ethanporcaro/eric-fulltext-meta huggingface dataset:
More Government Preschool: An Expensive and Unnecessary Middle-Class Subsidy. Backgrounder. No. 2378
Author: Burke, Lindsey M.
Date: 2010-03-02
Type: Information Analyses
Subjects: Early Childhood Education,Young Children,Federal Aid,Incentives,Political Attitudes,Equal Education,Middle Class,Grants,Preschool Children,Enrollment,Role

Federal spending on early childhood education and care exceeds $25 billion annually. President Obama and other proponents of taxpayer-funded universal preschool want to add $10 billion as an incentive for the states to expand their early childhood education and care programs--with the goal of giving all children access to state-subsidized preschool. Why is this a bad idea? Because the majority of America's young children already attend preschool--and a new federal program that provides financial incentives for states to expand preschool would become an expensive and unnecessary taxpayer subsidy for middle-class and upper-income children. "Free" preschools would also crowd out private preschool programs, limiting choice and options for parents. Heritage Foundation education policy expert Lindsey Burke explains why more government control and spending will not help America's children. (Contains 2 charts and 59 footnotes.)
Profiling Differences in Achievement and Social Goals of Students at Different Levels of Expertise
Author: O'Malley, Patricia Tenowich
Date: 2010-05-00
Type: Reports - Research
Subjects: Learning Theories,College Students,Grade Point Average,Goal Orientation,Learning Processes,Psychology,Expertise,Academic Achievement,Multivariate Analysis,Correlation,Predictor Variables,Student Educational Objectives,Achievement Need,College Instruction,Student Attitudes

The purpose of this study was to integrate domain-learning theory and goal theory to investigate the learning processes, achievement goals, social goals, and achievement of 141 college students. Cluster-analytic procedures were used to categorize participants at different levels of expertise based on their responses on knowledge, interest, and strategic processing measures specific to psychology. Results revealed two distinct levels of expertise: Acclimated and Competent. Three sets of findings enhance our understanding of college learning. First, results indicated students at different levels of expertise adopt different goals. Whereas, the Acclimated group adopted performance-avoidance goals, the Competent group adopted mastery, performance-approach, and social concern goals, indicating students at different levels of expertise have different reasons for achieving. Second, the results provide support for multiple goal theory: (a) interest, strategic processing, and psychology GPA were each positively correlated with mastery and performance-approach goals; and (b) mastery and performance-approach goals were each unique predictors of psychology GPA. Third, social goals were positively related to some academic outcomes and negatively related to others. Findings suggest that college students' goals relate to the development of expertise within a domain. Educators need to consider students' knowledge, interest, strategy use, and goal orientations when developing instructional environments to improve student learning. (Contains 1 figure and 2 tables.)
Urban Principal Leadership Skill Proficiency and Student Achievement
Author: Winn, Pam
Date: 2009-04-00
Type: Reports - Evaluative
Subjects: Urban Schools,Academic Achievement,Educational Administration,Accountability,Instructional Leadership,Principals,Leadership Effectiveness,Leadership Qualities,Administrator Evaluation,Standards,Educational Policy,State Programs,Self Evaluation (Individuals),Evaluators,Evaluation Methods,Correlation,School Effectiveness,School Demography,School Statistics,Institutional Characteristics

Because of the importance of developing highly skilled urban school leaders, statewide assessments of 248 urban Texas public school administrators were analyzed to determine principal confidence levels in leadership skill domains identified by the National Policy Board of Educational Administration (NPBEA). Important findings indicate differences exist between urban principal skill sets in relation to campus student academic achievement as measured by state accountability ratings. Leadership skills of urban principals from schools with the state's highest student academic ratings differed from principals at lower rated urban schools. Three appendixes are included: (1) Principal Assessment of Student Success (PASS); (2) National Policy Board of Educational Administration (NPBEA): Knowledge and Skill Domains; and (3) Texas Education Agency: School Accountability Rating. (Contains 6 tables.)
Rural Principal Leadership Skill Proficiency and Student Achievement
Author: Winn, Pam
Date: 2009-04-00
Type: Reports - Evaluative
Subjects: Rural Schools,Academic Achievement,Educational Administration,Accountability,Instructional Leadership,Principals,Leadership Effectiveness,Leadership Qualities,Administrator Evaluation,Standards,Educational Policy,State Programs,Self Evaluation (Individuals),Evaluators,Evaluation Methods,Correlation,School Effectiveness,School Demography,School Statistics,Institutional Characteristics

Because of the importance of developing highly skilled rural school leaders, statewide assessments of 259 rural Texas public school administrators were analyzed to determine principal confidence levels in leadership skill domains identified by the National Policy Board of Educational Administration (NPBEA). Important findings indicate differences exist between rural principal skill sets in relation to campus student academic achievement as measured by state accountability ratings. Leadership skills of rural principals from schools with the state's highest student academic ratings differed from principals at lower rated rural schools. Three appendixes are included: (1) Principal Assessment of Student Success (PASS); (2) National Policy Board of Educational Administration (NPBEA) Knowledge and Skill Domains; and (3) Texas Education Agency: School Accountability Rating. (Contains 6 tables.)
Active-Passive-Intuitive Learning Theory: A Unified Theory of Learning and Development
Author: Sigette, Tyson
Date: 2009-12-18
Type: Opinion Papers
Subjects: Learning Theories,Multiple Intelligences,Educational Psychology,Psychologists,Teaching Methods,Individual Development,Theory Practice Relationship,Influence of Technology,Intuition,Intentional Learning,Learning Processes,Computer Uses in Education,Educational Technology,Mentors,Classroom Environment,Learning Modalities,Cognitive Style,Technology Integration

This paper addresses many theories of learning and human development which are very similar with regards as to how they suggest learning occurs. The differences in most of the theories exist in how they treat the development of the learner compared to methods of teaching. Most of the major learning theories taught to educators today are based on decades of research; thus, they are decades old. The time has come to unify many of the theories of learning and development into one that takes into account a modern approach utilizing technology and its effect on learning.Active-Passive-Intuitive (API) Theory takes into account several ideas that the great educational psychologists of the twentieth century neglected. Piaget, Erikson, Vygotsky and Gardner have their ideas modernized and combined to include the technological advances of the late twentieth century. API Theory defines an effective modern classroom. It also largely incorporates the ideas of multiple intelligences as differing active processes.
A Comparison of Urban, Suburban, and Rural Principal Leadership Skills by Campus Student Achievement Level
Author: Erwin, Susan
Date: 2010-00-00
Type: Reports - Evaluative
Subjects: Urban Schools,Suburban Schools,Rural Schools,Comparative Analysis,Academic Achievement,Educational Administration,Accountability,Instructional Leadership,Principals,Leadership Effectiveness,Leadership Qualities,Administrator Evaluation,Standards,Educational Policy,State Programs,Self Evaluation (Individuals),Evaluators,Evaluation Methods,Correlation,School Effectiveness,Rural Urban Differences,School Demography,School Statistics,Institutional Characteristics

Because of the importance of developing highly skilled school leaders, statewide assessments of 784 Texas public school administrators were compared to determine how leadership skills varied by type of campus (urban, suburban and rural) and by campus student achievement ratings. Important findings indicate differences exist by campus type and by campus student academic achievement as measured by state accountability ratings. In particular, leadership skills of urban, suburban, and rural principals at campuses with the state's highest student academic achievement ratings differ from skills of principal at schools with lower student academic achievement ratings. Five appendixes are included: (1) National Policy Board of Educational Administration (NPBEA): Knowledge and Skill Domains; (2) Sample; (3) Urban Principal NPBEA Skills by Texas Accountability Ratings (N= 244 teams); (4) Suburban Principal NPBEA Skills by Texas Accountability Ratings (N= 264 teams); and (5) Rural Principal NPBEA Skills by Texas Accountability Ratings (N= 259 teams). (Contains 1 table.)
20 Years Later: Professional Military Education. Testimony before the Sub-Committee on Oversight and Investigations, Armed Services Committee, United States House of Representatives
Author: Carafano, James
Date: 2009-05-20
Type: Opinion Papers
Subjects: Graduate Study,Military Schools,War,Armed Forces,Military Training,Professional Development,Terrorism

"The Pentagon is currently undertaking a congressionally mandated Quadrennial Defense Review (QDR) of strategy, force structure, missions, and resources. One issue that should be on the table is defining professional military education requirements. The current system is inadequate. The Department of Defense (DOD) should restructure it to emphasize a broad range of graduate education opportunities early in an officer's career." The author wrote that in 2005. The QDR did not offer adequate clear strategic guidance for professional military development. Likewise, the focus areas for the current QDR do not appear to focus on this issue either. As a result, the services and the Defense Department continue to adjust to the realities of the post-Cold War world in an ad hoc manner. In this paper, the author offers his recommendations to improve the nation's professional military development.
The Education Innovator. Volume IX, No. 3
Author: Herbert, Doug, Ed.
Date: 2010-04-29
Type: Collected Works - Serial
Subjects: Educational Innovation,Charter Schools,Public Schools,Money Management,Federal Legislation,Public Agencies,United States History,Art Education,Academic Achievement,Educational Improvement,Technology Uses in Education,Teacher Effectiveness,Instructional Leadership,Grants,Television,Scholarships,Science Education,Technology Education,Engineering Education,Mathematics Education

The purpose of the U.S. Department of Education's online newsletter &quot;The Education Innovator&quot; is to promote innovative practices in education; to offer features on promising programs and practices; to provide information on innovative research, schools, policies, and trends; and to keep readers informed of key Department priorities and activities. This issue includes a feature article on the critical role that authorizers play in ensuring the success of new charter schools. Regular sections include: (1) What's New?; and (2) Innovations in the News. [For &quot;The Education Innovator. Volume IX, No. 2,&quot; see ED509183.]
Does Spending More on Education Improve Academic Achievement? Backgrounder. No. 2179
Author: Lips, Dan
Date: 2008-09-08
Type: Numerical/Quantitative Data
Subjects: Expenditure per Student,Elementary Secondary Education,Academic Achievement,Educational Change,Educational Opportunities,Public Education,Educational Improvement,Public Schools,Economic Climate,Outcomes of Education,Resource Allocation,Budgeting,Retrenchment

Debates about how to improve public education in America often focus on whether government should spend more on education. Federal and state policymakers proposing new education programs often base their arguments on the need to provide more resources to schools to improve opportunities for students. Many Americans seem to share this view. While this view may be commonly held, policymakers and citizens should question whether historical evidence and academic research actually support it. This paper addresses two important questions: (1) How much does the United States spend on public education?; (2) What does the evidence show about the relationship between public education spending and students' academic achievement? The answers to these questions should inform federal and state policy debates about how best to improve education. Twenty-nine states and the District of Columbia face budget shortfalls totaling approximately $48 billion for fiscal year 2009. Even more states could face shortfalls in the near future. At the federal level, long-term budgets face a challenging fiscal climate. Projected growth of entitlement programs is expected to place an ever-increasing burden on the federal budget, limiting the resources available for other purposes, including education. Simply increasing government spending on education may no longer be a viable option for federal and state policymakers. Furthermore, as this paper demonstrates, simply increasing education spending does not appear to improve American students' academic achievement. To improve learning opportunities for American children, policymakers should refocus on allocating resources more efficiently and effectively. Appendices include: (1) Historical Per-Pupil Expenditures on K-12 Public Education, by State; and (2) 4th, 8th, and 12th Grade NAEP Math and Reading Scores by Race. (Contains 24 footnotes.)
A Smarter Path to a &quot;Race to the Top&quot; in Education Reform. WebMemo. No. 2779
Author: Lips, Dan
Date: 2010-01-26
Type: Reports - Evaluative
Subjects: Elementary Secondary Education,Federal Legislation,Federal Regulation,Federal Programs,Educational Change,Guidelines,Grants,School Districts,Academic Achievement,Governance,Incentives,Compliance (Legal),Accountability,Educational Improvement,Federal Government,Standards,Public Education

The Obama Administration has signaled that it will include a $1.35 billion expansion of the &quot;Race to the Top&quot; (RTTT) fund in its FY 2011 budget. This is in addition to the $4.35 billion for RTTT included in last year's stimulus bill. Under the Department of Education's (DOE) guidelines for RTTT, states must meet certain requirements to be eligible for a share of these competitive grants. RTTT is based on the theory that incentives and guidelines provided by the DOE can spur effective education reforms by state governments and school districts. Past experience with No Child Left Behind (NCLB) shows that strengthening federal control may result in a number of unintended consequences. Instead of expanding federal power through the RTTT fund, Congress and the Administration should implement structural reforms of current Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) programs to enable and encourage effective bottom-up reforms. This can be accomplished in the following ways: (1) Granting states real flexibility and autonomy over federal programs and funds; (2) Requiring transparency and oversight about state academic performance and governance; and (3) Rewarding academic success rather than legislative compliance if federal incentives are offered. (Contains 10 footnotes.)
Ten Reasons Why the &quot;Economic Stimulus&quot; Should Not Include Education Spending. Backgrounder. No. 2233
Author: Lips, Dan
Date: 2009-01-26
Type: Reports - Evaluative
Subjects: Economic Progress,Elementary Secondary Education,Early Childhood Education,Educational Finance,Federal Programs,Educational Change,Public Education,Postsecondary Education,Federal Legislation,Federal Aid,Budgeting,Retrenchment,Economic Climate,Financial Exigency,Financial Problems,Economic Factors,Science Education,Technology Education,Engineering Education,Mathematics Education

House Democrats recently unveiled draft legislation for the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009. Widely touted as an economic stimulus package, the $825 billion draft legislation included as much as $142 billion for education. This includes the creation of a $79 billion State Fiscal Stabilization Fund to assist state governments in providing public education and other services. The act also includes significant spending increases for current and proposed federal programs for K-12, postsecondary, and early childhood education. This approach is bad economic policy and bad education policy. An unprecedented federal spending increase for education will not improve economic growth--and past experience strongly suggests that this plan will not improve American educational performance. Instead of a massive federal spending increase, Congress should embrace fiscally responsible solutions to help states meet fiscal challenges and improve educational services. This paper discusses the top ten reasons why this spending plan is the wrong approach. (Contains 22 footnotes.)
Key Questions for Arne Duncan, Nominee for Secretary for U.S. Department of Education. WebMemo. No. 2200
Author: Lips, Dan
Date: 2009-01-09
Type: Opinion Papers
Subjects: Public Schools,Elementary Secondary Education,Early Childhood Education,Federal Legislation,Educational Quality,Federal Government,Public Education,Educational Change,Public Agencies,Education,Public Officials,Educational Improvement,Academic Achievement,Educational Opportunities

The U.S. Senate will soon render its advice and consent to the nomination of Chicago Public Schools Chief Arne Duncan to be secretary of education. The word &quot;education&quot; is not mentioned in the Constitution, and the federal government has historically played a limited role in funding and regulating public education across the country. The federal government currently provides only 9 percent of the funding for K-12 public education in America. But federal spending is at an all-time high. The federal government currently spends $71 billion annually on K-12 education programs. Through programs like No Child Left Behind, which has seen funding increases of more than 40 percent during the Bush Administration, the federal government now exerts greater authority over public schools across the nation. Unfortunately, more than 40 years of increasing federal involvement in education has yielded little progress in improved student learning. History has shown the limits of what the federal government can and should do to improve education. The new Administration has a historic opportunity to transform the federal role in education and, in the process, support reform at the state and local level to ensure that all children have an opportunity to receive a quality education. To evaluate whether Secretary-designate Duncan will support this transformation, Senators should keep the following questions in mind as they consider his confirmation: (1) The Appropriate Federal Response to State Budget Challenges; (2) Reforming, Not Expanding, the Federal Role in Education; (3) Cutting Waste from the Department of Education's Budget; (4) Reforming  Federal Early Childhood Education Programs; and (5) Supporting Parental Choice in Education. (Contains 10 footnotes.)
Fiscal Analysis of the Report of the Select Panel on Revisioning Education in Maine
Author: Silvernail, David L.
Date: 2006-08-00
Type: Reports - Evaluative
Subjects: Educational Finance,Cost Effectiveness,Audits (Verification),State Programs,Planning Commissions,Fiscal Capacity,Change Strategies,Educational Change,Educational Planning,Strategic Planning,Research Reports,Educational Policy,Educational Improvement,Improvement Programs

In late 2005 the Select Panel on Revisioning Education in Maine issued their draft report describing a series of recommendations for the improvement of student learning in Maine. The Panel, convened by the Maine State Board of Education, and pursuant to Tile 20-A statutory requirements, developed their recommendations through six months of data collection and analysis, discussions and deliberations, culminating in a draft report for further discussions and debate by the Maine citizenry. In summer 2006 the Select Panel requested the Center for Education Policy, Applied Research and Evaluation (CEPARE) at the University of Southern Maine to conduct a cost analysis of the Panel's recommendations. This report describes the findings from the cost analysis.
21st Century Teaching and Learning: An Assessment of Student Website Evaluation Skills
Author: Pinkham, Caroline
Date: 2008-12-00
Type: Reports - Evaluative
Subjects: Scoring Rubrics,Program Effectiveness,Science Teachers,Grade 8,Internet,Web Sites,Benchmarking,Grade 7,Laptop Computers,Pretests Posttests,Media Literacy,Information Literacy,Evaluation Criteria,Curriculum Implementation,Instructional Effectiveness,Evaluation Methods,College School Cooperation

Over the past 20 years, the amount of information available to students via the Internet has increased dramatically. Access for students to technological resources used to locate information on the Internet has likewise increased. As a result, teachers are now being asked to teach students important 21st Century Skills, including the ability to effectively evaluate website resources. During fall 2007, administrators and teachers from Sanford Junior High School collaborated on a research project with staff from the Center for Education Policy, Applied Research, and Evaluation at the University of Southern Maine aimed at enhancing students' ability to effectively evaluate websites. Benchmarks for knowledge were created by project staff and were distributed to all science teachers. Those teachers then used the benchmarks to create their own content and methods for teaching the material. This project focused on instruction of students in 7th and 8th grade science classes because all of those students had access to their own laptop computer. Pre- and post-assessments were administered to all students participating in the project. Results revealed that students made improvements in their ability to evaluate website resources. Six appendices are included: (1) Project timeline and tasks; (2) Supplemental websites; (3) Description of websites; (4) Pre- and post-assessment instrument; (5) Assessment scoring rubric; and (6) Additional results analysis. (Contains 1 table.)