Search Results: (1-15 of 33 records)
|NFES 2019160||Forum Guide to Personalized Learning Data
The Forum Guide to Personalized Learning Data is designed to assist education agencies as they consider whether and how to use personalized learning. It provides an overview of personalized learning and describes best practices used by education agencies to collect data for personalized learning; to use those data to meet goals; and to support relationships, resources, and systems needed for the effective use of data in personalized learning. Personalized learning is still a developing prospect in many locations. therefore, the concepts and examples provided are intended to help facilitate idea sharing and discussion.
|NFES 2017168||Forum Guide to Reporting Civil Rights Data
The Forum Guide to Reporting Civil Rights Data presents a variety of effective methods through which local education agencies (LEAs) report civil rights data to the U.S. Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights. In addition, the guide provides examples of how state education agencies can voluntarily help their LEAs with Civil Rights Data Collection (CRDC) reporting. The guide includes an overview of the CRDC, a discussion of the challenges and opportunities in reporting civil rights data, an explanation of the CRDC reporting process, and case studies that examine how specific education agencies report civil rights data.
|NCES 2017095||Technical Report and User Guide for the 2015 Program for International Student Assessment (PISA)
This technical report and user guide is designed to provide researchers with an overview of the design and implementation of PISA 2015 in the United States, as well as information on how to access the PISA 2015 data. The report includes information about sampling requirements and sampling in the United States; participation rates at the school and student level; how schools and students were recruited; instrument development; field operations used for collecting data; detail concerning various aspects of data management, including data processing, scaling, and weighting. In addition, the report describes the data available from both international and U.S. sources, special issues in analyzing the PISA 2015 data, as well as a description of merging data files.
|NCES 2018411||1996/2001 Beginning Postsecondary Students Longitudinal Study Restricted-Use Data File (including the 2015 Federal Student Aid Supplement)
The 1996/01 Beginning Postsecondary Students Longitudinal Study (BPS:96/01) restricted-use data file contains data on a nationally representative sample of students who began postsecondary education for the first time in the 1995-96 academic year. These sample members were interviewed in their first, third, and sixth year since entering college. These record-level data are based on student interviews and other administrative data sources and allow users to examine topics related to enrollment, persistence, and degree attainment over six academic years, from 1995-96 to 2000-01. The file includes data from 2015 Federal Student Aid Supplement, which appended student loan data from the National Student Loan Data System through 2015.
|NCES 2018412||2004/2009 Beginning Postsecondary Students Longitudinal Study Restricted-Use Data File (including the 2015 Federal Student Aid Supplement and postsecondary education transcripts)
The 2004/09 Beginning Postsecondary Students Longitudinal Study (BPS:04/09) restricted-use data file contains data on a nationally representative sample of students who began postsecondary education for the first time in the 2003-04 academic year. These sample members were interviewed in their first, third, and sixth year since entering college. These record-level data are based on student interviews and other administrative data sources and allow users to examine topics related to enrollment, persistence, and degree attainment over six academic years, from 2003-04 to 2008-09. The file includes data from the postsecondary education transcripts (PETS) and the 2015 Federal Student Aid Supplement (which appended student loan data from the National Student Loan Data System through 2015).
|NCES 2018409||2015 Federal Student Aid Supplement for the 1996 and 2004 Beginning Postsecondary Students Longitudinal Study Cohorts
This publication provides guidance and documentation to users of the 2015 Federal Student Aid (FSA) Supplements. The 2015 FSA Supplements append data from the National Student Loan Data System (NSLDS) to the 1996/2001 Beginning Postsecondary Students Longitudinal Study (BPS:96/01) and the 2004/2009 Beginning Postsecondary Students Longitudinal Study (BPS:04/09) Restricted Use Data Files.
|NCES 2018410||Repayment of Student Loans as of 2015 Among 1995–96 and 2003–04 First-Time Beginning Students
This First Look report presents selected findings about the repayment of federal student loans using data from the 2015 Federal Student Aid Supplements to two Beginning Postsecondary Students Longitudinal Studies (BPS) conducted by the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES). The report focuses on two cohorts of borrowers: those who began their postsecondary education in the 1995–96 academic year (BPS:96/01) and those who began in the 2003–04 academic year (BPS:04/09). The report presents estimates of both cohorts’ cumulative borrowing, repayment, and default statuses as of June 30, 2015, some 20 years after the 1995–96 cohort and 12 years after the 2003–04 cohort began postsecondary education.
|REL 2017263||Analyzing student-level disciplinary data: A guide for districts
The purpose of this report is to help guide districts in analyzing their own student-level disciplinary data to answer important questions about the use of disciplinary actions. This report, developed in collaboration with the Regional Educational Laboratory Northeast and Islands Urban School Improvement Alliance, provides information to district personnel about how to analyze their student-level data and answer questions about the use of disciplinary actions, such as whether these actions are disproportionately applied to some student subgroups, and whether there are differences in student academic outcomes across the types of disciplinary actions that students receive. This report identifies several considerations that should be accounted for prior to conducting any analysis of student-level disciplinary data. These include defining all data elements to be used in the analysis, establishing rules for transparency (including handling missing data), and defining the unit-of-analysis. The report also covers examples of descriptive analyses that can be conducted by districts to answer questions about their use of the disciplinary actions. SPSS syntax is provided to assist districts in conducting all of the analyses described in the report. The report will help guide districts to design and carry out their own analyses, or to engage in conversations with external researchers who are studying disciplinary data in their districts.
|REL 2017260||Academic achievement and classification of students from the Freely Associated States in Guam schools
This report from Regional Educational Laboratory Pacific examines academic achievement, English language learner, and special education classification rates for students from the Freely Associated States (FAS) as compared to other students in Guam. To compare FAS and non-FAS academic achievement and English language learner and special education classification rates, REL Pacific used information about students who took the Stanford Achievement Test, 10th edition (SAT-10) exams during the 2013/14 school year, the only available dataset that included all variables of interest: performance outcomes, ethnicity, and program classification in Guam schools. The study found that more than 21.0 percent of test takers had an FAS ethnicity, and while few test takers scored at proficient or advanced levels on the SAT-10 sub-tests, FAS students were less likely than non-FAS students to receive a proficient or advanced score across all subtests. In addition, 85 percent of FAS test takers were classified as English learner students, compared to 59.5 percent of non-FAS test takers. However, the percentage of test takers classified as special education was lower for FAS students (4.2 percent) than for non-FAS students (5.8 percent).
|REL 2017221||The "I" in QRIS Survey: Collecting data on quality improvement activities for early childhood education programs
Working closely with the Early Childhood Education Research Alliance and Iowa’s Quality Rating System Oversight Committee, Regional Educational Laboratory Midwest developed a new tool—the "I" in QRIS Survey—to help states collect data on the improvement activities and strategies used by early childhood education (ECE) providers participating in a Quality Rating and Improvement System (QRIS). As national attention increasingly has focused on the potential for high-quality early childhood education and care to reduce school-readiness gaps, states developed QRIS to document the quality of ECE programs, support systematic quality improvement efforts, and provide clear information to families about their child care choices. An essential element of a QRIS is the support offered to ECE providers to assist them in improving their quality. Although all the Midwestern states offer support to ECE providers to improve quality as part of their QRIS, states do not collect information systematically about how programs use these quality improvement resources. This survey measures program-level participation in workshops and trainings, coaching, mentoring, activities aimed at increasing the educational attainment of ECE staff, and financial incentive to encourage providers to improve quality. States can use this tool to document the current landscape of improvement activities, to identify gaps or strengths in quality improvement services offered across the state, and to identify promising improvement strategies. The survey is intended for use by state education agencies and researchers interested in the "I" in QRIS and can be adapted for their specific state context.
|REL 2017197||Strategies for estimating teacher supply and
demand using student and teacher data
The Minnesota Department of Education partnered with Regional Educational Laboratory Midwest to redesign the state's teacher supply and demand study in order to increase its utility for stakeholders. This report summarizes the four-step process that was followed in redesigning the study, focusing on the state data sources and analytic methods that can address stakeholders' research questions. Because many data elements used in the study are common across states, the process described may help stakeholders in other states improve their studies of teacher supply and demand.
|NFES 2017016||Forum Guide to Data Visualization: A Resource for Education Agencies
The purpose of this publication is to recommend data visualization practices that will help education agencies communicate data meaning in visual formats that are accessible, accurate, and actionable for a wide range of education stakeholders. Although this resource is designed for staff in education agencies, many of the visualization principles apply to other fields as well.
|REL 2017166||Guide to using the Teacher Data Use Survey
The purpose of the Teacher Data Use Survey is to provide district and school leaders with a survey instrument that will enable to learn more about teachers' use of data, teachers' attitudes toward data, and teachers' perception of supports for using data. The survey was developed by a panel of five experts in data use and was pilot tested in a large urban district. There are three versions of the survey: one for teachers, one for administrators (e.g., principals), and one for instructional support staff (e.g., instructional coaches). Each version asks about teacher data use, thus offering a triangulated picture of teacher data use in a school or district. Survey scale reliabilities (Cronbach's alpha) were all greater than 0.80 and most were greater than 0.90. The Teacher Data Use Survey can thus offer school and district leaders a research-supported evidence base from which to plan ongoing support for teacher data use such as professional development, computer systems, and collaboration.
|NFES 2017017||Forum Guide to Collecting and Using Disaggregated Data on Racial/Ethnic subgroups
The Forum Guide to Collecting and Using Disaggregated Data on Racial/Ethnic Subgroups discusses strategies for collecting data on more detailed racial/ethnic subgroups than the seven categories used in federal reporting. This guide is intended to help state and district personnel learn more about data disaggregation in the field of education, decide whether this effort might be appropriate for them, and, if so, how to implement or continue a data disaggregation project. Access to and analysis of more detailed—that is, disaggregated—data can be a useful tool for improving educational outcomes for small groups of students who otherwise would not be distinguishable in the aggregated data used for federal reporting. Disaggregating student data can help schools and communities plan appropriate programs, decide which interventions to select, use limited resources where they are needed most, and see important trends in educational outcomes and achievement.
|REL 2016218||Self-study guide for implementing high school academic interventions
This Self-study Guide for Implementing High School Academic Interventions was developed to help district- and school-based practitioners plan and implement high school academic interventions. It is intended to promote reflection about current district and school strengths and challenges in planning for implementation of high school academic interventions, spark conversations among staff, and identify areas for improvement. The guide provides a template for data collection and guiding questions for discussion that may improve the implementation of high school academic interventions and decrease the number of students failing to graduate from high school on time.