Search Results: (1-15 of 17 records)
|NCES 2019084||Technology and K-12 Education: The NCES Ed Tech Equity Initiative
This interactive brochure provides an overview of the Initiative—including its purpose, goal, and target outcomes.
|NCES 2019085||Technology and K-12 Education: Advancing the NCES Ed Tech Equity Initiative
This infographic outlines the key steps NCES is taking to advance the NCES Ed Tech Equity Initiative.
|NCES 2019086||Technology and K-12 Education: The NCES Ed Tech Equity Initiative: Framework
Check out our new factsheet to learn about the factors most critical to informing ed tech equity in the context of K-12 education!
|NCES 2019087||Technology and K-12 Education: The NCES Ed Tech Equity Initiative: Data Collection Priorities
This factsheet outlines the key subtopics NCES will prioritize in its ed tech equity data collections.
|NFES 2017007||The Forum Guide to Collecting and Using Attendance Data
The Forum Guide to Collecting and Using Attendance Data is designed to help state and local education agency staff improve their attendance data practices – the collection, reporting, and use of attendance data to improve student and school outcomes. The guide offers best practice suggestions and features real-life examples of how attendance data have been used by education agencies. The guide includes a set of voluntary attendance codes that can be used to compare attendance data across schools, districts, and states. The guide also features tip sheets for a wide range of education agency staff who work with attendance data.
|REL 2017244||Quality improvement efforts among early childhood education programs participating in Iowa’s Quality Rating System
The purpose of this study was to examine the use and outcomes of quality improvement activities among early childhood education programs participating in the Iowa Quality Rating System (Iowa QRS). The study summarized survey responses from 388 program administrators, describing how staff of programs in Iowa QRS participate in quality improvement activities such as training, coaching, and continuing education. The study also used logistic regression analysis to examine the relationship between quality improvement activities and increases in Iowa QRS ratings, in a subset of 146 programs that received Iowa QRS ratings at two different points in time. Survey responses indicated that almost all programs had staff participate in trainings and a majority of programs offered coaching, but participation in continuing education was less common. The most common topic of professional development was health and safety practices, followed by child development and classroom practices. Analysis results found that Iowa QRS ratings tend to increase across time, and programs that provide key staff with 15 or more training hours per year are more likely to increase ratings over time than programs that do not. The results also suggest that topics covered in professional development are important, with both positive and negative relationships observed between different professional development topics and rating outcomes. The study findings can help Iowa QRS administrators plan and allocate resources to support programs' quality improvement efforts. The findings also can help administrators in other states better understand the types of quality improvement activities to which programs are drawn naturally, as well as factors that may facilitate or impede programs' pursuit of quality.
|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.
|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 2016159||Stated Briefly: Examining changes to Michigan's early childhood quality rating and improvement system (QRIS)
This "Stated Briefly" report is a companion piece that summarizes the results of another report of the same name. Documenting and improving early childhood program quality is a national priority, leading to a rapid expansion of Quality Rating and Improvement Systems (QRISs). QRISs document and improve the quality of early childhood education programs and provide clear information to families about their child care choices. This study described how early childhood programs were rated in Michigan's QRIS and examined how alternative approaches to calculating ratings affected the number of programs rated at each quality level. Using extant data from 2,390 early childhood education programs that voluntarily participated in Michigan's QRIS, the study found that programs in Michigan self-rated at low quality (level 1) and high quality (level 5) more often than at moderate quality (levels 2 through 4). The study also found that programs with both a self-rating and an independent observation of quality generally had higher self-ratings than observational ratings. The study used simulated data to compare the distributions of ratings in the original QRIS, the newly revised QRIS with relaxed domain requirements, and an approach that only used programs' overall scores. Findings revealed that in the new relaxed system and the total score approach, programs were rated at higher levels of quality when compared to the original QRIS. Implications of changes to the calculation systems in QRIS are discussed in terms of program ratings and financial implications for states.
|REL 2016143||Development and implementation of quality rating and improvement systems in Midwest Region states
Recent federal and state policies that recognize the benefits of high-quality early childhood education and care, such as the Race to the Top–Early Learning Challenge and the Preschool for All initiative, have led to a rapid expansion of quality rating and improvement systems (QRISs). Although 49 states implement a QRIS in some form, each system differs in its approach to defining, rating, supporting, and communicating program quality. This study examined QRISs in use across the Midwest Region to describe approaches that states use in developing and implementing a QRIS. The purpose was to create a resource for QRIS administrators to use as they refine their systems over time. Researchers used qualitative techniques, including a review of existing documents and semistructured interviews with state officials in the Midwest Region to document the unique and common approaches to QRIS implementation. Findings suggest that the process of applying for a Race to the Top–Early Learning Challenge grant helped advance the development of a QRIS system, even in states that were not awarded funding. Also, all seven states in the Midwest Region use a variety of direct observations in classrooms to measure quality within each QRIS, despite the logistical and financial burdens associated with observational assessment. Five of the states in the Midwest Region use alternate pathways to rate certain early childhood education programs in their QRIS, most commonly for accredited or state prekindergarten programs. Finally, linking state subsidies and other early childhood education funding to QRIS participation encouraged early childhood education providers to participate in a QRIS. Developing and refining a QRIS is an ongoing process for all states in the Midwest Region and systems are continually evolving. Ongoing changes require policymakers, researchers, providers, and families to periodically relearn the exact requirements of their QRISs, but if changes are based on evidence in the field of changing needs of children and families, revised QRISs may better measure quality and better serve the public. Findings from this report can help inform the decisions of state QRIS administrators as they expand and refine their systems.
|REL 2013003||Can Online Learning Communities Achieve the Goals of Traditional Professional Learning Communities? What the Literature Says
Professional learning communities (PLCs)—teams of educators who meet regularly to exchange ideas, monitor student progress, and identify professional learning needs—reflect a growing interest in promoting professional development that engages teachers and administrators. Increasingly, teachers are able to participate in online and hybrid PLCs in addition to PLCs that meet face-to-face. This report examines: characteristics of PLCs, as reported in the literature; advantages and challenges of online and hybrid PLCs, compared to face-to-face PLCs; and considerations for the design and setup of online and hybrid PLCs.
|NFES 2013802||Forum Guide to the Teacher-Student Data Link: A Technical Implementation
This publication is a practical guide for implementing a teacher-student data link (TSDL) that supports a range of uses at the local, regional, and state levels. The guide addresses the considerations for linking teacher and student data from multiple perspectives, including governance, policies, data components, business rules, system requirements, and practices. It provides references to promising practices for high quality data linkages, including TSDLspecific processes such as roster verification and the establishment of the Teacher of Record. The information and opinions published here are those of the Forum and do not necessarily represent the policy or views of the U.S. Department of Education or NCES.
|NFES 2013801||Forum Guide to Taking Action with Education Data
The Forum Guide to Taking Action with Education Data provides stakeholders with practical information about the knowledge, skills, and abilities needed to more effectively access, interpret, and use education data to inform action. The document includes an overview of the evolving nature of data use, basic data use concepts, and a list of skills necessary for effectively using data. The Guide recommends a question-driven approach to data use, in which the following questions can help guide readers who need to use data to take action: What do I want to know? What data might be relevant? How will I access relevant data? What skills and tools do I need to analyze the data? What do the data tell me? What are my conclusions? What will I do? What effects did my actions have? and what are my next steps? The Briefs that accompany the Introduction are written for three key education audiences: Educators, School and District Leaders, and State Program Staff.
|REL 2012121||Characteristics of Midwest Region School Districts Identified for Improvement
Like other states across the country, the seven REL Midwest Region states have been striving to meet the performance targets established under the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001. Under the act, districts are identified as "in improvement" and schools as "in need of improvement" after two successive years of not meeting adequate yearly progress performance targets. The report, Characteristics of Midwest Region school districts identified for improvement, presents statistical profiles of school districts designated as in improvement in the Midwest Region states as of 2009/10. It compares the prevalence and characteristics of these districts and those of districts not in improvement. It also reports the prevalence of districts in improvement under three states’ own accountability systems.
|REL 2012019||Comparing Achievement Trends in Reading and Math Across Arizona Public School Student Subgroups
This technical brief examines the 2008/09 reading and math proficiency levels of four categories of Arizona public school students (comprising 11 student subgroups): ethnicity (American Indian, Asian, Black, Hispanic, and White), English language learner status (English language learner students and non–English language learner students), disability status (students with disabilities and students without disabilities), and economic status (receiving free or reduced-price meals and not receiving free or reduced-price meals). Responding to an Arizona Department of Education request, the brief describes how student subgroup performance differs by school level (elementary, middle, and high) and across three school types: Title I Schools in Improvement (schools serving economically disadvantaged students and participating in the federal school improvement program intended to improve academic performance in schools not meeting adequate yearly progress for at least two consecutive years); Title I Schools Not in Improvement; and non–Title I schools. The same analyses were conducted for charter schools.