Search results

Abstract

This position paper formalizes the concept of the Categorical Ceiling Tax (CCT), an interpretive limitation observed in intervention studies that employ quantitative scoring rubrics to classify proficiency levels. The CCT describes a form of structural resistance that occurs when a population mean approaches, but does not cross, a predefined categorical threshold, even when measurable quantitative gains are documented. Using pre–post score data from a one-group design involving the total population of N = 494 Grade 7 students, this paper illustrates how categorical reporting obscured a documented positive mean shift (Δx̅ = +0.20), while the population classification remained at the “Instructional” level. This paper argues that categorical transitions, when interpreted independently, may misrepresent population-level progress in large samples. It further proposes that changes in the deficiency floor—defined as the proportion of learners classified at the Frustration level—be reported as a complementary interpretive indicator alongside categorical outcomes. These observations provide applied insights into the interpretation of outcomes generated through technology-supported assessment and reporting systems commonly used in contemporary educational settings.

Author Biography

Mhel Cedric D. Bendo, College of Business Administration, Polytechnic University of the Philippines, Cavite, Philippines

Mhel Cedric D. Bendo is a student researcher specializing in educational psychology, curriculum and instruction, educational measurement and evaluation, psychometrics, and educational technology. He is pursuing a Bachelor of Science in Entrepreneurship at the Polytechnic University of the Philippines. As of 2026, he holds an honorary appointment as an International Editorial Board Member for SIAR Publications, contributing to peer review, editorial guidance, and interdisciplinary journal development. He also serves as an invited peer reviewer for international peer-reviewed journals in online and distance learning, educational technology, educational evaluation, information literacy, interdisciplinary undergraduate research, and health and science education, including journals indexed in Web of Science (ESCI), Scopus (Q1–Q3, SCImago), ERIC, and DOAJ, supporting rigorous and ethically grounded interdisciplinary scholarship.

The Higher Achievement evaluation is a longitudinal, randomized controlled trial study of Higher Achievement, an intensive summer and after-school program that offers participants more than 500 hours of academic enrichment activities a year to help them meet the high academic standards expected of college-bound students.

Higher Achievement students ("scholars") enter the program during the summer before either fifth or sixth grade and commit to attending through eighth grade. This study collected school records data from the 2014-2015 school year through the 2018-2019 school year on three cohorts of scholars, starting with the scholars' year before entering the program (baseline) and two years of follow-up post program entry.

These student records included course grades, standardized test scores, attendance information, and demographic variables. In addition, surveys were conducted among center directors of Higher Achievement centers, mentor volunteers, and parents of scholars to collect information on program implementation and service contrast between program-attending and control students.

The goal of the Inference-Making and Reasoning in Biology (IMRB) measure was two-fold:

1. To develop a measure that is reliable, valid, and fair across male/female, Under-Represented Minority (URM)/non-URM, and first-generation college/not first-generation students.
2. To document that the measure can predict undergraduate introductory biology course grades

Two different 15-item, 1-hour forms were developed. Examinees (4-year college students planning to take or already taking introductory biology) do not need any specific preparation or knowledge before taking the assessment, as they are given all the information they need to reason with and are asked to draw valid conclusions with that information. These forms can be used in any order and may be administered by any research or course staff. They can be given on paper or on computer, to individuals or groups, once or twice per semester.

The Center for Analysis of Postsecondary Readiness (CAPR) was established in 2014 through a grant from the U.S. Department of Education's Institute of Education Sciences (IES) to document current practices in developmental education and to rigorously assess the effects of innovative programs. CAPR is led by the Community College Research Center (CCRC) at Teachers College, Columbia University, and social policy research organization MDRC.

CAPR's research includes a nationally representative survey of two- and four-year colleges. The survey is designed to help researchers and others better understand the approaches used by colleges and states to assess students' college readiness, deliver developmental instruction, and provide non-classroom-based student supports for students assessed as needing developmental education. The survey identifies emerging reform strategies, the extent to which colleges are scaling different practices, and the factors driving the adoption of these practices.

ArtScan, a project of the Arts Education Partnership, is a searchable clearinghouse of the latest state policies supporting education in and through the arts from all 50 states and the District of Columbia.

Since 1999, the Arts Education Partnership has tracked state policies for arts education in the 50 states and the District of Columbia. In 2013, AEP, with the cooperation of Education Commission of the States, merged its State Policy Database with the Education Commission of the States' database, ArtScan. To update the information for the 2014 edition of ArtScan, AEP staff conducted a comprehensive search of state education statutes and codes on each state's relevant websites. The new structure for the 2014 ArtScan allows users to explore the data in multiple ways, including a state-level profile for all policy areas, a comparison of selected states and policy areas, and several types of 50-state reports.

There are at least five ways to engage with the data housed in ArtScan.

• Capture a snapshot of all the data ArtScan has to offer about your state including state policies in 14 policy areas.
• Create custom side-by-side comparison reports using a search engine that allows you to choose individual states and policy areas/data points of interest to you.
• Compare the policies of all 50 states and the District of Columbia within specific policy areas (e.g. requirements for high school art education).
• Explore a summary of state policies for arts education identified in statute or code for all 50 states and the District of Columbia.
• Learn more about ArtScan and explore an analysis of the findings in A Snapshot of State Policies for Arts Education (March 2014).

These data are part of NACJD's Fast Track Release and are distributed as they were received from the data depositor. The files have been zipped by NACJD for release, but not checked or processed except for the removal of direct identifiers. Users should refer to the accompanying readme file for a brief description of the files available with this collection and consult the investigator(s) if further information is needed.

The goals of the study were to estimate the effect of juvenile versus criminal jurisdiction on recidivism and educational outcomes in Connecticut, and describe the relationships among education and juvenile justice outcomes from early to late adolescence. The study sample included all court-referred juveniles and adults in Connecticut between the years 2006 to 2012. The individual-level juvenile case records and educational variables for each year were acquired from the Connecticut Court Support Services Division (CSSD) and the Connecticut State Department of Education (CSDE). Data on court-involvement (CSSD) include juvenile referral history, detention data, service data, adult criminal history, and data on multiple risk assessments. Educational data (CSDE) include demographic information, student enrollment (i.e., number of days in attendance, graduation, dropout), statewide, standardized academic achievement test scores, disciplinary offense data, and special education data.

ArtsEdSearch is an online clearinghouse that collects and summarizes high quality research studies on the impacts of arts education and analyzes their implications for educational policy and practice.

ArtsEdSearch is a project of the Arts Education Partnership (AEP), and builds on Critical Links: Learning in the Arts and Student Academic and Social Development, a compendium of research that AEP published in 2002 exploring the impact of arts education on student success in school, life, and work. AEP has developed ArtsEdSearch as a resource for policymakers and education stakeholders and leaders to better understand and articulate the role that arts education can play in preparing students to succeed in the changing contexts of the 21st Century.

ArtsEdSearch currently includes summaries of over 200 research studies, syntheses of the major findings of these studies, and implications of the collected research for educational policy.

ArtsEdSearch focuses on research examining how education in the arts--in both discrete arts classes and integrated arts lessons--affects students' cognitive, personal, social and civic development, as well as how the integration of the arts into the school curriculum affects educators' instructional practice and engagement in the teaching profession.

ArtsEdSearch does not include research studies about how to teach the arts well or about how to assess student content knowledge and technical skill in the arts. These topics are of great importance to ensuring that students receive a high quality arts education and are the subject of other clearinghouses devoted to research on teaching and learning within particular arts disciplines.

The Eurobarometer series is a unique cross-national and cross-temporal survey program conducted on behalf of the European Commission. These surveys regularly monitor public opinion in the European Union (EU) member countries and consist of standard modules and special topic modules. The standard modules address attitudes towards European unification, institutions and policies, measurements for general socio-political orientations, as well as respondent and household demographics. The special topic modules address such topics as agriculture, education, natural environment and resources, public health, public safety and crime, and science and technology.

Eurobarometer 81.3 covered the following special topics: (1) Attitudes of European Citizens Towards the Environment and (2) Skills and Qualifications in the EU. Respondents' opinions were collected regarding their concern about environmental issues such as protection of natural resources, biodiversity, and pollution; their level of knowledge of these issues; and if they trusted various agencies such as the local government, trade unions, or consumer associations to provide reliable information about environmental issues. Respondents were also questioned about how environmental, social, and economic factors affected their quality of life, which group or groups were most responsible for addressing environmental issues, and which solutions they felt would have the strongest impact. Additional questions were asked regarding which skills were most important to achieve success in the workforce, where such skills could best be obtained, and the ease of accessing information on how to pursue educational opportunities to acquire these skills. Respondents were also asked about their socioeconomic position in society, whether their voice was being heard in the electoral system, and their opinions on if their home country and the European Union were generally going in the right or wrong direction.

Demographic and other background information collected includes age, gender, nationality, marital status, occupation, age when stopped full-time education, household composition, difficulties in paying bills, self-assessed level in society, self-assessed social class, and Internet use. In addition, country-specific data includes type and size of locality, region of residence, and language of interview (select countries).

This study utilized: a national survey of law enforcement officials; a national survey of criminal justice faculty; a survey of criminal justice students at Arizona State University, Kutztown University, Michigan State University, and Sam Houston State University; four separate surveys of a small expert panel; and mini-case studies to investigate issues associated with police human resource management and planning, such as recruitment, selection, training, and promotion.

The Oklahoma School Readiness Reach-by-Risk study builds on the development of the Oklahoma School Readiness Risk Index (SRRI) in 2011 by including data on the scope of early childhood programs in each of the state's 77 counties. This research project seeks to analyze the prevalence of particular socio-demographic indicators of school readiness, as well as promote informed policy funding decisions related to early childhood education. The purpose of this study is to highlight counties where the risk for starting school unprepared to learn is high, yet opportunities for quality early childhood programs and services are low.

Within this study the researchers focused on prekindergarten students (with Hispanic background) who displayed signs of being unprepared to learn by examining two social constructs: risk and reach (identified by early childhood programs). Risk measures were assessed through a risk index comprised of 11 socioeconomic and demographic indicators found by empirical research to increase a child's risk of being unprepared for school.

The Reach measures were created by gathering data from early education programs, the state's universal prekindergarten program, early childhood home visitation programs, and child care services. Early childhood program reach was determined by analyzing the county-level service density of early childhood education and home visitation programs in addition to several aspects of child care services, such as provider quality ratings and enrollment of children with child care subsidies in quality facilities.

This study was created, by the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA), to provide public access to team-level Academic Progress Rates (APRs), eligibility rates, retention rates, and penalty and award information on Division I student-athletes starting with the 2003-2004 season through the 2013-2014 season, as well as to provide efficient analysis and linking of these data to other educational data.

The National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) is the largest nationally representative and continuing assessment of what students in elementary and secondary schools in the United States know and can do in various subject areas. Assessments are conducted periodically in mathematics, reading, science, writing, the arts, civics, economics, geography, United States history, and beginning in 2014, in Technology and Engineering Literacy (TEL). Since NAEP assessments are administered uniformly using the same sets of test booklets across the United States, NAEP results serve as a common metric for all states and selected urban districts. The assessment stays essentially the same from year to year, with only carefully documented changes. This permits NAEP to provide a clear picture of student academic progress over time and for teachers, principals, parents, policymakers, and researchers to use NAEP results to assess progress and develop ways to improve education in the United States. For more information, please read An Introduction to NAEP.

There are two types of assessments: main NAEP and long-term trend NAEP. Main NAEP is administered to fourth-, eighth-, and twelfth-graders across the United States in a variety of subjects. The Main NAEP is conducted between the last week of January and the first week in March every year. National results are available for all assessments and subjects. Results for states and select urban districts are available in some subjects for grades 4 and 8. The Trial Urban District Assessment (TUDA) is a special project developed to determine the feasibility of reporting district-level NAEP results for large urban districts. In 2009 a trial state assessment was administered at grade 12. Long-term trend NAEP is administered nationally every four years. During the same academic year, 13-year-olds are assessed in the fall, 9-year-olds in the winter, and 17-year-olds in the spring. Long-term trend assessments measure student performance in mathematics and reading, and allow the performance of students from recent time periods to be compared with students since the early 1970s.

For example, the 1997 and 2008 NAEP arts assessments were part of the Main NAEP Assessments. The NAEP 1997 Arts Assessment was conducted nationally at grade 8. For music and visual arts, representative samples of public and nonpublic school students were assessed. A special "targeted" sample of students took the theatre assessment. Schools offering at least 44 classroom hours of a theatre course per semester, and offering courses including more than the history or literature of theatre, were identified. Students attending those schools who had accumulated 30 hours of theatre classes by the end of the 1996-97 school year were selected to take the theatre assessment. The NAEP 2008 Arts Assessment was administered to a nationally representative sample of 7,900 eighth-grade public and private school students. Approximately one-half of these students were assessed in music, and the other half were assessed in visual arts. The music portion of the assessment measured students' ability to respond to music in various ways. Students were asked to analyze and describe aspects of music they heard, critique instrumental and vocal performances, and demonstrate their knowledge of standard musical notation and music's role in society. The visual arts portion of the assessment included questions that measured students' ability to respond to art as well as questions that measured their ability to create art. Responding questions asked students to analyze and describe works of art and design. For example, students were asked to describe specific differences in how certain parts of an artist's self-portrait were drawn. Creating questions required students to create works of art and design of their own. For example, students were asked to create a self-portrait that was scored for identifying detail, compositional elements, and use of materials.

Most recently, in 2016, a total of 8,800 eighth-graders in the nation's public and private schools responded to and critiqued existing works of music and visual art and created their own original artwork. NCES collected and analyzed the data and released the 2016 report highlighting key findings. Average music and visual arts responding scores are reported separately on a scale of 0 to 300 points. Average creating scores for visual arts are reported on a scale of 0 to 100 percent. Results are also reported by student groups, school type, and region, as well as in comparison to the 2008 assessment.

In addition, NAEP has a number of special studies that are conducted periodically. These include research and development efforts such as the High School Transcript Study and the National Indian Education Study. More information on these special studies is available on the NAEP Web site.

The International Curriculum Analysis (ICA) study provided curricular and textbook information from each country participating in the Third International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS). TIMSS was a comparative study of education in mathematics and the sciences conducted in over 40 countries on five continents. The goal of TIMSS was to measure student achievement in mathematics and science in participating countries and to assess some of the curricular and classroom factors that are related to student learning in these subjects. The study was intended to provide educators and policy makers with an unparalleled and multidimensional perspective on mathematics and science curricula; their implementation; the nature of student performance in mathematics and science; and the social, economic, and educational context in which these occur.

Below is a description of each of the types of data files found in this study.

The Textbook Specific and Curriculum Guide Specific data files contain overall characteristic information, the number of pages, size of book, publisher, etc. pertaining to material used within a country for all countries involved in the study.

The General Topic Trace Mapping data files contain questionnaire responses for each specific science and mathematics topic for each grade.

The Document Description data file contains document ID, name, subject, publisher and publishing data for each document provided by each country in the study.

The Unit Level data files contain information describing a specific unit within a document, used for both textbooks and curriculum guides.

The Block Level data files contain specific curricular information about the blocks contained within each unit.

The Textbook Coverage data files contain summaries of context coverage for each country's textbooks and the performance expectation codes of those textbooks, both Mathematics and Science. The coverage rate for each content topic is expressed as the average percent that particular topic is mentioned in each of the country's textbooks.

The Textbook Characteristics data file contains derived variables from 400 textbooks used in 45 countries. The variables captures the frequency with which content material such as activities, exercise or question sets, instructional narratives and other instructional tools, as well as performance expectation related material are found within these textbooks.

Research on the correlates and consequences of state high school exit examinations (HSEEs) requires annual state-level data. This dataset contains information on every year in which a state mandated HSEEs as part of their general graduation requirements. Archival data on each states' HSEE policy was collected in order to (1) test hypotheses about the factors that have lead to the diffusion of state HSEEs over time and across states, and (2) test hypotheses about the impact of state HSEEs on student academic achievement and high school graduation rates. These variables were derived from a variety of primary source materials, including public records, legal archival resources, newspaper reports, and communications with officials in state education agencies. In order to make these materials available to future users, a separate linked data file was created that (1) provides a full bibliographic reference for each piece of source material, (2) gives the three-digit unique identifier that is associated with it, and (3) provides the name of the file that houses the actual document. The data describe not only which graduating classes in which states faced these requirements, but also the level of difficulty of the HSEEs. The data cover graduating classes between the years 1977 and 2007. For data on more recent graduating classes, please see the annual reports on HSEEs issued by the Center on Education Policy.