ethanporcaro/eric-fulltext-meta huggingface dataset:
Nursing Minimum Data Set for School Nursing Practice. Position Statement. Revised
Author: Denehy, Janice
Date: 2012-01-00
Type: Reports - Descriptive
Subjects: Data,Data Collection,Information Technology,Case Records,Student Records,School Health Services,Nursing,School Nurses,Position Papers,Professional Associations,Staff Role,Educational Policy,School Policy,Guidelines,National Standards,Standard Setting

It is the position of the National Association of School Nurses (NASN) to support the collection of essential nursing data as listed in the Nursing Minimum Data Set (NMDS). The NMDS provides a basic structure to identify the data needed to delineate nursing care delivered to clients as well as relevant characteristics of those clients. Structure and standardization of data is essential for the efficient utilization of Electronic Health Records (EHRs) so that health information is meaningful and can be shared electronically or exchanged across settings and with different health care providers. With the current emphasis on meaningful use of health data contained in EHRs, registered professional school nurses (hereinafter referred to as school nurse) need to be aware of the importance of including school health data in EHRs to participate in the electronic exchange of useful health information with other health care providers to insure continuity and quality of care (Johnson & Bergren, 2011). To accomplish this, EHRs require standardized, meaningful data integrating data sets such as the NMDS. Ongoing evaluation will be needed to determine the usefulness of the NMDS and its ability to capture the data needed to validate the contributions of school nursing services to the health care system or if additional data elements are needed to establish a data set unique to school nursing. [For the complete report, "Position Statements, Issue Briefs, Resolutions and Consensus Statements. Revised," see ED539227.]
Psychotropic Medication Use among Children in the Child Welfare System. Issue Brief No. 59, Fall 2012
Author: Walsh, Wendy A.
Date: 2012-00-00
Type: Reports - Research
Subjects: Child Welfare,Rural Areas,Urban Areas,Drug Therapy,Disproportionate Representation,Child Abuse,Rural Urban Differences,Child Behavior,Age Differences,Well Being

Prior research demonstrates that children in the child welfare system are given psychotropic medication at rates approximately three times higher than children and adolescents in the general population. Using data from the second National Survey of Child and Adolescent Well-Being, authors Wendy Walsh and Marybeth Mattingly report that among children age 4 and older with a report of maltreatment, rates of psychotropic medication use are significantly higher in rural (20 percent) than urban areas (13 percent). Children age 4 and older with a maltreatment report in rural areas were significantly more likely to take more than one medication than children in urban areas. The significantly higher rates of psychotropic medication use among children in rural areas and the significantly higher rates of taking multiple medications point to the need among child welfare professionals in rural areas to closely monitor use. The results of the current analysis indicate that more information is needed about the complex decision-making process regarding medication use. This includes a need to better understand how pediatric clinicians make decisions, and the impact of community norms on medication use. (Contains 3 figures, 1 table, and 24 endnotes.)
Race to the Top. District of Columbia Report. Year 2: School Year 2011-2012. [State-Specific Summary Report]
Author: Department of Education (ED)
Date: 2013-02-01
Type: Numerical/Quantitative Data
Subjects: Academic Achievement,Academic Standards,Accountability,Achievement Gap,Administrator Effectiveness,Alignment (Education),Budgets,Career Readiness,Charter Schools,College Readiness,Core Curriculum,Data,Educational Assessment,Educational Change,Educational Improvement,Elementary Secondary Education,Federal Legislation,Formative Evaluation,Grants,Higher Education,Language Arts,Leadership Effectiveness,Literacy,Low Achievement,Mathematics Achievement,Measurement Objectives,Models,Outcomes of Education,Partnerships in Education,Poverty,Principals,Professional Development,Program Effectiveness,Program Implementation,School Districts,School Effectiveness,School Turnaround,State Government,State Standards,STEM Education,Teacher Effectiveness,Teacher Evaluation

This State-specific summary report serves as an assessment of the District of Columbia's Year 2 Race to the Top implementation, highlighting successes and accomplishments, identifying challenges, and providing lessons learned from implementation from approximately September 2011 through September 2012. Despite the delays, the Office of the State Superintendent of Education (OSSE) has made progress in implementation since Year 1. OSSE continues to leverage Race to the Top-specific task forces to accomplish District-wide work. This includes the development of competitive subgrants and corresponding Requests for Applications (RFAs), and the review of teacher and leader evaluation plans. OSSE has a new Race to the Top Director since January 2012, which has provided stability in leadership across Race to the Top projects. OSSE experienced several procurement delays that directly affected Race to the Top initiatives, including the Enterprise Grants Management System, the Common Core State Standards (CCSS) resource website, statewide longitudinal data system (SLDS), Expanded Growth Measures, and Teacher Preparation Program Scorecard projects. In Year 3, the District plans for its Race to the Top team to play a major role in a tiered system of support for persistently lowest-achieving (PLA) schools, which is aligned with the District's approved Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) flexibility request. OSSE will continue to provide professional development opportunities for educators on implementing the CCSS. It also plans to promote its CCSS resource website and release the Standards Entry Points for Differentiated Learning, a consortium-developed manual for special education teachers. A glossary is included. (Contains 7 footnotes.) [For &quot;Race to the Top. District of Columbia Report. Year 1: School Year 2010-2011. [State-Specific Summary Report],&quot; see ED529308.]
Race to the Top. Delaware Report. Year 2: School Year 2011-2012. [State-Specific Summary Report]
Author: Department of Education (ED)
Date: 2013-02-01
Type: Numerical/Quantitative Data
Subjects: Academic Achievement,Academic Standards,Accountability,Achievement Gap,Administrator Effectiveness,Alignment (Education),Budgets,Career Readiness,Charter Schools,College Readiness,Core Curriculum,Data,Educational Assessment,Educational Change,Educational Improvement,Elementary Secondary Education,Federal Legislation,Formative Evaluation,Grants,Higher Education,Language Arts,Leadership Effectiveness,Literacy,Low Achievement,Mathematics Achievement,Measurement Objectives,Models,Outcomes of Education,Partnerships in Education,Poverty,Principals,Professional Development,Program Effectiveness,Program Implementation,School Districts,School Effectiveness,School Turnaround,State Government,State Standards,STEM Education,Teacher Effectiveness,Teacher Evaluation

This State-specific summary report serves as an assessment of Delaware's Year 2 Race to the Top implementation, highlighting successes and accomplishments, identifying challenges, and providing lessons learned from implementation from approximately September 2011 through September 2012. Despite some implementation challenges and delays during the second year of the grant, Delaware has made significant strides toward accomplishing its Race to the Top goals. Delaware Department of Education's (DDOE's) performance management processes improved the quality of the State's implementation of its plans in Year 2. DDOE provided support to its local educational agencies (LEAs) to assist them in developing and implementing their Race to the Top plans. Developing student growth measures for non-tested grades and subjects proved more challenging than anticipated, requiring the State to delay full implementation of Delaware Performance Appraisal System II (DPAS II) for one year from school year (SY) 2011-2012 to SY 2012-2013. This delay affected other areas and projects that depend on teacher effectiveness ratings, such as Human Capital Analytics and the Talent Transfer Initiative. In Year 3, Delaware plans on fully implementing DPAS II and incorporating student growth measures for teachers of non-tested grades and subjects. It will fully implement the Common Core State Standards (CCSS) and college readiness programs including the Middle School Preparation Program. The Education Insight Portal will be available to all educators, as well as principals, district administrators, and DDOE staff. Delaware will continue to strive for continuous improvement by refining its programs based on educator feedback and its project management processes. A glossary is included. (Contains 9 footnotes.) [For &quot;Race to the Top. Delaware Report. Year 1: School Year 2010-2011. [State-Specific Summary Report],&quot; see ED529310.]
Race to the Top. Maryland Report. Year 2: School Year 2011-2012. [State-Specific Summary Report]
Author: Department of Education (ED)
Date: 2013-02-01
Type: Numerical/Quantitative Data
Subjects: Academic Achievement,Academic Standards,Accountability,Achievement Gap,Administrator Effectiveness,Alignment (Education),Budgets,Career Readiness,Charter Schools,College Readiness,Core Curriculum,Data,Educational Assessment,Educational Change,Educational Improvement,Elementary Secondary Education,Federal Legislation,Formative Evaluation,Grants,Higher Education,Language Arts,Leadership Effectiveness,Literacy,Low Achievement,Mathematics Achievement,Measurement Objectives,Models,Outcomes of Education,Partnerships in Education,Poverty,Principals,Professional Development,Program Effectiveness,Program Implementation,School Districts,School Effectiveness,School Turnaround,State Government,State Standards,STEM Education,Teacher Effectiveness,Teacher Evaluation

This State-specific summary report serves as an assessment of Maryland's Year 2 Race to the Top implementation, highlighting successes and accomplishments, identifying challenges, and providing lessons learned from implementation from approximately September 2011 through September 2012. Maryland's Year 2 accomplishments included implementing support and monitoring processes for local educational agencies (LEAs) for the purposes of Race to the Top implementation, developing CCSS-aligned model units and lessons, holding summer professional development academies across the State, and providing instructional and leadership support services through the Breakthrough Center to lowest-achieving schools in Baltimore City Public Schools (BCPS) and Prince George's County Public Schools (PGCPS). While Maryland made some progress implementing its Race to the Top initiatives in Year 2, the State struggled to find adequate qualified staff to conduct project activities related to the State's technology and instructional improvement system (IIS) projects. This challenge, along with the State procurement process, led to delays in many projects that had already experienced delays in Year 1. During Year 3 Maryland will continue preparing educators to fully implement the Common Core State Standards (CCSS) in SY 2013-2014 and Partnership for Assessment of Readiness for College and Careers (PARCC) assessments in SY 2014-2015. Building on the model units and lessons that Maryland educators developed for each grade in ELA and mathematics in Year 2, the State will develop additional English language arts (ELA) and mathematics and create social studies and science curriculum resources. Additionally, all LEAs will participate in another pilot of the new teacher and principal evaluation system in Year 3 in preparation for full implementation in SY 2013-2014. The State's Curriculum Management System and Learning Management System, both key aspects of its IIS, will also be available for use in Year 3. A glossary is included. (Contains 13 footnotes.) [For &quot;Race to the Top. Maryland Report. Year 1: School Year 2010-2011. [State-Specific Summary Report],&quot; see ED529320.]
Race to the Top. North Carolina Report. Year 2: School Year 2011-2012. [State-Specific Summary Report]
Author: Department of Education (ED)
Date: 2013-02-01
Type: Numerical/Quantitative Data
Subjects: Academic Achievement,Academic Standards,Accountability,Achievement Gap,Administrator Effectiveness,Alignment (Education),Budgets,Career Readiness,Charter Schools,College Readiness,Core Curriculum,Data,Educational Assessment,Educational Change,Educational Improvement,Elementary Secondary Education,Federal Legislation,Formative Evaluation,Grants,Higher Education,Language Arts,Leadership Effectiveness,Literacy,Low Achievement,Mathematics Achievement,Measurement Objectives,Models,Outcomes of Education,Partnerships in Education,Poverty,Principals,Professional Development,Program Effectiveness,Program Implementation,School Districts,School Effectiveness,School Turnaround,State Government,State Standards,STEM Education,Teacher Effectiveness,Teacher Evaluation

This State-specific summary report serves as an assessment of North Carolina's second year of Race to the Top implementation. The report highlights successes and accomplishments, identifies challenges, and provides lessons learned from implementation from approximately September 2011 through September 2012. In Year 2, North Carolina continued the progress it made in Year 1 in all areas of its comprehensive reform plan and reached several implementation milestones. North Carolina made progress in implementing a qualifying evaluation system for teachers and principals by modifying its existing statewide evaluation system, the North Carolina Educator Evaluation System (NCEES). The State also continued to prepare its educators to fully implement the updated North Carolina Standard Course of Study in SY 2012-2013 by providing professional development and disseminating curricular materials. Delays impacted several of the State's Race to the Top initiatives. The Instructional Improvement System (IIS) and Virtual Blended STEM (science, technology, engineering, and mathematics) Courses projects were delayed in order to refine project plans and requirements and as a result of lengthy procurement processes; these projects now have condensed implementation timeframes. The State's extensive Year 2 preparations laid the groundwork for full implementation of the Common Core State Standards (CCSS) and NCEES in Year 3. The State's comprehensive professional development offerings, including more than 90 regional face-to-face sessions and online resources, will support educators as they implement these and other key initiatives. North Carolina will also continue to support teacher and leader pipelines through its Regional Leadership Academies, Distinguished Leadership in Practice program, Teach For America partnership, and the North Carolina Teacher Corps. North Carolina will continue to build readiness in the field for and begin implementing components of its two major technology initiatives, the Cloud and Home Base. A glossary is included. (Contains 9 footnotes.) [For &quot;Race to the Top. North Carolina. Year 1: School Year 2010-2011. [State-Specific Summary Report],&quot; see ED529322.]
California Diploma Project Technical Report III: Validity Study--Validity Study of the Health Sciences and Medical Technology Standards
Author: McGaughy, Charis
Date: 2012-12-00
Type: Reports - Research
Subjects: Validity,Academic Standards,State Standards,Vocational Education,Health Sciences,Medicine,College Readiness,Career Readiness,Surveys,College Faculty,Industry,Biotechnology,Public Health,Mental Health,Health Services,Administration

This study is a validity study of the recently revised version of the Health Science Standards. The purpose of this study is to understand how the Health Science Standards relate to college and career readiness, as represented by survey ratings submitted by entry-level college instructors of health science courses and industry representatives. For recruitment, WestEd researchers, with support from the Educational Policy Improvement Center (EPIC), contacted community colleges and health sector-related organizations throughout California. The survey was completed by 112 respondents, including 101 course instructors and 11 industry representatives. In conclusion, no standard was found to be not applicable by every respondent. Overall, every standard was rated as applicable to their course or occupational area by at least 21 (or almost 20%) of the survey respondents. Taken as a whole, the results from this study indicate a majority of respondents concur that the Career and Technical Education (CTE) Health Sciences and Medical Technology standards reflect adequate rigor (as measured by cognitive demand) and coverage necessary for students to be prepared for entry-level college nursing and biology courses. Appended are: (1) Standards Used in the Validity Study; (2) Course and Job Titles; (3) Individual Applicability and Importance Ratings; (4) Additional Questions; and (5) Open-Ended Responses to Additional Questions. (Contains 10 figures and 19 tables.)
California Diploma Project Technical Report I: Crosswalk Study--Crosswalk of the Intersegmental Committee for the Academic Senate Statements of Competencies to the Common Core State Standards
Author: McGaughy, Charis
Date: 2012-04-00
Type: Numerical/Quantitative Data
Subjects: Academic Standards,State Standards,Alignment (Education),Competence,College Readiness,Career Readiness,English,Language Arts,Mathematics,Reading,Writing (Composition),Listening,Speech,Numbers,Algebra,Geometry,Statistics,Probability,Calculus,English Language Learners,Technological Literacy

The Educational Policy Improvement Center (EPIC) conducted an investigation of the Intersegmental Committee for the Academic Senates (ICAS) Statements of Competencies for Mathematics and Academic Literacy. The purpose of this work is to understand how the ICAS competencies relate to college and career readiness, as represented by the augmented Common Core State Standards (CCSS) adopted by the California State Board of Education (SBE) on August 2, 2010. This study investigated a crosswalk analysis between (a) the Academic Literacy (ELA) ICAS competencies and the CCSS ELA Anchor Standards and (b) the mathematics ICAS competencies and the CCSS Standards for Mathematical Practice and the High School Mathematics Standards at the cluster level. Overall, the study finds that the ICAS competencies do relate to the augmented Common Core State Standards. This study also reveals the absence of certain &quot;habits of mind&quot; and English as a Second Language (ESL) standards in the CCSS ELA standards, and the absence of discrete mathematics and calculus in the augmented CCSS mathematics standards. The ICAS framework is broader than the CCSS ELA standards in addressing additional components related to supporting ESL students and includes key cognitive strategies all students need to be successful in postsecondary settings. The results of this study also raise the issue of the level of desired preparation in mathematics for high school graduates in California. The CCSS mathematics standards strongly relate to the ICAS competencies identified as &quot;essential&quot; for all students, but have gaps with the ICAS competencies deemed &quot;desirable&quot; for all students. Appended are: (1) Standards and Competencies; and (2) Competencies and Frequencies of Ratings. (Contains 5 figures, 17 tables, and 5 footnotes.) [This paper was prepared for Policy Analysis for California Education (PACE).]
Facilitating Postsecondary Education and Training for TANF Recipients. Temporary Assistance for Needy Families Program--Research Synthesis Brief Series. Brief #07
Author: Hamilton, Gayle
Date: 2012-03-00
Type: Reports - Evaluative
Subjects: Welfare Recipients,Postsecondary Education,Low Income Groups,Parents,Adult Education,Barriers,Enrollment,Graduation,Academic Persistence,Community Colleges,Vocational Education,Education Work Relationship,Dropout Prevention,Program Effectiveness,Outcomes of Education,Educational Policy,Educational Research

Increasing education among low-income parents is a vital component of policies to improve families' economic status. Educational attainment matters: between 1979 and 2005, wages for those with college and advanced degrees rose by 22 and 28 percent, respectively, while wages for high school graduates remained stagnant and wages for high school dropouts fell by 16 percent. Moreover, the strong association between postsecondary education and higher earnings does not necessarily mean that facilitating access to higher education among low-income adults will lead to earnings gains, particularly considering that many lack recent or successful school experiences. This brief draws on rigorous studies to highlight what is known about efforts to encourage participation in and completion of postsecondary education among recipients of Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) cash assistance and other low-income populations. In this brief postsecondary (or higher) education is defined as academic and vocational/occupational postsecondary programs but not basic education (such as GED preparation classes or high school diploma programs). The brief explores the programs that have been tried, their success in increasing engagement and completion, and the extent to which increases improved economic well-being. (Contains 1 table and 28 notes.)
Redefining College Readiness
Author: Conley, David T.
Date: 2007-03-00
Type: Reports - Descriptive
Subjects: College Freshmen,Academic Achievement,College Readiness,Definitions,Cognitive Ability,Metacognition,Intellectual Development,Skill Development,Skill Analysis,College Preparation,Outcome Measures,Academic Standards,Academic Ability,Grade Point Average,Performance Based Assessment,Cognitive Development,Educational Policy,Developmental Studies Programs

The purpose of this paper is to provide an operational definition of college readiness that differs from current representations of this concept primarily in its scope. The paper suggests that, while much has been learned about this phenomenon, particularly during the past 20 years, few systematic attempts have been made to integrate the various aspects or components of college readiness that have been investigated in some depth during this period of time. As a result, college readiness continues to be defined primarily in terms of high school courses taken and grades received along with scores on national tests as its primary metrics. Recent research has shed light on several key elements of college success. Most important for this paper is the realization that a range of cognitive and metacognitive capabilities, often described as &quot;key cognitive strategies,&quot; have been consistently and emphatically identified by those who teach entry-level college courses as being as important or more important than any specific content knowledge taught in high school. Examples of key cognitive strategies include analysis, interpretation, precision and accuracy, problem solving, and reasoning. (Contains 1 figure.)