ethanporcaro/eric-fulltext-meta huggingface dataset:
What's It Worth? The Economic Value of College Majors
Author: Carnevale, Anthony P.
Date: 2011-00-00
Type: Numerical/Quantitative Data
Subjects: Majors (Students),College Graduates,Bachelors Degrees,Educational Attainment,Outcomes of Education,Undergraduate Study,Career Choice,Gender Differences,Racial Differences,Ethnicity,Occupational Aspiration,Wages,Education Work Relationship,Occupations,Employment Patterns

Over the years, there has been a persistent lack of available information about the economic consequences of choosing one academic major over another. As a result, students have had little financial data on hand to help them choose between majors. No longer. This report finds that different majors have different economic value. While going to college is undoubtedly a wise decision, what students take while they're there matters a lot, too. On average, Bachelor's degree holders earn 84 percent more than those with a high school diploma. However, returns to majors run a wide gamut. At the extreme, the highest earning major earns 314 percent more at the median than the lowest-earning major at the median. Among other things, the authors detail: (1) Median earnings and earnings variation among typical workers (at the 25th and 75th percentiles) for all (not only recent graduates) full-time, full-year workers with a terminal Bachelor's degree; (2) These same earnings information by gender and race/ethnicity; (3) The likelihood that a person with a specific major will obtain a graduate degree and the subsequent earnings return that a graduate degree confers; (4) The pathways between education and work: which occupations and industries employ the most workers with various majors; and (5) Data on labor market attachment (employment and work status) by specific undergraduate major. In the summary of findings, the authors give an overview that compares "all" detailed majors by earnings, gender and racial/ethnic composition, labor force characteristics, and the like. The second section aggregates the 171 majors into 15 major groups. The second section compares earnings and other outcomes across broad major groups. The remaining sections deal in detail with each of the 15 major groups. They compare the majors within these groups, providing information on, for instance, the differences in earnings between a General Business major and an Accounting major. (Contains 42 tables.) [For the companion report, "Selected Findings from What's It Worth? The Economic Value of College Majors," see ED524307.]
Selected Findings from What's It Worth? The Economic Value of College Majors
Author: Carnevale, Anthony P.
Date: 2011-00-00
Type: Numerical/Quantitative Data
Subjects: Majors (Students),College Graduates,Bachelors Degrees,Educational Attainment,Outcomes of Education,Undergraduate Study,Career Choice,Gender Differences,Racial Differences,Ethnicity,Occupational Aspiration,Wages,Education Work Relationship

These Selected Findings are part of a larger report: "What's It Worth?: The Economic Value of College Majors." In the full report, readers can find detailed information about earnings, broken down by 171 different undergraduate majors and a variety of demographic factors. The study also analyzes the likelihood that students in specific majors going on to graduate school, and which occupations and industries they can expect to work in. In these Selected Findings, the authors have aggregated the 171 majors into 15 large groups and provided relevant data on earnings, graduate degree attainment, and demographic characteristics. This data covers not just recent graduates, but all workers with Bachelor's degrees in the U.S. economy. Their findings make it clear that while getting a degree matters, there is significant variation depending on which major students pick. (Contains 1 footnote.) [For the full report, "What's It Worth? The Economic Value of College Majors," see ED524305.]
Advice from the Field: Perspectives of State Directors of Special Education Regarding Post-School Outcomes Data and Indicator 14
Author: Reder, Nancy
Date: 2007-12-00
Type: Reports - Descriptive
Subjects: Focus Groups,Disabilities,Special Education,Educational Indicators,Outcomes of Education,State Officials,Administrator Attitudes,Data Collection,Educational Experience,Communities of Practice,Group Discussion,Accessibility (for Disabled)

The National Post School Outcomes Center (NPSO), in conjunction with the National Association of State Directors of Special Education (NASDSE), conducted a focus group with several state directors of special education to (a) discuss the collection of their post-school outcomes data and (b) share their experiences and suggestions with other state directors, especially those who are new to their positions. NPSO felt that it would be helpful for more experienced state directors, particularly in those states that had begun collecting post-school outcomes data long before the SPP/Annual Performance Reports (APR) process began, to share their perspectives and suggestions for how they organized and collected their data. Indicator 14 is one of the most challenging indicators to collect data for as most states were not collecting and analyzing this data prior to the requirements of the SPP/APR. This document is an extension of NPSO's ongoing work to facilitate the sharing of experiences and knowledge among states. A list of focus group participants is appended. (Contains 4 footnotes.)
Methods for Conducting Post-School Outcomes Follow-Up Studies: A Review of the Literature
Author: Alverson, Charlotte Y.
Date: 2006-11-00
Type: Information Analyses
Subjects: Disabilities,Literature Reviews,Followup Studies,Outcomes of Education,Disadvantaged Youth,Data Collection,Research Methodology,Evaluation Methods,Sampling,Predictor Variables,Evaluation Research,Information Sources,Accessibility (for Disabled)

The purpose of this brief is to summarize the methodologies and outcome measures used in Post-School Outcomes follow-up and follow-along studies of adolescents with disabilities. As a requisite in the Request for Proposal for funding of the National Post-School Outcomes Center (NPSO), knowledge development activities were to include: "Conducting a literature review on the measures and methodologies that are used to collect data on secondary, transition, and postsecondary school outcomes for youth with disabilities." This literature review was completed with the purpose of providing NPSO and State Education Agencies (SEAs) with information for how to conduct follow-up studies in the most efficient and scientific exacting manner. The brief contains an overview of the (a) methods used to conduct the literature review, (b) summary of findings for methodologies of collecting post-school outcomes data, and (c) a bibliography of the studies summarized in this review. NPSO Literature Review Bibliography is included. (Contains 2 figures.)
Help Wanted: Projections of Jobs and Education Requirements through 2018
Author: Carnevale, Anthony P.
Date: 2010-06-00
Type: Numerical/Quantitative Data
Subjects: Employment Projections,Job Development,Employment Opportunities,Employment Qualifications,Education Work Relationship,Postsecondary Education,Economic Climate,Educational Demand,Influence of Technology,Income,College Graduates,Social Class,Allied Health Occupations,School Personnel,Blue Collar Occupations,Managerial Occupations,Professional Occupations,Public Service Occupations,Sales Occupations,Service Occupations,Technical Occupations,Food Service,Science Careers,Engineering,Mathematics,Natural Resources,Construction Industry,Manufacturing Industry

The recession that began in December of 2007 is already 30 months old, but the U.S. economy will not recover its pre-recession employment levels for at least another two years. From there, it will take an additional three years to make up for lost growth and create a job market strong enough to employ both the casualties of the recession and the millions of new workers who will stream into the workforce from schools across the country. In this report, the authors look at the current state of the economy, assess the prospects for job creation through 2018, and detail what employers will be looking for once hiring resumes. Among other things, they find that: (1) There is a growing mismatch between the jobs that will be created over the next decade and the education and training of our adult workers. More than 60 million of our prime-age workforce who are 25-54 years old are still working in jobs that require high school or less; (2) The postsecondary education and training system will fall short by 3 million or more postsecondary degrees. Economic demand will not be met, denying numerous Americans access to middle-class career pathways; (3) Hundreds of thousands of Manufacturing and Natural Resources jobs in farming, fishing, and forestry have been destroyed in the recession and will not be coming back; (4) The U.S. economy will create 46.8 million job openings by 2018, including 13.8 newly created jobs and 33 million &quot;replacement&quot; positions produced when workers retire; (5) Employers filling these jobs, overwhelmingly, will require college degrees or other postsecondary preparation of 63 percent of their new hires; (6) Postsecondary education and training is quickly becoming the only viable path to the American middle class; and (7) Education and training connects directly to occupations and less directly to industries, which can complicate economic development efforts. (Contains 18 tables, 63 figures and 29 footnotes.) [For &quot;Help Wanted: Projections of Jobs and Education Requirements through 2018. Executive Summary,&quot; see ED524311.]
Help Wanted: Projections of Jobs and Education Requirements through 2018. Executive Summary
Author: Carnevale, Anthony P.
Date: 2010-06-00
Type: Numerical/Quantitative Data
Subjects: Employment Projections,Job Development,Employment Opportunities,Employment Qualifications,Education Work Relationship,Postsecondary Education,College Graduates,Social Class,Economic Climate,Educational Demand

America is slowly coming out of the Recession of 2007--only to find itself on a collision course with the future: not enough Americans are completing college. The Georgetown University Center on Education and the Workforce shows that by 2018, the nation will need 22 million new college degrees--but will fall short of that number by at least 3 million postsecondary degrees, Associate's or better. In addition, the nation will need at least 4.7 million new workers with postsecondary certificates. At a time when every job is precious, this shortfall will mean lost economic opportunity for millions of American workers. This shortage is the latest indication of how crucial postsecondary education and training has become to the American economy. The shortfall--which amounts to a deficit of 300,000 college graduates every year between 2008 and 2018--results from burgeoning demand by employers for workers with high levels of education and training. The authors' calculations show that America's colleges and universities would need to increase the number of degrees they confer by 10 percent annually, a tall order. Educational distribution of total jobs (by occupation) in 2018 is appended. (Contains 5 figures and 8 endnotes.) [For the full report, "Help Wanted: Projections of Jobs and Education Requirements through 2018," see ED524310.]
Writing, Technology and Teens
Author: Lenhart, Amanda
Date: 2008-04-24
Type: Reports - Research
Subjects: Focus Groups,Computer Use,Telephone Surveys,National Surveys,Educational Technology,Social Networks,Internet,Computer Mediated Communication,Influence of Technology,Handheld Devices,Student Attitudes,Parent Attitudes,Adolescents,Writing Instruction,Writing Skills,Writing (Composition),Science and Society,Access to Computers

Teenagers' lives are filled with writing. All teens write for school, and 93% of teens say they write for their own pleasure. Most notably, the vast majority of teens have eagerly embraced written communication with their peers as they share messages on their social network pages, in emails and instant messages online, and through fast-paced thumb choreography on their cell phones. This raises a major question: What, if anything, connects the formal writing teens do and the informal e-communication they exchange on digital screens? A considerable number of educators and children's advocates worry that James Billington, the Librarian of Congress, was right when he recently suggested that young Americans' electronic communication might be damaging "the basic unit of human thought--the sentence." They are concerned that the quality of writing by young Americans is being degraded by their electronic communication, with its carefree spelling, lax punctuation and grammar, and its acronym shortcuts. Others wonder if this return to text-driven communication is instead inspiring new appreciation for writing among teens. While the debate about the relationship between e-communication and formal writing is on-going, few have systematically talked to teens to see what they have to say about the state of writing in their lives. Responding to this information gap, the Pew Internet & American Life Project and National Commission on Writing conducted a national telephone survey and focus groups to see what teens and their parents say about the role and impact of technological writing on both in-school and out-of-school writing. This report looks at teens' basic definition of writing, explores the various kinds of writing they do, seeks their assessment about what impact e-communication has on their writing, and probes for their guidance about how writing instruction might be improved. (Contains 2 tables and 24 footnotes.)
National CrossTalk. Volume 18, Number 1
Author: National Center for Public Policy and Higher Education
Date: 2010-05-00
Type: Collected Works - Serial
Subjects: Undergraduate Study,State Colleges,Graduation Rate,Foundation Programs,Educational Quality,Educational Change,Brain Drain,Public Policy,College Graduates,Community Colleges,Educational Technology,Developmental Programs,Mathematics Instruction,Reading Instruction,Federal Aid,Educational Innovation,Teacher Education,Educational Finance,Curriculum Development,Access to Education,Public Colleges,Computer Uses in Education,Internet

&quot;National CrossTalk&quot; is a publication of the National Center for Public Policy and Higher Education. The National Center promotes public policies that enhance opportunities for quality education and training beyond high school. The primary purpose of &quot;National CrossTalk&quot; is to stimulate informed discussion and debate of higher education issues. This issue of &quot;National CrossTalk&quot; includes the following articles: (1) Ohio's Brain Drain: Reform of Public Higher Education Is Intended to Change Perceptions and Retain Graduates (Jon Marcus); (2) Redesigning the Basics: Tennessee's Community Colleges Use Technology to Change Their Approach to Developmental Reading and Math (Kay Mills); (3) Investing the Stimulus: Metropolitan State College of Denver Uses Federal Funding to Reposition Itself for the Future (Kathy Witkowsky); and (4) New Teacher Education: Woodrow Wilson National Fellowship Foundation Program Brings Change, One State at a Time (Susan C. Thomson). Regular sections include: (1) Editorial--Innovation and Public Trust: The Public Perceives Colleges and Universities to Be Unresponsive to Their Needs (Patrick M. Callan); (2) News from the Center; and (3) Other Voices, which includes: (a) Changing the Subject: Costs, Graduation Rates and the Importance of Rethinking the Undergraduate Curriculum (Robert Zemsky and Joni Finney); (b) Access and Opportunity: This Is a Critical Moment for Public Higher Education, One That Requires New Approaches (Matthew Goldstein); and (c) E-Barbarians at the Gates? Can an Internet-Based Education Compare Academically to a Campus Experience? (David L. Kirp).
National CrossTalk. Volume 17, Number 2
Author: Trombley, William, Ed.
Date: 2009-12-00
Type: Collected Works - Serial
Subjects: Higher Education,Educational Quality,Public Policy,Tuition,Educational Finance,Public Colleges,Economic Factors,Community Colleges,State Aid,Enrollment Trends,Budgets,Budgeting,Financial Support,Paying for College,College Students,Barriers,Student Financial Aid

&quot;National CrossTalk&quot; is a publication of the National Center for Public Policy and Higher Education. The National Center promotes public policies that enhance opportunities for quality education and training beyond high school. The primary purpose of &quot;National CrossTalk&quot; is to stimulate informed discussion and debate of higher education issues. This issue of &quot;National CrossTalk&quot; includes the following articles: (1) Overcrowded and Underfunded: New York's Public University Systems, and Beleaguered Students, Are an Extreme Example of National Trends (Jon Marcus); (2) Turning Students Away: The Plight of Florida's Community Colleges Suggests the Depth of the State's Financial Crisis (Robert A. Jones); (3) Diminishing State Support: Pennsylvania Reduces State Aid Amid Relentless Tuition Hikes and Record Enrollments (Kay Mills); (4) Behind the Eight Ball: Illinois Resorts to Budgetary Sleight-of-Hand and One-Time Fixes to Maintain Higher Education Funding (Susan C. Thomson); (5) Tuition Policy Debate: Washington's Public Higher Education Costs Continue to Shift from the State to the Student (Kathy Witkowsky); and (6) Calamity in California: State's Battered Budget Leads to Huge Fee Increases and Less Access to Public Universities (Jon Marcus). Regular sections include: (1) Editorial--Core Principles: In This Recession, the Highest Priority Should Be Placed on College Access and Affordability; (2) News from the Center; and (3) Other Voices, includes: (a) A Societal Imperative: Changing the Way We Think about Community Colleges (Pamela Burdman); and (b) Breaking the Affordability Barrier: How Much of the College Access Problem Is Attributable to Lack of Information about Financial Aid? (Bridget Terry Long).
National CrossTalk. Volume 19, Number 1
Author: National Center for Public Policy and Higher Education
Date: 2011-05-00
Type: Collected Works - Serial
Subjects: Higher Education,Educational Quality,Foreign Countries,Public Policy,Activism,Financial Support,Performance,Resource Allocation,Educational Policy,Sustainable Development,Critical Thinking,Economic Factors,Interdisciplinary Approach,Fees,College Students,Student Evaluation,Budgets,Paying for College,Educational Finance,Educational Attainment,Disadvantaged Youth,College Presidents,Administrator Role

&quot;National CrossTalk&quot; is a publication of the National Center for Public Policy and Higher Education. The National Center promotes public policies that enhance opportunities for quality education and training beyond high school. The primary purpose of &quot;National CrossTalk&quot; is to stimulate informed discussion and debate of higher education issues. This issue of &quot;National CrossTalk&quot; contains the following articles: (1) Austerity Measures: Students Protest as a Cash-Strapped Government Lets British Universities Triple Their Fees (Jon Marcus); (2) &quot;Outcome Funding&quot;: Tennessee Experiments with a Performance-Based Approach to College Appropriations (Robert A. Jones); (3) Reversal of Fortune: Ireland's &quot;Celtic Tiger&quot; Economic Miracle Is Followed by an Epic Downturn (Jon Marcus); and (4) Interdisciplinary Curriculum: Newly Established University of Minnesota Rochester Has a Radically Different Approach to Higher Education (Kathy Witkowsky). Regular sections include: (1) News from the Center; and (2) Other Voices, which includes: (a) The West Virginia Experience: Creating a Sustainable Public Agenda for Higher Education (Brian Noland); and (b) &quot;Critical Thinking&quot;: Can Assessments Determine Whether College Students Are Learning What They Need to Know? (William R. Doyle). &quot;Presidential Leadership for Public Purpose,&quot; a special report by the National Center for Public Policy and Higher Education, is also included.
National CrossTalk. Volume 18, Number 2
Author: National Center for Public Policy and Higher Education
Date: 2010-12-00
Type: Collected Works - Serial
Subjects: Higher Education,Middle Class,Management Systems,College Preparation,Public Relations,Educational Quality,Public Policy,Paying for College,Presidents,Educational Policy,Community Colleges,Public Officials,Educational Opportunities

&quot;National CrossTalk&quot; is a publication of the National Center for Public Policy and Higher Education. The National Center promotes public policies that enhance opportunities for quality education and training beyond high school. The primary purpose of &quot;National CrossTalk&quot; is to stimulate informed discussion and debate of higher education issues. This issue of &quot;National CrossTalk&quot; includes the following articles: (1) The Presidential Treatment: The Obama Administration Makes Big Advances, Faces Tough Challenges, in Higher Education Policy (Jon Marcus); The Virginia Plan: State's Community Colleges Confront the Need to Do More with Less (Robert A. Jones); (2) Indiana's &quot;Eighth University&quot; Western Governors University Brings Its &quot;Competency-Based&quot; Approach to the Hoosier State (Kathy Witkowsky); and (3) Allison Barber: WGU Indiana's Chancellor Leads a Public Relations Campaign. Regular sections include: (1) Editorial by Governor James B. Hunt Jr., former Governor of North Carolina and Chair of the National Center Board of Directors, and Patrick M. Callan, President of the National Center; (2) News from the Center; (3) Other Voices, which includes: (a) Not Ready for College: States Must Have a Systemic, Comprehensive Agenda for College Preparation (David Spence); (b) Making the Middle Class: Don't Let the Recession Fool You--Postsecondary Education Is More Valuable Than Ever (Anthony P. Carnevale and Michelle Melton); and (c) Baby Bonds: Government Sponsored Child Savings Accounts Could Help Families to Pay for College (David L. Kirp). &quot;Strengthening College Opportunity and Performance: Federal, State and Institutional Leadership,&quot; a policy report from The Delta Project on Postsecondary Education Costs, Productivity, and Accountability, the National Center for Higher Education Management Systems, and the National Center for Public Policy and Higher Education, is also included.