ethanporcaro/eric-fulltext-meta huggingface dataset:
The Nation's Report Card Mathematics 2011 Trial Urban District Snapshot Report. San Diego Unified School District. Grade 8, Public Schools
Author: National Center for Education Statistics (ED)
Date: 2011-12-00
Type: Numerical/Quantitative Data
Subjects: Achievement Gap,Comparative Analysis,Educational Assessment,Educational Indicators,Elementary School Students,Ethnic Groups,Gender Differences,Grade 8,Low Income Groups,Mathematics,Mathematics Achievement,Mathematics Tests,Middle School Students,National Competency Tests,National Programs,Profiles,Public Schools,Racial Differences,School Districts,Scores,Secondary School Students,Statistics,Statistical Significance,Urban Areas,Urban Schools

This one-page report presents overall results, achievement level percentages and average score results, scores at selected percentiles, average scores for district and large cities, results for student groups (school race, gender, and eligibility for National School Lunch Program) in 2011, and score gaps for student groups. In 2011, the average score of eighth-grade students in San Diego was 278. This was higher than the average score of 274 for public school students in large cities. The average score for students in San Diego in 2011 (278) was not significantly different from their average score in 2009 (280) and was higher than their average score in 2003 (264). In 2011, the score gap between students in San Diego at the 75th percentile and students at the 25th percentile was 54 points. This performance gap was not significantly different from that of 2003 (52 points). The percentage of students in San Diego who performed at or above the NAEP &quot;Proficient&quot; level was 31 percent in 2011. This percentage was not significantly different from that in 2009 (32 percent) and was greater than that in 2003 (18 percent). The percentage of students in San Diego who performed at or above the NAEP &quot;Basic&quot; level was 66 percent in 2011. This percentage was not significantly different from that in 2009 (68 percent) and was greater than that in 2003 (53 percent). [For the main report, &quot;The Nation's Report Card: Mathematics 2011. Trial Urban District Assessment Results at Grades 4 and 8. NCES 2012-452,&quot; see ED527170.]
The Nation's Report Card Mathematics 2011 Trial Urban District Snapshot Report. School District of Philadelphia. Grade 8, Public Schools
Author: National Center for Education Statistics (ED)
Date: 2011-12-00
Type: Numerical/Quantitative Data
Subjects: Achievement Gap,Comparative Analysis,Educational Assessment,Educational Indicators,Elementary School Students,Ethnic Groups,Gender Differences,Grade 8,Low Income Groups,Mathematics,Mathematics Achievement,Mathematics Tests,Middle School Students,National Competency Tests,National Programs,Profiles,Public Schools,Racial Differences,School Districts,Scores,Secondary School Students,Statistics,Statistical Significance,Urban Areas,Urban Schools

This one-page report presents overall results, achievement level percentages and average score results, scores at selected percentiles, average scores for district and large cities, results for student groups (school race, gender, and eligibility for National School Lunch Program) in 2011, and score gaps for student groups. In 2011, the average score of eighth-grade students in Philadelphia was 265. This was lower than the average score of 274 for public school students in large cities. The average score for students in Philadelphia in 2011 (265) was not significantly different from their average score in 2009 (265). In 2011, the score gap between students in Philadelphia at the 75th percentile and students at the 25th percentile was 49 points. This performance gap was not significantly different from that of 2009 (46 points). The percentage of students in Philadelphia who performed at or above the NAEP &quot;Proficient&quot; level was 18 percent in 2011. This percentage was not significantly different from that in 2009 (17 percent). The percentage of students in Philadelphia who performed at or above the NAEP &quot;Basic&quot; level was 52 percent in 2011. This percentage was not significantly different from that in 2009 (52 percent). [For the main report, &quot;The Nation's Report Card: Mathematics 2011. Trial Urban District Assessment Results at Grades 4 and 8. NCES 2012-452,&quot; see ED527170.]
The Nation's Report Card Mathematics 2011 Trial Urban District Snapshot Report. New York City Department of Education. Grade 8, Public Schools
Author: National Center for Education Statistics (ED)
Date: 2011-12-00
Type: Numerical/Quantitative Data
Subjects: Achievement Gap,Comparative Analysis,Educational Assessment,Educational Indicators,Elementary School Students,Ethnic Groups,Gender Differences,Grade 8,Low Income Groups,Mathematics,Mathematics Achievement,Mathematics Tests,Middle School Students,National Competency Tests,National Programs,Profiles,Public Schools,Racial Differences,School Districts,Scores,Secondary School Students,Statistics,Statistical Significance,Urban Areas,Urban Schools

This one-page report presents overall results, achievement level percentages and average score results, scores at selected percentiles, average scores for district and large cities, results for student groups (school race, gender, and eligibility for National School Lunch Program) in 2011, and score gaps for student groups. In 2011, the average score of eighth-grade students in New York City was 272. This was not significantly different from the average score of 274 for public school students in large cities. The average score for students in New York City in 2011 (272) was not significantly different from their average score in 2009 (273) and was higher than their average score in 2003 (266). In 2011, the score gap between students in New York City at the 75th percentile and students at the 25th percentile was 51 points. This performance gap was not significantly different from that of 2003 (52 points). The percentage of students in New York City who performed at or above the NAEP &quot;Proficient&quot; level was 24 percent in 2011. This percentage was not significantly different from that in 2009 (26 percent) and in 2003 (20 percent). The percentage of students in New York City who performed at or above the NAEP &quot;Basic&quot; level was 59 percent in 2011. This percentage was not significantly different from that in 2009 (60 percent) and was greater than that in 2003 (54 percent). [For the main report, &quot;The Nation's Report Card: Mathematics 2011. Trial Urban District Assessment Results at Grades 4 and 8. NCES 2012-452,&quot; see ED527170.]
The Nation's Report Card Mathematics 2011 Trial Urban District Snapshot Report. Milwaukee Public Schools. Grade 8, Public Schools
Author: National Center for Education Statistics (ED)
Date: 2011-12-00
Type: Numerical/Quantitative Data
Subjects: Achievement Gap,Comparative Analysis,Educational Assessment,Educational Indicators,Elementary School Students,Ethnic Groups,Gender Differences,Grade 8,Low Income Groups,Mathematics,Mathematics Achievement,Mathematics Tests,Middle School Students,National Competency Tests,National Programs,Profiles,Public Schools,Racial Differences,School Districts,Scores,Secondary School Students,Statistics,Statistical Significance,Urban Areas,Urban Schools

This one-page report presents overall results, achievement level percentages and average score results, scores at selected percentiles, average scores for district and large cities, results for student groups (school race, gender, and eligibility for National School Lunch Program) in 2011, and score gaps for student groups. In 2011, the average score of eighth-grade students in Milwaukee was 254. This was lower than the average score of 274 for public school students in large cities. The average score for students in Milwaukee in 2011 (254) was not significantly different from their average score in 2009 (251). In 2011, the score gap between students in Milwaukee at the 75th percentile and students at the 25th percentile was 46 points. This performance gap was not significantly different from that of 2009 (42 points). The percentage of students in Milwaukee who performed at or above the NAEP &quot;Proficient&quot; level was 10 percent in 2011. This percentage was not significantly different from that in 2009 (7 percent). The percentage of students in Milwaukee who performed at or above the NAEP &quot;Basic&quot; level was 41 percent in 2011. This percentage was not significantly different from that in 2009 (37 percent). [For the main report, &quot;The Nation's Report Card: Mathematics 2011. Trial Urban District Assessment Results at Grades 4 and 8. NCES 2012-452,&quot; see ED527170.]
The Nation's Report Card Mathematics 2011 Trial Urban District Snapshot Report. Miami-Dade County Public Schools. Grade 8, Public Schools
Author: National Center for Education Statistics (ED)
Date: 2011-12-00
Type: Numerical/Quantitative Data
Subjects: Achievement Gap,Comparative Analysis,Educational Assessment,Educational Indicators,Elementary School Students,Ethnic Groups,Gender Differences,Grade 8,Low Income Groups,Mathematics,Mathematics Achievement,Mathematics Tests,Middle School Students,National Competency Tests,National Programs,Profiles,Public Schools,Racial Differences,School Districts,Scores,Secondary School Students,Statistics,Statistical Significance,Urban Areas,Urban Schools

This one-page report presents overall results, achievement level percentages and average score results, scores at selected percentiles, average scores for district and large cities, results for student groups (school race, gender, and eligibility for National School Lunch Program) in 2011, and score gaps for student groups. In 2011, the average score of eighth-grade students in Miami-Dade was 272. This was not significantly different from the average score of 274 for public school students in large cities. The average score for students in Miami-Dade in 2011 (272) was not significantly different from their average score in 2009 (273). In 2011, the score gap between students in Miami-Dade at the 75th percentile and students at the 25th percentile was 47 points.This performance gap was not significantly different from that of 2009 (46 points). The percentage of students in Miami-Dade who performed at or above the NAEP &quot;Proficient&quot; level was 22 percent in 2011. This percentage was not significantly different from that in 2009 (22 percent). The percentage of students in Miami-Dade who performed at or above the NAEP &quot;Basic&quot; level was 61 percent in 2011. This percentage was not significantly different from that in 2009 (64 percent). [For the main report, &quot;The Nation's Report Card: Mathematics 2011. Trial Urban District Assessment Results at Grades 4 and 8. NCES 2012-452,&quot; see ED527170.]
The Nation's Report Card Mathematics 2011 Trial Urban District Snapshot Report. Los Angeles Unified School District. Grade 8, Public Schools
Author: National Center for Education Statistics (ED)
Date: 2011-12-00
Type: Numerical/Quantitative Data
Subjects: Achievement Gap,Comparative Analysis,Educational Assessment,Educational Indicators,Elementary School Students,Ethnic Groups,Gender Differences,Grade 8,Low Income Groups,Mathematics,Mathematics Achievement,Mathematics Tests,Middle School Students,National Competency Tests,National Programs,Profiles,Public Schools,Racial Differences,School Districts,Scores,Secondary School Students,Statistics,Statistical Significance,Urban Areas,Urban Schools

This one-page report presents overall results, achievement level percentages and average score results, scores at selected percentiles, average scores for district and large cities, results for student groups (school race, gender, and eligibility for National School Lunch Program) in 2011, and score gaps for student groups. In 2011, the average score of eighth-grade students in Los Angeles was 261. This was lower than the average score of 274 for public school students in large cities. The average score for students in Los Angeles in 2011 (261) was not significantly different from their average score in 2009 (258) and was higher than their average score in 2003 (245). In 2011, the score gap between students in Los Angeles at the 75th percentile and students at the 25th percentile was 50 points. This performance gap was not significantly different from that of 2003 (50 points). The percentage of students in Los Angeles who performed at or above the NAEP &quot;Proficient&quot; level was 16 percent in 2011. This percentage was not significantly different from that in 2009 (13 percent) and was greater than that in 2003 (7 percent). The percentage of students in Los Angeles who performed at or above the NAEP &quot;Basic&quot; level was 49 percent in 2011. This percentage was not significantly different from that in 2009 (46 percent) and was greater than that in 2003 (32 percent). [For the main report, &quot;The Nation's Report Card: Mathematics 2011. Trial Urban District Assessment Results at Grades 4 and 8. NCES 2012-452,&quot; see ED527170.]
The Nation's Report Card Mathematics 2011 Trial Urban District Snapshot Report. Jefferson County Public Schools (Louisville, KY). Grade 8, Public Schools
Author: National Center for Education Statistics (ED)
Date: 2011-12-00
Type: Numerical/Quantitative Data
Subjects: Achievement Gap,Comparative Analysis,Educational Assessment,Educational Indicators,Elementary School Students,Ethnic Groups,Gender Differences,Grade 8,Low Income Groups,Mathematics,Mathematics Achievement,Mathematics Tests,Middle School Students,National Competency Tests,National Programs,Profiles,Public Schools,Racial Differences,School Districts,Scores,Secondary School Students,Statistics,Statistical Significance,Urban Areas,Urban Schools

This one-page report presents overall results, achievement level percentages and average score results, scores at selected percentiles, average scores for district and large cities, results for student groups (school race, gender, and eligibility for National School Lunch Program) in 2011, and score gaps for student groups. In 2011, the average score of eighth-grade students in Jefferson County was 274. This was not significantly different from the average score of 274 for public school students in large cities. The average score for students in Jefferson County in 2011 (274) was higher than their average score in 2009 (271). In 2011, the score gap between students in Jefferson County at the 75th percentile and students at the 25th percentile was 50 points. This performance gap was not significantly different from that of 2009 (50 points). The percentage of students in Jefferson County who performed at or above the NAEP &quot;Proficient&quot; level was 25 percent in 2011. This percentage was not significantly different from that in 2009 (22 percent). The percentage of students in Jefferson County who performed at or above the NAEP &quot;Basic&quot; level was 62 percent in 2011. This percentage was not significantly different from that in 2009 (60 percent). [For the main report, &quot;The Nation's Report Card: Mathematics 2011. Trial Urban District Assessment Results at Grades 4 and 8. NCES 2012-452,&quot; see ED527170.]
Compare and Contrast Program Planning Models
Author: Baskas, Richard S.
Date: 2011-11-13
Type: Information Analyses
Subjects: Training,Program Development,Comparative Analysis,Models,Training Methods,Adult Education

This paper will examine the differences and similarities between two program planning models, Tyler and Caffarella, to reveal their strengths and weaknesses. When adults are involved in training sessions, there are various program planning models that can be used, depending on the goal of the training session. Researchers developed these models based on their ideological frameworks and goals. Research was conducted through the Education Resource Information Center (ERIC) and Google Scholar, and eight references were located  A literature review was performed to determine their relevance to the research. Results revealed a significant amount of similarities and differences between two planning models, and how they may be used in future research.
Analyzing How Formalist, Cognitive-Processing, and Literacy Practices Learning Paradigms are Shaping the Implementation of the Common Core State Standards
Author: Beach, Richard
Date: 2011-12-02
Type: Reports - Evaluative
Subjects: Text Structure,Models,State Standards,Educational Change,Literacy,Educational Policy,Policy Analysis,Learning Theories,Program Implementation,Alignment (Education),Low Income Groups,Teaching Methods,Educational Strategies,Expectation,Content Analysis,Research Needs,Reading Instruction,Writing Instruction,English Instruction,College Preparation,Advanced Placement Programs,Educational Assessment

This paper analyzes the influence of three different learning paradigms for learning literacy--formalist, cognitive-processing, and literacy practices--on the implementation of the Common Core State Standards. It argues that the Common Core State Standards are based largely on a formalist paradigm as evident in the emphasis on teaching text structure/genre forms for reading, writing, and speaking/listening. It also notes that much of the analysis of alignment of the Common Core State Standards with state standards (Porter et al., 2011) as well as the development of &quot;learning progressions&quot; is based on cognitivist learning/cognitive stage model paradigms. And, it posits the value of adopting an alternative literacy practice paradigm that focuses on creating authentic contexts for literacy learning. It also cites research on issues about creating false expectations for low-income students in ways that do not serve students' best interests. All of this suggests the need for further research on the implementation of the Common Core State Standards.
Implementing a Successful Bilingual Educational Program in Japan: Support for Minority Languages and the Present Climate of Bilingual Education
Author: Cumming, Brett
Date: 2011-12-01
Type: Reports - Evaluative
Subjects: Foreign Countries,Foreign Students,Bilingual Education,Bilingual Education Programs,Cultural Influences,Bilingualism,Program Implementation,Migrants,Educational Policy,Linguistic Theory,Psycholinguistics,Language Minorities,Language Maintenance,Sociolinguistics,Immersion Programs,Bilingual Students,Language of Instruction,English (Second Language)

Although generally acknowledged as complex and multidimensional, bilingual education, when successful, plays an important role in maintaining and developing bilingualism, resulting in numerous benefits to those who undertake it. This essay will discuss the necessary components and principles of what is required to make a successful bilingual program by defining what bilingualism is as well as critically analysing the benefits and drawbacks of such a program, with pertinent examples relevant to the overall present education system in Japan and what support is offered to foreign students and migrants to assist them in maintaining their first language. This paper will also address the very need for effective bilingual programs and what a bilingual individual is defined as. A number of major theories such as L1-L2 interdependency, critical period hypothesis, and additive and subtractive bilingualism will be explored to substantiate weak and strong forms of bilingual education.  Other relevant social, psycholinguistic and cultural factors will also be discussed as will their implications and how they relate to ensuring bilingual programs succeed for minority and majority language students in their aims and objectives.
Microbial Quality, Nutritional Knowledge and Food Hygienic Practices among Street Food Vendors
Author: Gowri, B.
Date: 2011-12-11
Type: Reports - Research
Subjects: Food Service,Vendors,Nutrition,Knowledge Level,Hygiene,Sanitation,Microbiology,Foreign Countries

Since all categories of people from different socio-economic sectors purchase street foods; the street foods should not only be cheap but also hygienic and rich in nutrition. The investigators with their nutrition knowledge had an urge to study the nutrition knowledge of the vendors, whether the foods prepared are nutritionally sound or not?, are they preparing and serving food hygienically?, etc. Disease could be easily spread through food, water and the place of sales, how it is packed. etc.. and these questions made the investigators to take up this study. Hence, the investigators were interested to know the answers for the above said questions. To study the nutritional knowledge and food hygienic practices prevailing among the street food vendors, 200 vendors in Dindigul district, Tamil Nadu, India were selected by using purposely random sampling techniques. The investigators met the vendors and collected the details. Microbial analysis, food adulteration test were done for food samples. The street food vendors were poor in hygienic practices in food preparation, handling, serving and storing. They were also poor in their nutritional knowledge. This study implies the need for the following measures to be adopted for hygienic food preparation by the street vendors: license must be obtained by the street food vendors and the foods should be frequently inspected by the agencies; nutritionists should take charge of disseminating awareness on hygienic practices, nutrition and health so that it will help in the preparation of nutritious foods. (Contains 11 tables and 14 online resources.)
Completing a Graduate Degree: A Case of a Female Student
Author: Regmi, Kapil Dev
Date: 2011-11-22
Type: Reports - Research
Subjects: Graduate Students,Females,Gender Differences,Barriers,Student Financial Aid,Financial Problems,Family Life,College Faculty,Faculty Advisers,Teacher Student Relationship,Student Attitudes,Student Experience,Interviews,Foreign Countries

This paper was written as an assignment for one of my courses while pursuing a graduate degree in the Department of Education Studies at the University of British Columbia (UBC), Canada. I have made an attempt to explore perceptions and experiences of a female graduate student on four different aspects of her family and academic life. The four aspects that emerged as the themes while analysing interview transcript are: personal and family life; gender differences; funding and scholarship; and the role of supervisor. The paper also presents how the interview was conducted, how the data were generated and how analysis was done. At the end of the paper I have presented my reflections. This short and single-participant semi-structured interview research concludes with three basic findings as major impeding factors for a successful completion of a graduate programme, especially by a female student. The three findings are: female graduate students still face many challenges--as systemic barriers--that are more severe than their male counterparts face; financial problem is still a strong impeding factor that associate with all other major and minor barriers for the completion of a graduate degree; and finally, the relationship between a graduate student and her/his supervisor and the latter's expertise in the area of student's research interest is one of the significant factors for the successful completion of a graduate programme.