ethanporcaro/eric-fulltext-meta huggingface dataset:
The Quality Imperative: A State Guide to Achieving the Promise of Extended Learning Opportunities
Author: Princiotta, Daniel
Date: 2009-03-00
Type: Reports - Descriptive
Subjects: Elementary Secondary Education,Supplementary Education,Weekend Programs,Evening Programs,Summer Programs,After School Programs,Academic Achievement,Financial Support,Instructional Effectiveness,Incentives,Technical Assistance,Outcomes of Education,Program Evaluation

Extended learning opportunities (ELOs) provide safe, structured learning environments for students outside the traditional school day. ELOs include afterschool and summer learning programs as well as before-school, evening, and weekend programs. ELOs come in many forms and can include tutoring, volunteering, academic support, community service, organized sports, home-work help, and art and music programs. ELOs are based in schools, 21st Century Community Learning Centers, child care centers, and community-based organizations, such as 4-H Clubs and Boys and Girls Clubs. No matter where they are located, ELOs complement what children and youth learn during school in ways that support student success. For this reason, effective ELOs should be considered an integral part of state elementary and secondary (K-12) education systems. All ELOs, however, do not produce similar results. In fact, low quality ELOs fail to show positive impacts and can even have negative effects on children. Therefore, governors, chief state school officers, and other state leaders should act to support the development, sustainability, and availability of high quality ELOs. To improve ELO quality, state leaders have initiated efforts to develop program standards, create program self-assessment tools, and provide technical assistance to local programs. State leaders can build on and strengthen these efforts by integrating them into a broader state ELO quality system. State leaders can take the following actions to implement a comprehensive state ELO quality system: (1) Establish an ELO quality team of key stakeholders to envision, develop, and administer a state ELO quality system; (2) Identify federal and state funding sources to support ELO quality; (3) Specify state goals for ELOs and set research-based ELO program standards; (4) Measure the extent to which ELOs meet program standards and demonstrate expected results; (5) Provide incentives to improve ELO quality; (6) Support a strong ELO workforce; and (7) Connect students with high quality ELOs. Furthermore, the authors discuss high quality ELOs are important, the features of high quality ELOs and State actions to develop and ELO quality system. (Contains 113 notes.)
Perfecting the Formula: Effective Strategies = Educational Success. A Briefing Prepared for the 2009 Governors Education Symposium (June 14-15, 2009)
Author: National Governors Association, Center for Best Practices
Date: 2009-00-00
Type: Collected Works - General
Subjects: Conferences (Gatherings),Teacher Effectiveness,Academic Achievement,Longitudinal Studies,Low Achievement,Academic Standards,Student Evaluation,Educational Strategies,Best Practices,School Support,State Standards,Educational Assessment,Educational Indicators,Management Information Systems

This briefing serves as a companion piece to sessions held at the 2009 Governors Education Symposium. It is divided into four issue briefs: (1) Standards and Assessments by Ilene Berman, National Governors Association Center for Best Practices; (2) Teacher Effectiveness by Sandi Jacobs, National Council on Teacher Quality; (3) Supporting Low-Performing Schools by Andy Calkins, Stupski Foundation; and (4) State Longitudinal Data Systems by Aimee Guidera, Data Quality Campaign. (Contains 1 figure.) [For the final report of the 2009 Governors Education Symposium, see ED507642.]
Implementing Graduation Counts: State Progress to Date, 2009
Author: Curran, Bridget
Date: 2009-07-00
Type: Numerical/Quantitative Data
Subjects: Graduation Rate,Educational Indicators,Educational Assessment,Achievement Rating,Academic Achievement,Measurement Techniques,Compliance (Psychology),State Surveys,High School Graduates,Program Implementation,Program Improvement,Data,Academic Records,Accountability

In 2005, all 50 state governors made an unprecedented commitment to voluntarily implement a common, more reliable formula for calculating their states' high school graduation rates by signing the National Governors Association (NGA) Graduation Counts Compact. Four years later, progress is steady. Twenty states now report that they use the Compact formula to calculate their high school graduation rate and publicly report the data. Five more states plan to report the Compact rate later in 2009, eight more in 2010, and 12 more in 2011. Three additional states have not indicated to NGA a date by which they will report using the Compact rate, but will presumably meet a new federal reporting deadline of 2011. Two others have requested a waiver extending the federal deadline beyond 2011. Twelve of the 20 states reporting the Compact rate also report that they use the Compact Rate to meet the graduation rate requirements under the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB). Up by six since 2008, 42 states now report they have the data systems needed to track individual students and more accurately calculate the high school graduation rate using the NGA Compact rate. Not all of those have tracked a cohort the full five years from eighth grade (which identifies first-time ninth graders) to high school graduation. Eighteen of the 20 states that are reporting the Compact graduation rate also report additional indicators of student outcomes. Nineteen of the 20 states report disaggregated graduation rate data for different student subgroups, such as minorities, disadvantaged students, and students with disabilities. Two appendices are included in this report: (1) State Policies to Measure High School Graduation; and (2) Ten Essential Elements of Longitudinal Data Systems: State Status. (Contains 6 notes.)
Raising Rigor, Getting Results: Lessons Learned from AP Expansion
Author: Wakelyn, David
Date: 2009-08-00
Type: Reports - Descriptive
Subjects: High School Students,Advanced Placement Programs,Disadvantaged,Educational Strategies,Program Improvement,Best Practices,Access to Education,State Action,Government Role,Enrollment Management,Academic Achievement,Educational Planning,Alignment (Education),Educational Indicators

Advanced Placement (AP), which enables high school students to take introductory college-level courses, is the nation's oldest example of a rigorous, common curriculum. Students who score well on AP exams are more likely to persist in college and earn a degree. The Advanced Placement Expansion project of the National Governors Association Center for Best Practices (NGA Center) was one component of a large-scale initiative launched in 2005 to redesign the American high school. Alabama, Georgia, Kentucky, Maine, Nevada, and Wisconsin received funding to expand Advanced Placement (AP) courses to minority and low-income students at 51 pilot high schools in rural and urban school districts. The NGA Center, working in partnership with the College Board, has demonstrated that it is possible for states to raise rigor and get results at scale. Nationwide, the potential for AP expansion is considerable. Hundreds of thousands of students have the ability, but lack the opportunity, to take and succeed in AP courses. Governors interested in increasing this opportunity can start by setting new goals for Advanced Placement, so one-third of all high school students take an AP course and one-quarter of them score at mastery. Pursuing the strategies presented in this report and setting these goals would enable states to grow Advanced Placement courses to serve as many as 1 million students by the class of 2014. (Contains 3 tables, 2 figures, and 28 notes.) [Funding for this report was supported by the Michael and Susan Dell Foundation.]
Shaping a Healthier Generation: Successful State Strategies to Prevent Childhood Obesity
Author: Mulheron, Joyal
Date: 2009-09-00
Type: Guides - Non-Classroom
Subjects: Obesity,Prevention,Children,Child Health,Health Promotion,Well Being,Public Health,Policy Formation,Public Policy,Local Government,Government Role,State Government,Child Care,Health Education,Health Services,Nutrition,Physical Activity Level,Life Style,Educational Environment,Lunch Programs,Breakfast Programs,Federal Programs,Physical Education,Physical Fitness,Transportation,Neighborhoods,Eating Habits,Body Composition,Counseling,Screening Tests,Clinical Diagnosis,School Health Services,Home Visits,Nurses,Strategic Planning,Governance,State Agencies,Public Agencies

Studies show that childhood obesity has reached epidemic proportions in the United States. Today, more than 23 million American children--or nearly one in every three--are overweight or obese. If childhood obesity is left unaddressed, a generation of individuals could face health, social, and economic challenges that promise to stress government at all levels. With comprehensive and coordinated initiatives, governors are uniquely positioned to prevent childhood obesity by harnessing the power of the executive office and the collective efforts of multiple stakeholders throughout the state. The National Governors Association (NGA) Center for Best Practices convened the "Shaping a Healthier Generation Advisory Council" in response to the need for innovative and actionable childhood obesity prevention strategies for governors to implement in their states. This report, based on the Council's work, aims to offer direction to governors and other policymakers who want to craft children's health policies that prevent obesity and advance the well-being of families. (Contains 6 tables, 3 figures, and 194 notes.)
Reducing Dropout Rates through Expanded Learning Opportunities. Issue Brief
Author: Harris, Laura
Date: 2009-10-28
Type: Guides - Non-Classroom
Subjects: Homework,Graduation Rate,Dropout Rate,Dropout Prevention,Dropouts,Job Training,Educational Opportunities,After School Programs,Summer Programs,School Schedules,Intervention,Poverty,At Risk Students,Tutoring,Daily Living Skills,Enrichment Activities,Access to Education,State Government,Government Role,High School Students,Middle School Students,Academic Standards,Relevance (Education),Student Motivation,Interpersonal Relationship

Expanded learning opportunities (ELOs), which include afterschool, summer learning, and extended day and extended year programs, can help states reduce dropout rates and increase graduation rates. Effective elementary, middle, and high school ELOs support academic rigor, boost student engagement, and provide students with supportive relationships. High-quality ELOs can also help combat the effects of poverty on students' academic achievement by providing programs and services including tutoring, homework help, life skills and job training, and enrichment opportunities in music, sports, and the arts. Expanding access to high-quality ELOs can be a key state strategy to stem the tide of students leaving school before graduation. This issue brief offers strategies that ensure ELOs are an effective part of a state's larger dropout prevention strategy. Governors who pursue these strategies as part of an ambitious dropout prevention agenda can expect to see not only fewer high school dropouts, but also more engaged students who are better prepared for work and life beyond school. (Contains 63 notes.)
Characteristics of Doctoral Scientists and Engineers in the United States: 2006. Detailed Statistical Tables. NSF 09-317
Author: Foley, Daniel J.
Date: 2009-09-00
Type: Numerical/Quantitative Data
Subjects: Surveys,Graduates,Doctoral Degrees,Engineering,Health Occupations,Professional Occupations,Scientists,Cohort Analysis,Employment,Data Analysis,Sampling,Federal Government,Research Methodology,Education Work Relationship,Employment Patterns

This report presents data from the 2006 Survey of Doctorate Recipients (SDR). The SDR is a panel survey that collects longitudinal data, biennially, on demographic and general employment characteristics of individuals who have received a doctorate in a science, engineering, or health field from a U.S. academic institution. Sampled individuals are followed from shortly after they receive their doctorate through age 75 years. The SDR sample is augmented each cycle with new samples of the most recent cohorts of science and engineering doctorate recipients, identified by the Survey of Earned Doctorates, an annual census of research doctorates awarded in the United States. The detailed statistical tables presented provide information on the number and median salaries of doctoral scientists and engineers by field of doctorate and occupation; demographic characteristics, such as sex, race/ethnicity, citizenship, and age; and employment-related characteristics, such as sector of employment, employer location, and labor-force rates. Appendix A provides technical information about the survey methodology, coverage, concepts, definitions, sampling errors, and standard error tables; Appendix B provides crosswalks defining field of doctorate and occupation classifications used in survey sampling. The 2006 SDR mail questionnaire is provided in appendix C. The National Science Foundation and the National Institutes of Health sponsored the 2006 survey, which was conducted by the National Opinion Research Center (NORC) at the University of Chicago. It is the 17th in a series of surveys initiated in 1973 in response to the needs of the federal government for demographic and employment information on scientists and engineers trained at the doctoral level. The goal of the 2006 SDR is to provide policymakers and researchers with high-quality data on the career patterns and achievements of the nation's doctoral scientists and engineers. (Contains 1 footnote, 164 tables and 4 notes.)
Doctorate Recipients from U.S. Universities. Summary Report, 2007-08. Survey of Earned Doctorates. Special Report
Author: National Science Foundation, Division of Science Resources Statistics
Date: 2009-12-00
Type: Numerical/Quantitative Data
Subjects: Universities,Doctoral Degrees,Financial Support,Annual Reports,College Graduates,Time to Degree,Trend Analysis,Student Characteristics,Special Needs Students,Employment Potential,Geographic Distribution,Debt (Financial),Graduate Surveys,Educational Attainment

&quot;Doctorate Recipients from U.S. Universities: Summary Report 2007-08&quot; is the 41st in a series of reports on research doctorates awarded by universities in the United States. Data presented in this report were collected by the Survey of Earned Doctorates (SED). The SED, which has been conducted annually since 1957, is a census of all individuals who receive a research doctorate from a U.S. academic institution in a given academic year (July 1 through June 30 of the following year). This report presents data from the 2007 and 2008 SED. The 2008 census covered 48,802 individuals who earned research doctorates in the academic year ending June 2008; the 2007 census covered 48,112 individuals who earned research doctorates in the academic year ending June 2007. The body of this report discusses the results of the 2008 SED, beginning with a summary of key findings. Trends in the numbers and percentages of doctorate recipients through 2008 are reported by the broad fields in which doctorate recipients earn their degrees, and by sex, race/ethnicity, and citizenship. Cross-sectional data on the educational pathways that doctorate recipients take to the research doctorate are reported for the 2008 cohort, as well as data on the average amount of time taken to complete the doctoral degree, doctorate recipients reporting disabilities, sources of financial support during graduate school, and the postgraduation status and plans of doctorate recipients. The data tables follow the main text, beginning with summary data tables for 2008 (tables 1-35), which display the numbers and percentages from which the figures and the numbers cited in the text are drawn. Detailed data tables for 2008 research doctorate recipients (tables 36-46) and for the previous 10-year period (1998-2008, tables 47-50) follow the summary 2008 data tables. Data collected by the 2007 SED are presented as a data supplement without accompanying narrative. These supplementary summary and detailed data tables follow the 2008 tables. Appended are: (1) Technical Notes; and (2) Survey of Earned Doctorates Questionnaires. (Contains 10 footnotes, 20 figures, and 106 tables.)
WebWise 2.0: The Power of Community. WebWise Conference on Libraries and Museums in the Digital World Proceedings (9th, Miami Beach, Florida, March 5-7, 2008)
Author: Green, David
Date: 2009-02-00
Type: Collected Works - Proceedings
Subjects: Internet,Social Networks,Creativity,Information Technology,Sharing Behavior,Computer Mediated Communication,Community Development,Influence of Technology,Organizations (Groups),Archives,Libraries,Cultural Centers,Museums,Web Sites,Electronic Publishing,Interpersonal Relationship,Interaction,Conferences (Gatherings)

Since it was coined by Tim O'Reilly in formulating the first Web 2.0 Conference in 2004, the term "Web 2.0" has definitely caught on as a designation of a second generation of Web design and experience that emphasizes a high degree of interaction with, and among, users. Rather than simply consulting and reading Web pages, the Web 2.0 generation is contributing material and participating in new online communities. As the nature of community is affected by these new technologies, archives, libraries, and museums will need to strategize how they address and harness these new patterns for their own future. The 2008 WebWise Conference, co-hosted by the Institute of Museum and Library Services and The Wolfsonian-Florida International University, addressed these issues with its theme, "WebWise 2.0: The Power of Community." Over the course of two and a half days (March 5-7, 2008), several hundred members of the archives, library, and museum community met in Miami Beach, and online via a conference blog, to consider the implications of these new ways of organizing knowledge and social interaction for their own institutions. This summary report provides another view of the conference: an abbreviated overview of participants' observations and discussions about the new kind of social contract that is being woven between cultural institutions and their communities, catalyzed by the new creativity and communications tools easily available on the Internet. Full text of keynote addresses by the following are provided: Jonathan Fanton; Jose-Marie Griffiths; and Jeffrey Schnapp. Conference speaker biographies, project demonstration information, and a Web 2.0 terminology glossary are also included. (Contains 14 figures and 45 footnotes.)
Perfecting the Formula: Effective Strategies = Educational Success. A Report from the 2009 Governors Education Symposium (Cary, North Carolina, June 14-15, 2009)
Author: National Governors Association, Center for Best Practices
Date: 2009-00-00
Type: Reports - Descriptive
Subjects: Conferences (Gatherings),Educational Quality,Educational Change,Educational Finance,Communities of Practice,Educational Improvement,Educational Policy,Politics of Education,Change Agents,Teacher Effectiveness,Management Information Systems,Academic Standards,School Support,Low Achievement

The 2009 "Governors Education Symposium" was co-hosted by the James B. Hunt, Jr. Institute for Educational Leadership and Policy and the National Governors Association Center for Best Practices on June 14-15, 2009, in Cary, North Carolina. Vermont Governor Jim Douglas and former North Carolina Governor Jim Hunt served as co-chairs. This year's "Symposium" took place in the midst of an economic downturn, resulting in tight budgets across the United States. Recognizing the importance of quality education in the long-term economic success of their states, 21 governors came together at a critical time to discuss bold education reforms with U.S. Secretary of Education Arne Duncan. In addition, many governors brought state teams composed of education commissioners, state legislators, education policy advisors, and other individuals to ensure that they could make the most of the information presented at the "Symposium." The program focused on how governors can maximize the funds available under the "American Recovery and Reinvestment Act" (ARRA) to improve education in their states. Along with the energy and insight brought to the table by each of the participating governors, an array of policy experts and researchers contributed to the lively, in-depth discussions of education policy issues currently facing states. As "Symposium" experts contributed to the discussions with governors, they drew from their own research and policymaking experiences, as well as the body of existing research and current practices both nationally and internationally. This report reflects the discussions that occurred and draws upon briefing materials commissioned for the event. (Contains 18 notes.) [For a briefing prepared for the 2009 "Governors Education Symposium," see ED507633.]
Partitioning: Instructor Mathematics Philosophy Shaping Community College Mathematics
Author: Kantner, M. Joanne
Date: 2009-00-00
Type: Reports - Research
Subjects: Grounded Theory,Constructivism (Learning),Concept Mapping,Mathematics Instruction,Mathematical Concepts,Philosophy,Subcultures,Ethnology,College Environment,College Mathematics,Community Colleges,Teacher Attitudes,College Faculty,Observation,Interviews,Andragogy,Adult Education

The purpose of this study was to explore the ways instructors' subject matter beliefs regarding mathematics shape their courses in a community college environment. Data were collected and analysed from instructors' philosophical definitions of mathematics and observations of teaching episodes using a constructivist grounded theory research design. Findings show instructor beliefs separate mathematics discourses into subcultures of workplace, applied and academic mathematics communities with a perceived need for future mathematics assigned to each partition. In partitioning mathematics courses, instructors need to become aware of the possible shifting of content which can be inclusive and exclusive of needed academic mathematics. The knowledge learned can be incommensurable between these disjoint subcultures and can become a barrier to the future mathematics learning needs of workers in a knowledge-based society. (Contains 2 tables and 2 figures.) Appended are: (1) Interview Protocol One; (2) Concept Map Directions; and (3) Interview Protocol Two. (Contains 2 figures and 2 tables.) [This paper was published in: K. Safford-Ramus (Ed.) "A Declaration of Numeracy: Empowering Adults Through Mathematics Education, Proceedings of the 15th International Conference of Adults Learning Mathematics, Philadelphia, PA" (pp. 85-101), London: Adults Learning Mathematics: An International Research Forum.]