Search Results: (1-15 of 71 records)
|Forum Guide to Data Quality
The Forum Guide to Data Quality provides best practices from districts and states for maintaining quality data as these agencies regularly review and revise their methods for working with data, as well as their expectations for all staff who are responsible for education data and their quality. This resource is intended to help districts and states seeking to improve or further develop their policies and practices related to data quality.
|Middle Grades Longitudinal Study of 2017–18 (MGLS:2017) Assessment Item Level File (ILF), Read Me
This ReadMe provides guidance and documentation for users of the Middle Grades Longitudinal Study of 2017-18 (MGLS:2017) Assessment Item Level File (ILF)(NCES 2023-014) made available to researchers under a restricted use only license. Other supporting documentation includes MGLS_Math_and_Reading_Items_User_Guide.xlsx, MGLS_MS1_Math_Item_Images.pdf, MGLS_MS2_Math_Item_Images.pdf, MGLS_MS1_MS2_Reading_Sample_Item_Type_Images.pdf, MGLS_MS1_MS2_EF_HeartsFlowers_Instructions.pptx, and MGLS_MS2_EF_Spatial_2-back_Instructions.pptx
|Overview of the Middle Grades Longitudinal Study of 2017–18 (MGLS:2017): Technical Report
This technical report provides general information about the study and the data files and technical documentation that are available. Information was collected from students, their parents or guardians, their teachers, and their school administrators. The data collection included direct and indirect assessments of middle grades students’ mathematics, reading, and executive function, as well as indirect assessments of socioemotional development in 2018 and again in 2020. MGLS:2017 field staff provided additional information about the school environment through an observational checklist.
|Forum Guide to State Education Agency Support for Local Education Agencies in Civil Rights Data Reporting
The Forum Guide to State Education Agency Support for Local Education Agencies in Civil Rights Data Reporting presents a variety of effective methods through which state education agencies (SEAs) can support their local education agencies (LEAs) in reporting civil rights data to the U.S. Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights. In addition, the guide provides several detailed case studies from states that currently support their LEA reporting.
|Using Education Indicators: A Forum Guide for State and Local Education Agencies
This guide was developed to provide timely and useful information on education indicators, how their collection and use have changed over time, and how agencies use them strategically. Since the publication of the 2005 document Forum Guide to Education Indicators (https://nces.ed.gov/forum/pub_2005802.asp), many advancements in education have impacted indicators, including changes to data systems (such as improved longitudinal data systems), federal data collections and accountability systems, legislation, mandatory public reporting, privacy protections, and data security. This new guide highlights best practices for using indicators, adjustments over time to the collection and use of indicators, shifts in types of relevant indicators, and what possibilities local and state education agencies see for the effective use of indicators in the future.
|U.S. Technical Report and User Guide for the 2019 Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS)
The U.S. TIMSS 2019 Technical Report and User’s Guide provides an overview of the design and implementation of TIMSS 2019 in the United States and includes guidance for researchers using the U.S. datasets.
This information is meant to supplement the IEA’s TIMSS 2019 Technical Report and TIMSS 2019 User Guide by describing those aspects of TIMSS 2019 that are unique to the United States including information on merging the U.S. public- and restricted-use student, teacher, and school data files with the U.S. data files in the international database.
|Sharing Study Data: A Guide for Education Researchers
Open science envisions that researchers will make their study data available to other investigators to facilitate research transparency and accelerate the development of knowledge. This guide describes key issues that education researchers should consider when deciding which study data to share, how to organize the data, what documentation to include, and where to share their final dataset. The guide also provides strategies for addressing related challenges and includes links to other resources, a checklist aligned to each section, and appendices that contain templates and samples.
|National Household Education Surveys Program of 2019 Data File User's Manual
The 2019 National Household Education Surveys Program (NHES:2019) Data File User’s Manual provides documentation and guidance for users of the NHES:2019 data files, which include data from the Early Childhood Program Participation survey and the Parent and Family Involvement in Education survey. The survey program collected information about early childhood care, parental involvement in education, school choice, homeschooling, online learning, and home learning activities. Data files are being released for each survey, with ASCII, SAS, SPSS, Stata, csv, and R formats available.
|Forum Guide to Metadata
The Forum Guide to Metadata presents and examines the ways in which metadata can be used by education agencies to improve data quality and promote a better understanding of education data. Supported by metadata-related case studies from state and local education agencies, the guide highlights the uses of metadata from a technical point of view, as well as the perspectives of data management, data reporting and use, and data privacy and security. The guide further discusses how to plan and successfully implement a metadata system in an education setting and provides examples of standard metadata items and definitions to assist agencies with standardization.
|Using High School and College Data to Predict Teacher Candidates' Performance on the Praxis at Unibetsedåt Guåhan (University of Guam)
Policymakers and educators on Guåhan (Guam) are concerned about the persistent shortage of qualified K-12 teachers. Staff at the Unibetsedåt Guåhan (University of Guam, UOG) School of Education, the only local university that offers a teacher training and certification program, believe that more students are interested in becoming teachers but that the program's admissions requirements--in particular, the Praxis® Core test, which consists of reading, writing, and math subtests--might be a barrier. Little is known about the predictors for passing the Praxis Core test. This makes it difficult to develop and implement targeted interventions to help students pass the test and prepare for the program.
This study examined which student demographic and academic preparation characteristics predict passing the Praxis Core test and each of its subtests. The study examined two groups of students who attempted at least one subtest within three years of enrolling at UOG: students who graduated from a Guåhan public high school (group 1) and all students, regardless of the high school from which they graduated (group 2). Just over half the students in each group passed the Praxis Core test (passed all three subtests) within three years of enrolling at UOG. The pass rate was lower on the math subtest than on the reading and writing subtests. For group 1, students who earned credit for at least one semester of Advanced Placement or honors math courses in high school had a higher pass rate on the Praxis Core test than students who did not earn any credit for those courses, students who earned a grade of 92 percent or higher in grade 10 English had a higher pass rate on the reading subtest than students who earned a lower grade, and students who earned a grade higher than 103 percent in grade 10 English had a higher pass rate on the writing subtest than students who earned a lower grade. For group 2, students who did not receive a Pell Grant (a proxy for socioeconomic status) had a higher Praxis Core test pass rate than students who did receive a Pell Grant, students who earned a grade of B or higher in first-year college English had a higher Praxis Core test pass rate than students who earned a lower grade, and male students had a higher pass rate on the reading and math subtests than female students.
The study findings have several implications for intervention plans at both the secondary and postsecondary levels. Although students must pass all three Praxis subtests to be admitted to the teacher preparation program at the School of Education, examining student performance on each subtest can help stakeholders understand the content areas in which students might need more support. In the long term preparing more prospective teachers for the Praxis Core test might increase program enrollment, which in turn might increase the on-island hiring pool.
|Program for the International Student Assessment (PISA) 2018 Restricted-Use Files (RUF)
The PISA 2018 Restricted Use File (RUF) consists of restricted-use data from PISA 2018 for the United States. The data file and documentation includes the data file, a codebook, instructions on how to merge with the U.S. PISA 2018 public-use dataset (NCES 2021-047), and a cross-walk to assist in merging with other public datasets, such as the Common Core of Data (CCD) and Private School Survey (PSS). As these data files can be used to identify respondent schools, a restricted-use license must be obtained before access to the data is granted. Click on the restricted-use license link below for more details https://nces.ed.gov/surveys/pisa/datafiles.asp.
For more details on the data, please refer to chapter 9 of the PISA 2018 Technical Report and User Guide (NCES 2021-011).
|Program for the International Student Assessment (PISA) 2018 Public Use File (PUF)
The PISA 2018 Public Use File (PUF) consists of data from the PISA 2018 sample. Statistical confidentiality treatments were applied due to confidentiality concerns. The PUF can be accessed from the National Center for Education Statistics website at http://nces.ed.gov/surveys/pisa/datafiles.asp.
For more details on the data, please refer to chapter 9 of the PISA 2018 Technical Report and User Guide (NCES 2021-011).
|Technical Report and User Guide for the 2016 Program for International Student Assessment (PISA) Young Adult Follow-up Study
This technical report and user guide is designed to provide researchers with an overview of the design and implementation of PISA YAFS 2016, as well as with information on how to access the PISA YAFS 2016 data.
|Program for the International Student Assessment Young Adult Follow-up Study (PISA YAFS) 2016 Public Use File (PUF)
The PISA YAFS 2016 Public Use File (PUF) consists of data from the PISA YAFS 2016 sample. PISA YAFS was conducted in the United States in 2016 with a sample of young adults (at age 19) who participated in PISA 2012 when they were in high school (at age 15). In PISA YAFS, students took the Education and Skills Online (ESO) literacy and numeracy assessments, which are based on the Program for the International Assessment of Adult Competencies (PIAAC). It contains data for individuals including responses to the background questionnaire and the cognitive assessment. Statistical confidentiality treatments were applied due to confidentiality concerns.
For more details on the data, please refer to chapter 8 of the PISA YAFS 2016 Technical Report and User Guide (NCES 2021-020).
|2012 Beginning Postsecondary Students Longitudinal Study (BPS:12) Student Records Collection Data File Documentation: Research Data File Documentation
This publication describes the methodology used in the 2012 Beginning Postsecondary Students Longitudinal Study (BPS:12) Student Records Collection research datafile, a release of exploratory administrative data that are made available only for research on institution response and imputation methodologies. As a result of low institutional response rates, population estimates are NOT advised. Specifically, these data should NOT be used to generate population estimates or analyze the postsecondary records of this BPS cohort. This release includes student-level data for a nationally representative sample of over 35,000 first-time beginning postsecondary students who began postsecondary education during the 2011-12 academic year. Efforts, albeit unsuccessful, were made to collect student level data on enrollment, student budget, and financial aid from postsecondary education institutions attended between the 2011–12 and 2016–17 academic years.