ethanporcaro/eric-fulltext-meta huggingface dataset:
The Influence of the College Match Program on Near-Peer Advisers. College Match Issue Focus
Author: MDRC
Date: 2015-05-00
Type: Reports - Descriptive
Subjects: Public Schools,College Preparation,Educational Counseling,Comprehensive Guidance,College School Cooperation,High Achievement,Low Income Groups

Educators, researchers, and policymakers across the political spectrum agree that the nation must send more of its young people to college and find ways to help them graduate--especially young people from low-income families. To that end, in 2010, MDRC and a group of partners developed College Match, an innovative school-based college advising program that was pilot-tested in select Chicago and New York City public schools. The MDRC-operated program placed &quot;near-peer&quot; advisers--trained advisers who are recent college graduates--in low-income high schools where they provided college advising to a group of moderate- and high-achieving students, guiding them toward selective colleges where retention and graduation rates are high and they had better odds of success. Here a group of advisers reflect on the influence of the program on their career trajectories. [Advisers contributing to this document include: Ebelio Mondragon, Jessica Salazar, Michele L. (Taylor) Howard, and Kelli Hammond Antonides.]
Health Barriers to Learning and the Education Opportunity Gap. Progress of Education Reform. Volume 15 Issue 3
Author: Basch, Charles E.
Date: 2015-08-00
Type: Reports - Descriptive
Subjects: Barriers,Access to Education,Disproportionate Representation,At Risk Students,Disadvantaged Youth,Educational History,School Health Services,Child Health,Low Income Groups,Minority Group Students,Access to Health Care,Public Education,Educational Change,Racial Differences,Ethnic Groups,Diseases,Visual Impairments,Gender Differences,Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder,Physical Activity Level,Incidence,Educational Policy

Education is a critical pathway by which children can rise out of the cycle of poverty. Billions of dollars are invested annually in America's public schools and considerable improvement has been made in academic achievement and educational attainment. However, certain school-aged cohorts--entire communities of youth--have been left behind. An under-appreciated fact is that these same youth are disproportionately affected by a constellation of health problems that subvert their motivation and impair their ability to learn. Scientists and stakeholders agree that students must be healthy to be ready to learn. This report discusses: (1) A brief history of school health in America; (2) Why is school health important for school reform?; and (3) What do policymakers need to know? Next steps. The key takeaways from this report are: (1) Health barriers to learning affect millions of American youth, disproportionately affecting low-income and minority youth; (2) School health is not a panacea for improving academic achievement among America's most vulnerable children, but it is an underutilized and highly promising strategy to help children break out of the cycle of poverty by increasing access to educational opportunity; and (3) The rising healthcare costs that threaten America's economic security, and low levels of fitness and high levels of obesity that threaten America's military readiness, are additional rationales for schools to address health.
Dynamic Tensions: Early Reflections from MDRC's Evaluation of the Innovative Professional Development Challenge
Author: MDRC
Date: 2015-01-00
Type: Reports - Descriptive
Subjects: School Support,Faculty Development,Interviews,Secondary School Teachers,Individual Needs,Teacher Collaboration,Systems Approach,Program Implementation,Program Effectiveness,Program Evaluation,Teacher Improvement,Improvement Programs

In the Innovative Professional Development (iPD) Challenge, the Bill &amp; Melinda Gates Foundation has invested in helping school districts and networks redesign their instructional support systems to better support educators in increasing student success. This Issue Focus, the second in a series, presents early reflections from MDRC's evaluation of the iPD Challenge and is based on interviews with school and district staff and surveys of secondary school leaders conducted in four school districts during the 2013-2014 school year, the first year of iPD implementation.
Losing Ground: School Segregation in Massachuestts
Author: Ayscue, Jennifer B.
Date: 2013-05-00
Type: Numerical/Quantitative Data
Subjects: School Segregation,Minority Group Students,Racial Composition,Social Class,Social Science Research,Educational Environment,Trend Analysis,Public Schools,Enrollment Trends,Racial Differences,African American Students,Hispanic American Students,White Students,Institutional Characteristics,Low Income Groups,Urban Schools,Demography,Asian American Students,American Indian Students,Desegregation Litigation,School Desegregation

Though once a leader in school integration, Massachusetts has regressed over the last two decades as its students of color have experienced intensifying school segregation. This report investigates trends in school segregation in Massachusetts by examining concentration, exposure, and evenness measures by both race and class. First, the report provides a brief overview of the history of school desegregation in the state and in several prominent school districts. Then is summarized several decades of social science research highlighting the harms of segregation and the benefits of diverse learning environments. The next section describes the report's data and methods. Examined are enrollment patterns and several measures of desegregation at the state level. After exploring trends at the state level, next explored are the Boston and Springfield metropolitan areas with similar measures provided of segregation for each metro area; this section will also discuss the degree and type of racial transition occurring in the ten largest districts in each metro. The report concludes with a discussion of findings and multiple recommendations for those who seek to address segregation in Massachusetts schools. Fact sheets documenting segregation trends in four of Massachusetts's metro areas also accompany this report. The following are appended: (1) Additional Data Tables; and (2) Data Sources and Methodology. [The report was written with John Kucsera, Genevieve Siegel-Hawley, and Gary Orfield. This is the third of thirteen in a series of special reports on public school segregation in Eastern states. These studies explore trends in enrollment and school segregation patterns from 1989 to 2010 at the state and regional levels, including various metro areas for each state.]
New York State's Extreme School Segregation: Inequality, Inaction and a Damaged Future
Author: Kucsera, John
Date: 2014-03-00
Type: Numerical/Quantitative Data
Subjects: School Segregation,Desegregation Plans,Educational History,Student Diversity,Demography,School Districts,Competency Based Education,Racial Composition,Trend Analysis,Educational Trends,State Legislation,Court Litigation,Civil Rights Legislation,Federal Legislation,Desegregation Litigation,School Desegregation

The fight for equal educational opportunity in New York has followed a pattern similar to other diverse or racially transforming states. From the 1950s to 1980s, the issue of school desegregation was an important issue. Local civil rights pressure, the courts, and legislation attempted to desegregate large urban school systems through both voluntary school choice programs and involuntary reassignment plans. Over the last 20 years, however, most desegregation policies have been abandoned, as minorities continue to grow and reside in isolated neighborhoods, and leaders shift focus onto neighborhood schools and the provision of equitable school funding or resources. School segregation has persisted or increased across the state--one of the main explorations of this report. In this report, first is provided a brief overview of the history of desegregation in New York. Following is a review of over sixty years of social science research to determine possible harms of segregation and the benefits of well-designed diverse schools. Next, demographic and segregation patterns over the last twenty years for the state are explored, preceded by a brief description of the data and methodology. These same trends are also explored for the large New York metropolitan area and its various regions (including Long Island and Yonkers), followed by the state's four main upstate metropolitan areas (Albany, Buffalo, Rochester, and Syracuse). Within the metropolitan area analyses, the report briefly delves into the degree and type of racial transition within the largest school districts. These findings are discussed, along with a number of legal and policy recommendations for the state and key metropolitan areas. The report contains an appendix of additional data tables. [The report was written with Gary Orfield. This is the fifth of thirteen in a series of special reports on public school segregation in Eastern states. These studies explore trends in enrollment and school segregation patterns from 1989 to 2010 at the state and regional levels, including various metro areas for each state.]
The Courts, the Legislature, and Delaware's Resegregation: A Report on School Segregation in Delaware, 1989-­2010
Author: Niemeyer, Arielle
Date: 2014-12-00
Type: Numerical/Quantitative Data
Subjects: School Desegregation,School Resegregation,State Legislation,Desegregation Litigation,Public Schools,Urban Schools,Elementary Secondary Education,White Students,African American Students,Hispanic American Students,Asian American Students,Educational History,Enrollment,Racial Composition,Student Diversity,Low Income Groups,Suburban Schools,Court Litigation

Delaware's history with school desegregation is complicated and contradictory. The state both advanced and impeded the goals of &quot;Brown v. Board of Education.&quot; After implementing desegregation plans that were ineffective by design, Delaware was ultimately placed under the first metropolitan, multi-district desegregation court order in the US. The federal district court's decision was significant because it rendered meaningless the city/suburban boundaries which dramatically separated students by race. The mandated desegregation plan, in place for almost two decades, made Delaware one of the two most integrated states in the US. It was eventually dissolved after the participating districts were granted unitary status. This report is organized as follows: The first section provides a brief overview of the history of desegregation in Delaware, followed by a summary of social science evidence related to the harms of segregation and the benefits of well-designed diverse schools. It describes the data and methodology and then presents a state-level analysis of enrollment and segregation trends. Those same trends are explored for the Wilmington metropolitan area. Within the metropolitan area discussion, the report briefly delves into the degree and type of racial transition within the largest school districts. It closes with a discussion of the findings, along with a number of policy recommendations. Also included with the report are separate fact sheets documenting segregation trends in the Wilmington metro area. Appended to the report are: (1) State, Metropolitan, and District Tables; and (2) Data and Methodology. [This report was written with Jennifer Ayscue, John Kuscera, Gary Orfield, and Genevieve Siegel-Hawley. This is the eighth of thirteen in a series of special reports on public school segregation in Eastern states. These studies explore trends in enrollment and school segregation patterns from 1989 to 2010 at the state and regional levels, including various metro areas for each state.]
Profiles of For-Profit and Nonprofit Education Management Organizations. Fourteenth Edition--2011-2012
Author: Miron, Gary
Date: 2013-11-00
Type: Numerical/Quantitative Data
Subjects: Profiles,Nonprofit Organizations,Private Agencies,Educational Administration,Educational Practices,Annual Reports,Data Collection,Information Sources,Educational Trends,Statistical Data,Statistical Distributions,Enrollment Trends,Cluster Grouping,Institutional Characteristics,Background,Definitions,Program Descriptions,Organization Size (Groups),Enrollment,Elementary Secondary Education,Enrollment Rate,Virtual Classrooms,State Surveys,Charter Schools,School Choice

Annual &quot;Profiles&quot; reports are comprehensive digests of data on education management organizations. Analysis and interpretation of the data in this report are, for the most part, limited to describing general trends over time. The report is intended for a broad audience. Policymakers, educators, school district officials, and school board members may use this information to learn more about current or potential contractors. Investors, persons involved in the education industry, and employees of EMOs may find it useful in tracking changes, strategizing for growth, and planning investments. Journalists and researchers who study and seek to learn more about education management organizations may also find much here to interest them. Changes in the 14th Edition of the EMO Profiles include a closer integration of two separate data sets that track the nonprofit and for-profit EMOs, along with increased reliance on key informants and media sources to identify new EMOs and changes in schools operated by EMOs. The 2011-2012 school year marked another year of growth in both the for-profit and nonprofit education management sectors. In the previous three years we saw some signs of slowing growth in the for-profit sector, but the changes between 2010-2011 and 2011-12, demonstrate that there is still room for growth. The nonprofit management sector's growth has been steadily growing faster than their for-profit counterparts, both in terms of new nonprofit EMOs and new managed schools. Student enrollments in all managed schools continue to grow at a rapid pace. Appended are: (1) Reader's Guide; (2) For-Profit EMO Response Table; (3) Nonprofit EMO Response Table; (4) No Longer Profiled Companies; and (5) Methods for Compiling School Profiles. [To access &quot;Profiles of For-Profit and Nonprofit Education Management Organizations: Thirteenth Annual Report, 2010-2011&quot; see ED528373.
Common Core in California Schools: Preparing Kids for Their Future. Fact Sheet
Author: Children Now
Date: 2015-01-21
Type: Reports - Descriptive
Subjects: State Standards,Alignment (Education),Achievement Tests,English,Language Arts,Program Implementation,Educational Change,Progress Monitoring,Educational Benefits,Expectation,Educational Policy

Today's students are preparing to enter a world in which higher education and the workforce are demanding higher-level skills than ever before. To ensure all students are ready for success after high school, the Common Core State Standards establish a set of learning goals that work grade-by-grade, step-by-step, to prepare them to meet challenges they will face both in college and career. Students benefit from this approach through a greater use of analysis, critical thinking, problem-solving, and collaboration skills. The standards are in line with the skills that all students need to become 21st century learners. Common Core was borne from the recognition that consistent, real-world learning goals would ensure all students--regardless of where they live--graduate high school prepared for college, career, and civic life. The standards were drafted by content experts and teachers, with significant public input, and were adopted by California policymakers on a bipartisan basis in 2010. They are widely supported by a diverse and broad spectrum of stakeholders. Common Core does not dictate specific content: it is a set of standards that sets expectations for what students should know at each grade level, like being able to count to 100 in kindergarten. It is up to local teachers and school leaders to decide how to help their students reach those goals. Implementing Common Core in every classroom in the state and using the Smarter Balanced Assessments to measure student progress is a significant undertaking, and challenges have been expected. None of these temporary difficulties, however, outweigh the long-term benefits of providing students what they need to be ready for a successful future. Teachers, students, and district leaders should be provided the time and support necessary to successfully implement the standards.
Building a Lattice for School Leadership: Lessons from England. Policy Brief #15-1
Author: Supovitz, Jonathan
Date: 2015-03-00
Type: Reports - Descriptive
Subjects: Foreign Countries,Educational Administration,Administrator Education,Administrator Responsibility,Leadership Training,Leadership Effectiveness,Educational Development,Educational History,Leadership Role,Curriculum Development,Alignment (Education),Network Analysis,Educational Policy

The flat structure of American schools is ill-suited to meet today's increasing demands for educational improvement. Even with unprecedented pressure to raise performance, America's schools are still largely organized the way they were a century ago--with a single principal presiding over a largely egg-crated faculty. Is such a thin veneer of instructional leadership sufficient to build the capacity of teachers at each grade level and content area to develop students to reach high expectations? Historically, American schools have addressed this deficit in instructional support with a patchwork of poorly defined roles and responsibilities--under-utilized department chairs, fitful coaching models, and informal teacher leaders who generally lacked the training and authority to influence the practice of their peers. How exactly do these roles fit into contemporary schools' strategies for improving teaching and learning? How can we more systematically build the capacity of school leaders to engage with and overcome the challenges of continuous school improvement? One place to look for fresh ideas about leadership development is England. Over the past 15 years, educational leaders in England have made several important revisions in the ways leadership is organized in schools, how leaders are developed, and how leadership is integrated into the larger educational infrastructure. There is much that American policymakers might learn from these experiences. This policy brief examines the evolution of the educational leadership development system in England to see what ideas American leaders and policymakers might take from looking transnationally. The brief is based on a more in-depth examination of that leadership development system described in a Consortium for Policy Research in Education (CPRE) research report entitled &quot;Building a Lattice for School Leadership: The Top-to-Bottom Rethinking of Leadership Development in England and What It Might Mean for American Education.Research Report #RR-83&quot; (see ED558763). The research report was based upon a year of research on school leadership in England that included extensive background research, site visits to schools and leadership programs, and over 20 interviews with government officials, teachers and school leaders, university researchers, union officials, and both for profit and non-profit school leadership providers. Implications for policy makers are presented.
Smarter Balanced Preliminary Performance Levels: Estimated MAP Scores Corresponding to the Preliminary Performance Levels of the Smarter Balanced Assessment Consortium (Smarter Balanced)
Author: Northwest Evaluation Association
Date: 2015-01-00
Type: Numerical/Quantitative Data
Subjects: Standard Setting,Standard Setting (Scoring),Pretesting,Cutting Scores,Academic Standards,Career Readiness,College Readiness,Mathematics Achievement,Reading Achievement,Probability,Tables (Data),Norm Referenced Tests,Achievement Rating,Mathematics Tests,Reading Tests,Performance Based Assessment,Scores,Grades (Scholastic)

Recently, the Smarter Balanced Assessment Consortium (Smarter Balanced) released a document that established initial performance levels and the associated threshold scale scores for the Smarter Balanced assessment. The report included estimated percentages of students expected to perform at each of the four performance levels, reported by grade and test subject (e.g., English Language Arts or Mathematics), based on preliminary field testing of the Smarter Balanced assessment conducted during the spring of 2014. These threshold scale scores and expected percentages represent a preliminary attempt at standard setting, and Smarter Balanced may revise them after the spring 2015 testing term. Nevertheless, they represent the best information currently available about the cut scores that will be used during the spring 2015 testing term of the Smarter Balanced test. Using the information provided within the Smarter Balanced report about the percentages of students expected to perform at each level, Northwest Evaluation Association™ (NWEA™) conducted a series of analyses to examine what Measures of Academic Progress® (MAP®) interim assessment scores might be associated with these performance level categories. This was not an empirical study in the manner of our normal scale linking studies, because the Smarter Balanced assessment has not yet been fully implemented. NWEA intends to work with its partner school districts to conduct such a study, examining the relationship between MAP performance and Smarter Balanced performance for individual students, once Smarter Balanced has been fully implemented within NWEA partner districts. NWEA analyses focused on the percentages of students expected to perform within each of the Smarter Balanced performance levels. NWEA compared these percentages to our own nationally representative normative distributions in order to estimate the MAP scores that would produce similar percentages of students as those expected to fall within the Smarter Balanced performance level categories. The approach taken here is quite similar to the approach used in many prior linking studies, and can provide highly accurate estimates of cut scores. Links used in this document are contained in the appendix.
NWEA Recommendations for Transitioning Students from MPG to MAP 2-5
Author: Northwest Evaluation Association
Date: 2014-12-00
Type: Reports - Evaluative
Subjects: Elementary School Students,Achievement Tests,Mathematics Achievement,Reading Achievement,Reading Tests,Mathematics Tests,Computer Assisted Testing,Adaptive Testing,Test Score Decline,Primary Education

In order to determine which test is more appropriate to administer to elementary grade students, it is important to consider the purpose of the test in conjunction with the ability and grade level of the students. Northwest Evaluation Association™ (NWEA™) designed Measures of Academic Progress® (MAP®) tests mindful of the amount of learning that occurs in elementary school students and the accelerated rate in which that learning occurs as compared to middle and high school students. MAP for Primary Grades (MPG) Reading and Mathematics tests assess pre-, emergent, and beginning readers using audio support in order to provide information regarding the student's achievement in those subjects. The content and the manner in which the tests are constructed are appropriate for students from kindergarten up to second grade. As of fall 2012, MPG tests aligned to the Common Core were added to the standard MPG Survey with Goals tests. General considerations for the transition between MPG and MAP are provided.