents of public schools in cities and towns. Part 3 describes higher education and training of teachers. Contents include presidents of universities, presidents of junior colleges, directors and deans for various schools within universities, and principals of normal and kindergarten training schools. Part 4 describes special schools. Contents include superintendents for schools for the blind, deaf, and feeble-minded. Part 5 describes summer school directors of universities, colleges, and normal schools. Part 6 lists information for libraries and museums. Contents include librarians for public and society libraries, state library commissions, directors of library schools, and directors of museums. Part 7 describes miscellaneous educational organizations. Contents include boards and foundations of church education, superintendents of Catholic and Jewish organizations, international and American educational associations, women's clubs, and educational periodicals.
2010-11 Statewide Census of Private Education (SCOPE): Summary of a Study of Private K-12 Schools in Minnesota
Author: MartinRogers, Nicole
Date: 2012-05-00
Type: Reports - Descriptive
Subjects: Private Education,Private Schools,Elementary Secondary Education,Institutional Characteristics,Enrollment,Student Characteristics,School Choice,Graduation Requirements,Graduation Rate,Educational Finance,Technology Uses in Education,Student Costs,Tuition

To better understand the reach and impact of private education in Minnesota, the Minnesota Independent School Forum contracted with Wilder Research to conduct a study of private schools throughout the state. The results of the study provide a comprehensive portrait of private K-12 schools including private school characteristics and programs, school enrollment and capacity, student characteristics, potential interest of private schools in participating in a school choice program, high school graduation requirements and graduation rates, school staffing, and school finances. It also provides comparisons with Minnesota public schools. A report and this summary were developed for use by the Minnesota Legislature, other policymakers, funders, educators, advocacy organizations, and others interested in the education of children in Minnesota. Similar surveys were conducted by the Minnesota Independent School Forum in 2000, 2002, and 2003. [This summary presents highlights of the 2010-11 Statewide Census of Private Education report. For a related report, &quot;Statewide Census of Private Education: Complete Results,&quot; see ED619451.]
Educational Directory 1920-1925
Author: Department of the Interior, United States Bureau of Education (ED)
Date: 1925-00-00
Type: Historical Materials
Subjects: Directories,Boards of Education,State Departments of Education,State Boards of Education,State Agencies,State Officials,Superintendents,Public Schools,Administrators,School Health Services,School Personnel,College Presidents,Department Heads,Governing Boards,Principals,Elementary Secondary Education,Vocational Education,Special Schools,Librarians,Blindness,Deafness,Students with Disabilities,Religious Organizations,Religious Schools,Catholic Schools,Judaism,Professional Associations,Clubs,Females,Mothers,Periodicals,Foreign Countries,Museums,Social Work,Caseworkers,Parent Associations

The educational directories for 1920, 1921, 1922, 1923, 1924, and 1925 United States Bureau of Education cover some of the following categories: educational activities for various government departments and independent establishments; school officers and superintendents for state schools, state boards of education, county and other local schools, and public schools in cities and towns; business managers and chief medical inspectors for cities of over 30,000 population; presidents, deans, and directors for universities, colleges, and for various schools within universities; summer school directors; directors of museums; librarians, executive officers, and directors of public, state, and society libraries, commissions, and library schools; educational boards, foundations, and organizations for Jewish and Catholic parochial schools; directors of schools for social workers; international and American associations of education; learned and civic organizations; State Federation of Women's Clubs; National Congress of Mothers and Parent-Teachers Associations; and educational periodicals.
Educational Directory 1926-1930
Author: Department of the Interior, United States Bureau of Education (ED)
Date: 1930-00-00
Type: Historical Materials
Subjects: Directories,Boards of Education,State Departments of Education,State Boards of Education,State Agencies,State Officials,Superintendents,Public Schools,Administrators,School Health Services,School Personnel,College Presidents,Department Heads,Governing Boards,Principals,Elementary Secondary Education,Vocational Education,Special Schools,Librarians,Blindness,Deafness,Students with Disabilities,Religious Organizations,Religious Schools,Catholic Schools,Judaism,Professional Associations,Clubs,Females,Periodicals,Foreign Countries,Parent Associations,Social Work,Caseworkers

The educational directories for 1926, 1927, 1928, 1929, and 1930 United States Bureau of Education cover some of the following categories: principals and superintendents of state schools, county and other local schools, and public schools in cities and towns; public school business managers; presidents of universities, colleges, and junior colleges; heads of departments of education; presidents or deans of various schools within universities; presidents of institutions for the training of teachers; directors of summer schools; educational boards and foundations; church educational boards and societies; Jewish educational organizations; superintendents of Catholic parochial schools; directors of schools for social workers; international and American associations of education; National Congress of Parents and Teachers; and educational periodicals.
Gaussian Variational Estimation for Multidimensional Item Response Theory
Author: Cho, April E.
Date: 2020-00-00
Type: Reports - Research
Subjects: Item Response Theory,Mathematics,Statistical Inference,Maximum Likelihood Statistics,Statistical Analysis,Computation,Simulation,Models,Data Analysis

Multidimensional Item Response Theory (MIRT) is widely used in assessment and evaluation of educational and psychological tests. It models the individual response patterns by specifying functional relationship between individuals' multiple latent traits and their responses to test items. One major challenge in parameter estimation in MIRT is that the likelihood involves intractable multidimensional integrals due to latent variable structure. Various methods have been proposed that either involve direct numerical approximations to the integrals or Monte Carlo simulations. However, these methods are known to be computationally demanding in high dimensions and rely on sampling data points from a posterior distribution. We propose a new Gaussian Variational EM (GVEM) algorithm which adopts a variational inference to approximate the intractable marginal likelihood by a computationally feasible lower bound. In addition, the proposed algorithm can be applied to assess the dimensionality of the latent traits in an exploratory analysis. Simulation studies are conducted to demonstrate the computational efficiency and estimation precision of the new GVEM algorithm in comparison to the popular alternative Metropolis-Hastings Robbins-Monro (MHRM) algorithm. In addition, theoretical results are also presented to establish the consistency of the estimator from the new GVEM algorithm. [This paper will be published in &quot;British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology.&quot;]
Gender Stereotypes about Interests Start Early and Cause Gender Disparities in Computer Science and Engineering
Author: Master, Allison
Date: 2021-00-00
Type: Journal Articles
Subjects: Sex Stereotypes,Student Interests,Gender Discrimination,Computer Science,Engineering,STEM Education,Gender Differences,Elementary Secondary Education,Sense of Community,Group Membership,Correlation,Student Motivation,Self Concept,Equal Education,Gender Bias

Societal stereotypes depict girls as less interested than boys in computer science and engineering. We demonstrate the existence of these stereotypes among children and adolescents from first to 12th grade and their potential negative consequences for girls' subsequent participation in these fields. Studies 1 and 2 (n = 2,277; one preregistered) reveal that children as young as age six (first grade) and adolescents across multiple racial/ethnic and gender intersections (Black, Latinx, Asian, and White girls and boys) endorse stereotypes that girls are less interested than boys in computer science and engineering. The more that individual girls endorse gender-interest stereotypes favoring boys in computer science and engineering, the lower their own interest and sense of belonging in these fields. These gender-interest stereotypes are endorsed even more strongly than gender stereotypes about computer science and engineering abilities. Studies 3 and 4 (n = 172; both preregistered) experimentally demonstrate that 8- to 9-y-old girls are significantly less interested in an activity marked with a gender stereotype (&quot;girls are less interested in this activity than boys&quot;) compared to an activity with no such stereotype (&quot;girls and boys are equally interested in this activity&quot;). Taken together, both ecologically valid real-world studies (Studies 1 and 2) and controlled preregistered laboratory experiments (Studies 3 and 4) reveal that stereotypes that girls are less interested than boys in computer science and engineering emerge early and may contribute to gender disparities.
Remote Learning during the Global School Lockdown: Multi-Country Lessons
Author: Barron Rodriguez, Maria
Date: 2020-00-00
Type: Reports - Research
Subjects: School Closing,Distance Education,Online Courses,Educational Technology,Technology Uses in Education,COVID-19,Pandemics,Elementary Secondary Education,World Problems,Program Effectiveness,Blended Learning,Synchronous Communication,Asynchronous Communication,Cultural Differences,Foreign Countries,Partnerships in Education,Curriculum Development,Socioeconomic Influences,Barriers,Supply and Demand,Access to Computers,Faculty Development,Family School Relationship,Student School Relationship,Interpersonal Communication,Teacher Effectiveness,At Risk Students,Socioeconomic Status,Educational Policy,Inclusion,Coping,Achievement Gains,Progress Monitoring,Remedial Instruction

The COVID-19 pandemic is severely affecting education systems across the world. While schools are closed (or partially closed), simulations across different countries suggest that learning gains previously achieved by students will be partly lost. Children from disadvantaged backgrounds have suffered these shocks even more and can be at a higher risk of dropping out of school. To better understand the effects of these shocks, as well as to analyze the perceived effectiveness of remote learning solutions, this qualitative exploratory study synthesizes the main national education actions deployed by a group of selected countries to mitigate learning losses. It includes three main sections that have been organized in a chronological order within this report: the first one, &quot;What can we learn from education emergency responses in low- and middle-income countries?&quot; analyzes the emergency education responses to the COVID-19 pandemic of over 120 governments from April until May, 2020. The second section, &quot;Is remote learning perceived as effective? An in-depth analysis across five countries&quot; discusses the main national education responses deployed by Brazil, Kenya, Nigeria, Sierra Leone, and Peru, as well as the perceived effectiveness of these strategies conducted from May until August, 2020. The third section, &quot;What works with remote and remedial strategies? an analysis across 13 countries&quot; builds on key lessons learned during the analysis of the five multi-country experiences and presents global trends of remote learning implemented during school closures and the actions governments adopted to get ready for remedial learning, conducted from August until December 2020. The countries prioritized for the third section are IDA borrowing countries of which six are low-income countries: Afghanistan, Haiti, Malawi, Mozambique, Niger, and Rwanda; and five are lower-middle-income countries: Cambodia, Cameroon, Kenya, Nepal, and Pakistan. Additionally, two high-income countries, Estonia and Uruguay, have been included in the report. [For a related report, &quot;Remote Learning during COVID-19: Lessons from Today, Principles for Tomorrow,&quot; see ED619430.]
AISD Prekindergarten Expansion Grant Evaluation Report, 2007-2008: Promoting School Readiness. Publication Number 07.71
Author: Curry, Janice
Date: 2008-12-00
Type: Reports - Research
Subjects: School Readiness,School Districts,Preschool Education,Grants,Partnerships in Education,Preschool Children,Teacher Qualifications,Developmentally Appropriate Practices,Scoring Rubrics,Academic Standards,Difficulty Level,Low Income Students,School Schedules,Enrollment Trends,English Language Learners,Native Language,Multilingualism,Intelligence Tests,Verbal Ability,Vocabulary,Spanish,Academic Achievement,Student Characteristics,Faculty Development,Cognitive Development,Reading Achievement,Mathematics Achievement,Teacher Characteristics,Language Arts,Program Evaluation

This report summarizes Austin Independent School District's prekindergarten program for the 2007-2008 school year.
How Many Currently Enrolled (Fall 2007) AISD Students Failed Both 2006 and 2007 TAKS Reading/English Language Arts (ELA) or Mathematics? How Many Currently Enrolled (Fall 2007) AISD Students Passed Both 2006 and 2007 TAKS Reading/ELA or Mathematics? TAKS Performance Series, Part 1. DPE Publication Number 06.39
Author: Doolittle, Martha
Date: 2007-11-00
Type: Reports - Descriptive
Subjects: Academic Failure,Achievement Tests,Reading Achievement,Language Arts,Mathematics Achievement,Enrollment,Academic Achievement,Grade 5,Grade 9,Grade 7,Grade 12

Texas state assessment (TAKS) data in reading/English language arts and mathematics from 2006 and 2007 for AISD students enrolled in Fall 2007 were examined to find out how many students failed both tests, passed both tests, or failed one but not the other, for two consecutive years.
AISD Prekindergarten Expansion Grant Evaluation Report, 2008-2009: Promoting School Readiness. Publication Number 08.66
Author: Curry, Janice
Date: 2009-11-00
Type: Reports - Research
Subjects: Preschool Education,School Schedules,School Districts,Achievement Tests,Receptive Language,Achievement Gains,School Readiness,Grants,Program Evaluation,Low Income Students,Limited English Speaking,English Language Learners,Homeless People,Bilingual Teachers,English (Second Language),Second Language Learning,Second Language Instruction,Teacher Characteristics,Student Characteristics,Budgets,Emergent Literacy,Intelligence Tests,Verbal Ability,Vocabulary,Enrollment Trends,Cognitive Development,Partnerships in Education,Reading Achievement,Mathematics Achievement,Grade 3,Elementary School Students,Longitudinal Studies,Social Development,Teacher Attitudes,Teacher Surveys

Austin Independent School District provided full-day prekindergarten to 5,196 4-year-olds in 2008-2009 at 66 schools. Seventy percent or more of students made measureable gains on a test of receptive vocabulary, and average gains showed growth about two times greater than that expected for 4-year-olds after a 7-month period.
Question: What Are the Performance Results for AISD former ELL Students on TAKS Reading, Mathematics, Writing, Science, and Social Studies in Spring Compared with All AISD Students? Former ELL Series, Part 1. DPE Publication No. 06.34 A
Author: Gonzalez, Rosa Maria
Date: 2007-10-00
Type: Reports - Descriptive
Subjects: Achievement Tests,School Districts,English Language Learners,Mathematics Achievement,Social Studies,Reading Achievement,Science Achievement,Writing Achievement,Comparative Analysis,Language Arts,State Standards,Elementary School Students,Secondary School Students,Scores

This report summarizes AISD student TAKS results among former English language learner students in spring 2006. This is part 1 of a 2-report series. [For part 2, see ED619483.]
Question: What Are the Performance Results of Former English Language Learners (ELL) or Limited English Proficient (LEP) Students on Texas Assessment of Knowledge and Skills (TAKS) Subject Area Tests since the First Year That TAKS Was Implemented in Spring 2003 (School Year 2002-2003) through Spring 2006 (School Year 2005-2006)? Former ELL Students Series, Part 2. DPE Pub. No. 06.34 B
Author: Gonzalez, Rosa Maria
Date: 2008-01-00
Type: Reports - Descriptive
Subjects: English Language Learners,Achievement Tests,School Districts,Limited English Speaking,Longitudinal Studies,Student Records,Bilingual Education,Second Language Learning,Second Language Instruction,English (Second Language),Ethnicity,Language Arts,Mathematics Achievement,Science Achievement,Reading Achievement,Social Studies,Writing Achievement,Scores,Elementary School Students,Secondary School Students,Comparative Analysis,State Standards

The purpose of this report was to identify former English language learner (ELL) students and to know how they as a group had performed on 2006 TAKS. This is part 2 of a 2-report series. [For part 1, see ED619482.]
Education Technology (EdTech) Survey 2020-21. Research Report
Author: Department for Education (DfE) (United Kingdom)
Date: 2021-05-00
Type: Reports - Research
Subjects: Educational Technology,Technology Uses in Education,Foreign Countries,Distance Education,COVID-19,Pandemics,Educational Benefits,Academic Achievement,Faculty Workload,Time Management,Information Management,Progress Monitoring,Teacher Collaboration,Lesson Plans,Barriers,Special Needs Students

Education Technology (EdTech) refers to the practice of using technology to support teaching and the effective day-to-day management of education institutions. In 2019, the Department for Education (DfE) set out its vision to support schools and colleges to embed technology effectively by supporting them to better understand the opportunities and help tackle the barriers to effective adoption and use of EdTech.1 To support the EdTech Strategy and to inform future technology policy development, the DfE commissioned CooperGibson Research (CGR) to conduct research to establish the state and usage of technology across schools in England. The Department for Education began the commissioning process for a survey of the EdTech landscape in schools in early March 2020. The aim of the survey was to understand the current state of technology in schools, in order to: inform the steps government should take to helps schools embed and use technology to support cost savings, workload reductions and improved pupil outcomes; and to help the EdTech sector to understand the technology landscape of the school sector so that they can adapt and develop their tools in ways that reflect the current conditions within schools. Following the decision to close schools in England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland, the commissioning process for the survey was paused. The commissioning process resumed in July 2020 and, while the original aims remained, the survey included an additional focus on how technology was being used to support remote teaching and learning. This report presents the findings of this research.
Summer Schools Research. Final Research Report
Author: Department for Education (DfE) (United Kingdom)
Date: 2022-03-00
Type: Reports - Research
Subjects: Summer Schools,Foreign Countries,Secondary Schools,Conventional Instruction,COVID-19,Pandemics,Secondary School Students,Summer Programs,Program Effectiveness,Expectation,Student Satisfaction,Well Being,Educational Planning,Student Characteristics,Educational Benefits,Parent School Relationship,Admission Criteria,School Activities,Program Improvement,Institutional Characteristics,School Schedules,Attendance,Educational Finance

The Department for Education (DfE) provided funding for secondary schools to establish short face-to-face summer schools over the 2021 summer holiday, to help them make up for learning lost during the COVID-19 pandemic. Lasting for one or two weeks, summer schools involved a blend of academic learning and enrichment activities and were intended to complement transition work that schools might normally undertake. Schools determined which pupils, from any year group, would most benefit from a summer school, although it was anticipated that there would be a focus on pupils transitioning into year 7. This transition is known to be a challenging one for some pupils, and the impacts of the pandemic increased this challenge. A range of data was collected by the DfE to assess the effectiveness of the summer school programme. CooperGibson Research was commissioned to conduct analysis of survey and management information (MI) data relating to the programme, triangulating findings where possible. This report presents the findings of this analysis.