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.

Abstract

The increasing reliance on digital technologies in education has intensified concerns regarding unequal access to digital resources across countries, particularly in developing regions. While digital connectivity has the potential to enhance learning opportunities, disparities in internet access and technological infrastructure may contribute to unequal educational outcomes. This study examines the relationship between the digital divide and educational inequality in Asia through a cross-country secondary data analysis of connectivity, access, and student achievement. Using publicly available datasets from the World Bank, the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), and the International Telecommunication Union (ITU), the study analyzes key indicators of internet access, digital infrastructure, student achievement, and educational inequality across selected Asian countries. Descriptive statistics, correlation analysis, and multiple regression models were employed to examine structural associations among variables. The results indicate that internet access is positively associated with student achievement and negatively associated with educational inequality. Digital infrastructure also demonstrates positive associations with educational performance and lower levels of inequality. In contrast, rural population is negatively associated with student achievement and positively associated with educational inequality. Overall, the findings highlight the importance of digital connectivity and technological capacity in shaping both the quality and equity dimensions of education systems across diverse national contexts.

Author Biographies

Mhel Cedric D. Bendo, Polytechnic University of the Philippines–Maragondon Campus

Mhel Cedric D. Bendo is a student researcher and academic writer pursuing a Bachelor of Science in Entrepreneurship at Polytechnic University of the Philippines–Maragondon Campus. His research interests include mobile learning, digital learning environments, AI in education, educational psychology, curriculum studies, educational assessment, and financial technology (FinTech). He serves on the editorial boards of the SIAR-Global Journal of Humanities, Management & Educational Review, SIAR-Global Journal of Literatures & Educational Review, the International Journal of Multidisciplinary Research and Exploration (IJMRE), and the International Journal of Advanced Multidisciplinary Application (IJAMA), and also works as a technical editor for an international academic journal. He is a reviewer for multiple international peer-reviewed journals, including Cogent Education (Taylor & Francis). He is an active researcher who has authored several studies published and forthcoming in international and Scopus-indexed journals, while his research-informed commentary has appeared in national and regional Philippine newspapers, including the Manila Bulletin.

Dr. Domar C. Alviar, National University–Manila

Domar C. Alviar is an Associate Professor at National University–Manila, where he is a 2026 Gawad Pantas awardee. He holds a Master of Development Communication and Doctor of Communication from the University of the Philippines Open University. A CHED-SIKAP scholar, his research interests include development communication, systems thinking, ethnomethodology and conversation analysis (EMCA), media ethics, law, and ethical artificial intelligence in education. He serves on the Steering Committee of the Philippine International Studies Organization (PHISO) and contributes to academic discussions on academic integrity, higher education, and ethical AI. He previously worked in Middle East and North Africa customs relations and international supply management and served as publications and communications editor at Adamson University. He writes the “Inside Academe” column for Tutubi.ph and contributes opinion articles to national broadsheets, including the Philippine Daily Inquirer and other publications.

Abstract

This study employed a Convergent Mixed-Methods Design to examine how mobile gaming influences students’ behaviour, study habits, physical well-being, and academic obligations within a senior high school educational context. The quantitative component involved 58 Grade 11 students from Section X in the Philippines who answered a 10-item Likert-scale survey assessing gaming habits, academic distractions, sleep problems, physical symptoms, and coping strategies. Data were analyzed using weighted means, frequency distributions, and Pearson’s correlations. The qualitative component consisted of semi-structured interviews with ten purposively selected participants. The thematic analysis revealed three major themes: (1) gaming for enjoyment and escape, (2) physical discomfort and sleep loss, and (3) difficulty managing academic responsibilities alongside failed attempts at self-regulation. Findings indicated that greater gaming involvement was associated with reduced focus, sleep deprivation, decreased motivation, and neglect of academic tasks. Quantitative results revealed a moderate negative relationship between mobile game addiction and academic performance (r = −.52, p < .001). Qualitative narratives further explained how sleep loss, cognitive fatigue, and reinforcement-driven habits contributed to academic disengagement despite students’ awareness of negative consequences. The study highlights the importance of digital literacy programs, structured guidance interventions, and school-based strategies that promote responsible gaming habits and academic self-regulation among learners.

Author Biography

Mhel Cedric D. Bendo, Polytechnic University of the Philippines

Mhel Cedric D. Bendo is a student researcher specializing in educational psychology, curriculum and instruction, educational measurement and evaluation, psychometrics, educational technology, and business and financial technology (FinTech). He is pursuing a Bachelor of Science in Entrepreneurship at the Polytechnic University of the Philippines. As of 2026, he is a member of the Editorial Board of SIAR Publications, an Editorial Board Member of the International Journal of Multidisciplinary Research and Exploration (IJMRE), and an Editorial Board Member and Review and Technical Committee Member of the International Journal of Advanced Multidisciplinary Application (IJAMA), where he contributes to peer review, subject-area feedback, manuscript evaluation, and research assessment. He also serves as a Technical Editor for the Journal of Student-Run Clinics (JSRC), contributing to editorial review processes and the technical evaluation of submitted manuscripts. He is an invited peer reviewer for international peer-reviewed journals, including Cogent Education (Taylor & Francis), a peer-reviewed journal published by a leading global academic publisher, contributing to the evaluation of scholarly work in education and interdisciplinary research. His reviewing contributions cover education, psychology, artificial intelligence in education, educational technology, educational evaluation, interdisciplinary undergraduate research, health education, business, and entrepreneurship, including journals indexed in Web of Science (ESCI), Scopus (Q1–Q3), ERIC, and DOAJ.

This is the data deposit for the AERA Open paper "Unintended Consequences of Teacher Autonomy and Principal Leadership: Evidence from Teacher–Parent Communication and Teacher Well-Being." Motivated by recent tragedies highlighting teacher stress stemming from parental demands, this study examines the relationships among parent–teacher communication, teacher autonomy, principal leadership, and well-being in South Korea. Analyzing data from the Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) 2022 with school fixed effects, we find that increased hours spent communicating with parents are negatively associated with multiple dimensions of teacher well-being. Furthermore, we uncover a critical “autonomy paradox”: although perceived autonomy generally enhances well-being, high levels of autonomy significantly exacerbate the negative association between communication hours and well-being. We also reveal that strong principal instructional leadership fails to mitigate this paradox and may even intensify the perceived burden. These findings challenge the assumption that autonomy or leadership functions as a protective resource. Instead, within high-pressure, bureaucratic systems, autonomy and leadership may operate as a managerial device and source of personal liability characterized by isolated responsibility rather than professional resources.

This data collection was assembled to examine the geographic distribution of two-way dual language (TWDL) and one-way dual language (OWDL) bilingual education programs across Texas public school campuses during the 2020–2021 academic year. Campus-level bilingual program enrollment data were obtained from the Texas Education Agency (TEA) through a formal public information request submitted under the Texas Public Information Act. Geographic coordinate data were obtained from TEA's publicly available campus reference file for the 2021–2022 school year. Demographic context variables were drawn from the 2017–2021 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates (U.S. Census Bureau), including county- and census tract-level data on nativity (Table B05012) and median household income (Table S1903). Geographic boundary files were obtained from the U.S. Census Bureau TIGER/Line Shapefiles (2021) at both the county and census tract levels.

The collection includes campus-level enrollment counts for six bilingual program types: TWDL, OWDL, ESL content-based, ESL pull-out, transitional bilingual early exit, and transitional bilingual late exit. Enrollment counts for small cell sizes were suppressed by TEA for privacy protection. The collection also includes derived variables consisting of normalized program enrollment ratios calculated as program-specific enrollment divided by total campus enrollment. Campus records include geographic coordinates, school type classification (public, charter, or alternative), district identifiers, and county identifiers. The collection additionally includes two derived shapefiles, one at the county level and one at the census tract level, in which TEA-restricted campus enrollment data are not present; these shapefiles contain only Census Bureau demographic variables (immigrant density and median household income) merged into TIGER/Line boundary geometry. Geographic coverage is the state of Texas. The data describe the 2020–2021 academic year.

The 2019 National Survey of Early Care and Education (2019 NSECE) is a set of four nationally-representative integrated surveys conducted in 2019 of 1) households with children under age 13, 2) home-based early care and education (ECE) providers, 3) center-based ECE providers, and 4) the center-based ECE provider workforce. Together these four surveys characterize the supply of and demand for ECE in the United States and create a better understanding of how well families' needs and preferences coordinate with providers' offerings and constraints. The NSECE surveys make particular effort to measure the experiences of low-income families, as these families are the focus of a significant component of ECE and school-age public policy.

The NSECE was first conducted in 2012. Before that effort, there had been a 20-year long absence of nationally representative data on the use and availability of ECE in the United States. The NSECE was conducted again in 2019 to update the information from 2012 and shed light on how the ECE and school-age care landscape changed from 2012 to 2019. The 2019 NSECE followed a similar design as the 2012 survey, including surveying households with children under age 13, home-based providers, center-based providers, and staff working in center-based classrooms.

The 2019 NSECE was funded by the Office of Planning, Research, and Evaluation (OPRE) in the Administration for Children and Families (ACF), United States Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). The project team was led by NORC at the University of Chicago, with partners Chapin Hall at the University of Chicago and Child Trends, as well as other collaborating individuals and organizations.

Restricted-Use Data Files

The 2019 NSECE quick tabulation and public-use files are currently available via this site. The Level 1 restricted-use files that supplement the public-use data are also available through ICPSR (see National Survey of Early Care and Education (NSECE) Level 1 Restricted-Use Files, [United States], 2019 (ICPSR 38445)).

Level 2 and Level 3 restricted-use files are available via the National Opinion Research Center (NORC). For more information, please see the instructions for NSECE Levels 2/3 Restricted-Use Data.

For additional information about this study, please see:

• NSECE project page on the OPRE website
• NSECE study page on NORC's website
• NSECE Data Users Page

For quick links to the PDF manuals (for the Quick Tabulation Files) and user's guides (for the Public-Use Files), please visit the Data Training Resources from the NSECE page. In addition, users can select "Documentation Only" from the Download tab on this study homepage to download all NSECE documentation in one zip file. Researchers interested in applying for the Restricted-Use Data Files are encouraged to read the user's guides before completing their application.

This study examined how U.S. political leaders publicly framed disability during calendar year 2025, using a systematic discourse analysis of public statements and federal legislation. It also examined how this discourse was reflected in federal education policy, including statements by the Secretary of Education and education-related bills.

The study analyzed 121 public statements about people with disabilities made by White House and Cabinet officials, and 32 federal bills introduced in 2025 that could affect the rights, services, or educational opportunities of individuals with disabilities. Statements were identified through a two-stage process that combined a custom Python-based web-scraping tool, which extracted verbatim, attributed quotations from news articles, press releases, interview transcripts, official speeches, and social media posts using the OpenAI GPT-4 API, with manual verification searches conducted in ChatGPT Plus and Perplexity AI Pro. Federal bills were identified through Congress.gov. All statements were reviewed by the authors to confirm accuracy, attribution, and date. Each statement and bill was independently scored by two human coders and by GPT-4 using an author-developed four-point rubric grounded in the social and human rights models of disability, ranging from 1 (dehumanizing) to 4 (affirming).

The data contain one record per statement, including the speaker's name and title, date, verbatim quotation, source, context, an analysis of the framing, a score from 1 (dehumanizing) to 4 (affirming), and the rationale for the score. The bills data are available on the project website and are not included in this deposit.

The study was approved by the university Institutional Review Board (March 2025) and was preregistered on the Open Science Framework (https://osf.io/hbfe5/).

The 2024 National Survey of Early Care and Education (2024 NSECE) is a set of four integrated surveys which include 1) households with children under age 13, 2) home-based early care and education (ECE) providers serving children under age 13, 3) center-based ECE providers serving children age 5 years and under (not yet in kindergarten), and 4) the center-based ECE workforce. Together, these surveys characterize the supply of and demand for ECE in the United States and permit a clearer understanding of how well families' needs and preferences coordinate with providers' offerings and constraints and the local ECE workforce. The NSECE surveys make particular effort to measure the experiences of low-income families, as these families are the focus of a significant component of ECE and school-age public policy.

The NSECE was first conducted in 2012. Before that effort, there had been a 20-year long absence of nationally representative data on the use and availability of ECE in the United States. The NSECE was conducted again in 2019 to update the information from 2012 and shed light on how the ECE and school-age care landscape changed from 2012 to 2019. To facilitate over-time comparisons, the 2024 NSECE largely replicates the design of the 2019 and 2012 NSECE, although all are cross-sectional surveys with no intentional overlap in sampled households, providers, or workers.

The 2024 NSECE was funded by the the Administration for Children and Families (ACF), United States Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). The project team was led by NORC at the University of Chicago, with partners including Child Trends and a Content Advisory Team of collaborating experts. Chapin Hall at the University of Chicago worked closely with NORC on the building of the provider sampling frame in 2023.

Level 2 restricted-use files are available via NORC. For more information, please see the instructions for NSECE Levels 2 Restricted-Use Data.

For additional information about this study, please see:

• NSECE project page on the OPRE website
• NSECE study page on NORC's website
• NSECE Data Users Page on NORC's website

For quick links to the User's Guides, please visit CFData's Data Training Resources from the NSECE page. In addition, users can select "Documentation Only" from the Download tab on this study homepage to download all NSECE documentation in one zip file. Researchers interested in applying for the Restricted-Use Data Files are encouraged to read the User's Guides before completing their application.

This deposit contains the replication data and materials associated with the article “How Do Schools React? Making Sense of Organizational Responses to Accountability Pressure.” The study examines how schools in Chile respond to performance-based accountability (PBA) in a highly marketized education system. The quantitative component draws on survey data from teachers (n = 1,130) and school leaders (n = 200) in 79 urban schools located in the metropolitan areas of Santiago, Valparaíso, and Concepción. The qualitative component includes semi-structured interviews with school leaders (n = 23) and teachers (n = 28) from 15 urban schools in Santiago’s Metropolitan Region, complemented by documentary analysis. The materials document school responses to accountability pressure, including teaching to the test, curricular alignment, resource redistribution, data use, and actors’ beliefs about the fairness, validity, and pressure associated with standardized testing and accountability policies. The deposit is intended to support transparency, verification, and reuse of the study’s analytic procedures and findings.

In order to assist higher education institutions and their students during the pandemic, the federal government established the Higher Education Emergency Relief (HEER) fund, which directed over $75 billion to institutions of higher education - including nearly $25 billion to community colleges - over a three-year period. Researchers at the Community College Research Center (CCRC), the Public Policy Institute of California (PPIC), and Wheelhouse: The Center for Community College Leadership and Research at the University of California, Davis (Wheelhouse) partnered through the Accelerating Recovery in Community Colleges (ARCC) Network to understand how community colleges used HEER funds to support their students and institutions during the pandemic.

This data collection contains responses from a survey of 170 community colleges across six states: California, Michigan, New York, Ohio, Tennessee, and Texas. This institutional survey of pandemic relief spending and recovery strategies attempted to answer the following research questions:

1. • How did colleges use HEER student and institutional aid?
   • How did colleges target specific populations for HEER-funded student supports?
   • What do colleges' expenditure patterns reveal about how student and institutional needs changed over time?
   • How successful did colleges perceive HEER funds to be in meeting student and institutional needs during the pandemic?
   • What do colleges' concerns about the end of HEER funds reveal about how to prioritize future funding efforts?
   • In what ways did colleges' experiences with HEER funds vary based on institutional characteristics?

The resulting dataset provides insight into the specific pandemic recovery activities colleges implemented, colleges' perceptions of how successful funds were in addressing student and institutional needs during the pandemic, and what institutional needs were not met by aid.

In 2019, the National Survey of Early Care and Education (NSECE) team conducted a set of four integrated surveys of 1) households with children under age 13, 2) home-based providers, 3) center-based providers, and 4) the center-based workforce as a cross-sectional follow-up to the original 2012 NSECE. Together they characterize the supply of and demand for early care and education (ECE) in the U.S. and permit better understanding of how well families' needs and preferences mirror providers' offerings and constraints. The NSECE surveys make particular effort to measure the experiences of low-income families, as these families are the focus of a significant component of ECE and school-age public policy.

In light of the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic in Spring 2020, the Office of Planning, Research, and Evaluation (OPRE) funded a new data collection effort beginning in 2020 to learn how the pandemic was affecting ECE providers and the individuals who work directly with children in ECE settings. The NSECE project team sought to re-interview center-based providers, center-based workforce members, listed home-based providers, and unlisted and paid home-based providers, who completed surveys in the 2019 NSECE. Households participating in the 2019 NSECE were not included in the NSECE COVID-19 Longitudinal Follow-up. Data collection for the NSECE COVID-19 Longitudinal Follow-up took place across two waves between late 2020 and early 2022.

The NSECE was first conducted in 2012. Before that effort, there had been a 20-year long absence of nationally representative data on the use and availability of ECE. The NSECE was conducted again in 2019 to update the information from 2012 and shed light on how the ECE and school-age care landscape changed from 2012 to 2019. The 2019 NSECE followed a similar design as the 2012 survey, including surveying households with children under age 13, home-based providers, center-based providers, and staff working in center-based classrooms.

The 2019 NSECE is funded by the Office of Planning, Research, and Evaluation (OPRE) in the Administration for Children and Families (ACF), U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). The project team is led by NORC at the University of Chicago, with partners Chapin Hall at the University of Chicago and Child Trends, as well as other collaborating individuals and organizations.

For additional information about this study, please see:

• NSECE project page on the OPRE website
• NSECE study page on NORC's website
• NSECE Data Users Page

For more information, tutorials, and reports related to the NSECE, please visit the Child and Family Data Archive's Data Training Resources from the NSECE page.

Momentum toward removing school-based law enforcement (SBLE) has increased since the summer of 2020. This change has occurred due to issues of equity with the hope that removing SBLE will reduce existing racial and ethnic disparities in the criminal justice system. SBLE refers to sworn law enforcement stationed in schools on either a part- or full-time basis. Some SBLE are known as school resource officers, who often receive special training in juvenile law and interacting with students in schools, although this varies from state to state. Other SBLE do not receive any special training in working with young people.

Although the move toward removing SBLE may have intuitive appeal to some school districts, no empirical evidence exists regarding what happens to students' frequency of contact with the criminal justice system after schools remove SBLE. Similarly, current research has not examined the impacts on the attendant racial and ethnic disparities.

All the data used in this study are secondary data from the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES), including both the publicly available Civil Rights Data Collection (CRDC) and the restricted-use School Survey on Crime and Safety (SSOCS). All data cleaning, manipulation, and analysis will be done using syntax files in Stata. This study is a collection of these three Stata .do syntax files.

This study compared changes in three measures of criminal justice contact (i.e., arrests, referrals to law enforcement, and crimes reported to police) in schools that removed SBLE relative to the changes in schools that did not remove SBLE. The study examined within-school racial and ethnic differences in rates of arrest and referrals to law enforcement, and between-school differences in all three measures of criminal justice system contact by school racial composition.

The 2019 National Survey of Early Care and Education (2019 NSECE) is a set of four nationally-representative integrated surveys conducted in 2019 of 1) households with children under age 13, 2) home-based early care and education (ECE) providers, 3) center-based ECE providers, and 4) the center-based ECE provider workforce. Together these four surveys characterize the supply of and demand for ECE in the United States and create a better understanding of how well families' needs and preferences coordinate with providers' offerings and constraints. The NSECE surveys make particular effort to measure the experiences of low-income families, as these families are the focus of a significant component of ECE and school-age public policy.

The NSECE was first conducted in 2012. Before that effort, there had been a 20-year long absence of nationally representative data on the use and availability of ECE. The NSECE was conducted again in 2019 to update the information from 2012 and shed light on how the ECE and school-age care landscape changed from 2012 to 2019. The 2019 NSECE followed a similar design as the 2012 survey, including surveying households with children under age 13, home-based providers, center-based providers, and staff working in center-based classrooms.

The 2019 NSECE is funded by the Office of Planning, Research, and Evaluation (OPRE) in the Administration for Children and Families (ACF), United States Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). The project team is led by NORC at the University of Chicago, with partners Chapin Hall at the University of Chicago and Child Trends, as well as other collaborating individuals and organizations.

The Level 1 data supplements the public-use data (see National Survey of Early Care and Education (NSECE) Public-Use Files, [United States], 2019 (ICPSR 37941)), with minimal overlap of variables across the data files.

For additional information about this study, please see:

• NSECE project page on the OPRE website
• NSECE study page on NORC's website
• NSECE Data Users Page

For quick links to the PDF manuals (for the Quick Tabulation Files) and user's guides (for the Public-Use Files), please visit the Data Training Resources from the NSECE page. In addition, users can select "Documentation Only" from the Download tab on this study homepage to download all NSECE documentation in one zip file. Researchers interested in applying for the Restricted-Use Data Files are encouraged to read the user's guides before completing their application.

The 2012 National Survey of Early Care and Education (NSECE) is a set of four integrated, nationally representative surveys conducted in 2012. These were surveys of (1) households with children under 13, (2) home-based providers, (3) center-based providers, and (4) the center-based provider workforce.

The 2012 NSECE documents the nation's current utilization and availability of early care and education (including school-age care), in order to deepen the understanding of the extent to which families' needs and preferences coordinate well with providers' offerings and constraints. The experiences of low-income families are of special interest as they are the focus of a significant component of early care and education and school-age child care (ECE/SACC) public policy. The 2012 NSECE calls for nationally-representative samples including interviews in all 50 states and Washington, DC.

The study is funded by the Office of Planning, Research and Evaluation (OPRE) in the Administration for Children and Families (ACF), United States Department of Health and Human Services. The project team is led by the National Opinion Research Center (NORC) at the University of Chicago, in partnership with Chapin Hall at the University of Chicago and Child Trends.

The Quick Tabulation and Public-Use Files are currently available via this site. Restricted-Use Files are also available at three different access levels; to determine which level of file access will best meet your needs, please see the NSECE Data Files Overview for more information.

Level 1 Restricted-Use Files are available via the Child and Family Data Archive. To obtain the Level 1 files, researchers must agree to the terms and conditions of the Restricted Data Use Agreement and complete an application via ICPSR's online Data Access Request System.

Level 2 and 3 Restricted-Use Files are available via the National Opinion Research Center (NORC). For more information, please see the access instructions for NSECE Levels 2/3 Restricted-Use Data.

For additional information about this study, please see:

• NSECE project page on the OPRE website
• NSECE study page on NORC's website
• NSECE Data Users Page

For more information, tutorials, and reports related to the National Survey of Early Care and Education, please visit the Child and Family Data Archive's Data Training Resources from the NSECE page.

The Wisconsin School Violence and Bullying Prevention Study sought to understand the impact of comprehensive bullying prevention programs on outcomes related to violence, safety, and bullying rates. This study focused on 24 middle schools (grades 6 to 8) in Wisconsin.

To examine the effectiveness of the school's current anti-bullying program, the Bullying Prevention Program Assessment tool (BPPAT) was completed at the end of the school year. The BPPAT focused on administrative policy and procedures geared towards students, faculty, parents, or administrators. This tool examined the following items: policy and procedures, program implementation, staff training, parental education and communication, student training, reporting systems, and continuous quality improvement (CQI). Students and faculty were given surveys to determine bullying rates and perceptions of school safety. The school safety survey was given to all students concerning their bullying victimization and perception of school safety. This survey contains the following demographic variables: age, sex, grade, and race. The verified bullying incident data contains incident reporting from faculty, which focused on the type of bullying and the demographics of the perpetrator and victim. After new bullying prevention programs were implemented, students were given the safety and bullying victimization survey which focused on perceptions of bullying and school safety.

The number of bullying incidents, number of student victims and perpetrators, and the demographic characteristics of victims and perpetrators were retained in aggregate form for each school were submitted to the Department of Public Instruction (DPI) for analysis.

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.

This study was designed to examine how districts that experienced an incident of school employee sexual misconduct in 2014 defined, interpreted, and implemented key elements of Title IX before, during, and after an incident. The study used a qualitative case study design with a purposeful sample of five districts recruited from a database of 459 districts who experienced a case of school employee sexual misconduct in 2014. The study was conducted between January 2016 and September 2017.

Data collected included: 1) various district documents, 2) 41 interviews with primary actors (school employees and county officials directly involved in responding to the incident), 3) 10 focus groups with 51 secondary actors (school employees who were not directly involved with the incident but who might have been indirectly affected by it), and 4) offender, victim and district characteristics. Documents reviewed included written policies and protocols, training materials and handbooks for staff and students, case documents, and other guiding documents as applicable. In interviews and focus groups, participants were asked to discuss their knowledge of district policies and procedures, to describe the dissemination of and any changes to these policies and procedures, and to provide recommendations for improvement. To protect the confidentiality all district and participant identifying information is confidential and has been removed from any reporting.

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.

This round of Eurobarometer surveys covered the following special topics among respondents aged 16 to 30 years: (1) Mobility, (2) Job Training and Education, (3) Institutional Impact, (4) Social and Political Life, and (5) Climate Change. Respondents' opinions were collected regarding their mobility within the European Union, and how this affected their ability to study, train, and work. Respondents were also asked about training, school and university education in their own respective countries as well. Additional questions were asked regarding EU institutions and the impact of the EU initiative known as 'Youth Guarantee.' Respondents were also asked about their socioeconomic position in society, the impact of recent economic crises on their economic and social lives, and their attitudes toward environmental and climate change. In addition, respondents were also asked about their relationship to online social networks, as well as public life in the EU in general.

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

The National Center for Early Development and Learning (NCEDL) Multi-State Study of Pre-Kindergarten examined the pre-kindergarten programs of six states: California, Illinois, New York, Ohio, Kentucky, and Georgia. For this study, pre-kindergarten (pre-k) included center-based programs for four-year-olds that are fully or partially funded by state education agencies and that are operated in schools or under the direction of state and local education agencies.

The study had two primary purposes:

1. To describe the variations of experiences for children in pre-kindergarten and kindergarten programs in school-related settings (public schools and state-funded pre-k classrooms in community-based settings), and

2. To examine the relationships between variations in pre-kindergarten/kindergarten experiences and children's outcomes in early elementary school.

The study addressed six primary groups of research questions:

1. What is the nature and distribution of education and experience of teachers and teacher assistants in pre-k public school programs?

2. What is the nature and distribution of global quality and specific practices in key areas such as literacy, math, and teacher-child relationships in a diverse sample of pre-k public school programs for four-year-olds as well as in a similarly diverse sample of kindergarten classes?

3. How do quality and practices vary as a result of child and teacher characteristics (e.g., child gender, race, home language, family income, and teacher's years of education) and classroom, program, community, and state structural variables (e.g., teacher-child ratio, funding base of the program, teacher salary, and degree of state regulation) for children with different demographic characteristics (e.g., race, gender, home language, and family income)?

4. Do quality and practice vary in relation to combinations of these variables? For example, are quality and practice a function of family poverty and teacher pay or education?

5. Can children's outcomes at the end of their pre-kindergarten year be predicted by the children's experiences in pre-k programs? Are the various dimensions of quality and/or practice differentially related to outcomes? Are these relationships constant across a population of children with different characteristics (e.g., race, gender, home language, and family income)?

6. Do pre-kindergarten program quality and practices predict children's transitions to kindergarten and children's skills at the end of the kindergarten year? Are these transitions moderated by children's characteristics, like race, gender, and family income?

The six states in the study were selected based on the significant amount of resources they have committed to pre-k initiatives. States were also selected to maximize the diversity in geography, program settings (public school or community), program intensity (full day versus part day), and educational requirements for teachers. Within each state, a random sample of 40 centers/schools was selected. One classroom in each center/school was selected at random for observation, and four children in each classroom were selected for individual assessment. The children were followed from the beginning of pre-k through the end of kindergarten. In five of the six states, families were also visited in their homes.

1. Classroom Services and Specific Instructional Practices

   Within the 40 classrooms in each participating state, carefully trained data collectors conducted classroom observations twice each year, while additional surveys were used to gather information from administrators/principals, teachers, and parents. Data were gathered on program services, (e.g., healthcare, meals, and transportation), program curriculum, teacher training and education, teachers' opinions of child development, and their instructional practices on subjects such as language, literacy, mathematics concepts, and social-emotional competencies. Data were also collected as to what types of steps were taken to aid children in their transitions from pre-k to kindergarten.

2. Children

   Within each participating pre-k classroom, four randomly selected children were assessed using a battery of individual instruments to measure language, literacy, mathematics, and related concept development, as well as social competence. A panel of expert reviewers aided the researchers in selecting a variety of standardized and nonstandardized assessments. The pre-k child assessments were conducted in the fall and spring of 2001-2002. The same children were followed into kindergarten and assessed in the fall and spring of 2002-2003 to examine whether specific practices employed by pre-k teachers made a difference in their transitions to kindergarten.

3. Families

   In individual home-based interviews, information on socio-economic, socio-cultural, and familial contexts were obtained through open-ended questions, structured ratings, and videotaped parent-child interactions. Specifically, parents were asked about (1) family life as it relates to socio-economic status and socio-cultural environment, (2) family educational practices and beliefs about the comparative roles of school and family in educating children, (3) the nature and quality of the home-school relationship, and (4) their own ratings of their children's psychological development and social competence.

Demographic information collected includes race, gender, family income, and mother's education level.

The above information pertains to the Main Child Level Public-Use Version and the Main Child Level Restricted-Use Version. From these main datasets, subsets were created at the classroom level for Pre-Kindergarten (Pre-K Classroom Level Public-Use Version and Pre-K Classroom Level Restricted-Use Version) and for Kindergarten (Kindergarten Classroom Level Public-Use Version and Kindergarten Classroom Level Restricted-Use Version).

The Taiwan Education Panel Survey (TEPS) is a national longitudinal project initiated by Academia Sinica and jointly funded by Ministry of Education, the National Science Council, and Academia Sinica. The objective of TEPS is to stimulate more basic research in the fields of education, sociology, economics, and psychology by employing large scale panel data on representative samples of students, and their parents, teachers, and school administrators. In a nutshell, TEPS has five distinguishing features: (1) Theory driven: The focus is on the skills, behavioral, values, and psychological consequences of schooling institutions and family environments of students. Factors that are found in the literature to affect students' learning outcomes are all included. Specifically speaking, an AOE model of learning outcomes, representing learning capabilities (Ability), learning opportunities (Opportunity), and the amount of effort made by the students (Effort), serves as a guiding framework for questionnaire development. Ability and effort are more on students themselves while opportunities covers family, teachers, and school environment, peers, and so forth.

(2) Student centered and multidimensional and multi-levels: Central to the project were questionnaire surveys of students. The data collection extends to cover the most influential actors in their learning environment: parents, teachers, and schools. It covered nested multiple levels of data - individual students, classes, and schools, etc.

(3) Panel surveys covering multiple programs and multiple cohorts: Students in junior high (G7 to G9), senior high (G10 to G12), vocational (G10 to G12), and junior college (G10 to G14) programs were administered for data collection. All students were followed at least twice. A portion of them were followed four times at G7, G9, G11, and G12. In light of the ongoing transformation of the Taiwanese educational system in 1990s, the project started with two cohorts of approximately 40,000 students, making it possible to employ a quasi-experimental design in future analysis.

(4) National representative samples of the students: Students under data collection were representative samples of the 1984/85 and 1988/89 birth cohorts. Weighting is provided according to the probabilistic sampling design.

(5) Public goods: Data are made available to the public as soon as the data collection and data cleaning is completed, thereby providing an important resource for both academic and policy research.

The National Center for Early Development and Learning (NCEDL) combined the data of two major studies in order to understand variations among state-funded pre-kindergarten (pre-k) programs and in turn, how these variations relate to child outcomes at the end of pre-k and in kindergarten. The Multi-State Study of Pre-Kindergarten and the State-Wide Early Education Programs (SWEEP) Study provide detailed information on pre-kindergarten teachers, children, and classrooms in 11 states. By combining data from both studies, information is available from 721 classrooms and 2,982 pre-kindergarten children in these 11 states.

Pre-kindergarten data collection for the Multi-State Study of Pre-Kindergarten took place during the 2001-2002 school year in six states: California, Georgia, Illinois, Kentucky, New York, and Ohio. These states were selected from among states that had committed significant resources to pre-k initiatives. States were selected to maximize diversity with regard to geography, program settings (public school or community setting), program intensity (full-day vs. part-day), and educational requirements for teachers. In each state, a stratified random sample of 40 centers/schools was selected from the list of all the school/centers or programs (both contractors and subcontractors) provided to the researchers by each state's department of education.

In total, 238 sites participated in the fall and two additional sites joined the study in the spring. Participating teachers helped the data collectors recruit children into the study by sending recruitment packets home with all children enrolled in the classroom. On the first day of data collection, the data collectors determined which of the children were eligible to participate. Eligible children were those who (1) would be old enough for kindergarten in the fall of 2002, (2) did not have an Individualized Education Plan, according to the teacher, and (3) spoke English or Spanish well enough to understand simple instructions, according to the teacher.

Pre-kindergarten data collection for the SWEEP Study took place during the 2003-2004 school year in five states: Massachusetts, New Jersey, Texas, Washington, and Wisconsin. These states were selected to complement the states already in the Multi-State Study of Pre-K by including programs with significantly different funding models or modes of service delivery. In each of the five states, 100 randomly selected state-funded pre-kindergarten sites were recruited for participation in the study from a list of all sites provided by the state.

In total, 465 sites participated in the fall. Two sites declined to continue participation in the spring, resulting in 463 sites participating in the spring. Participating teachers helped the data collectors recruit children into the study by sending recruitment packets home with all children enrolled in the classroom. On the first day of data collection, the data collectors determined which of the children were eligible to participate. Eligible children were those who (1) would be old enough for kindergarten in the fall of 2004, (2) did not have an Individualized Education Plan, according to the teacher, and (3) spoke English or Spanish well enough to understand simple instructions, according to the teacher.

Demographic information collected across both studies includes race, teacher gender, child gender, family income, mother's education level, and teacher education level.

The researchers also created a variable for both the child-level data and the class-level data which allows secondary users to subset cases according to either the Multi-State or SWEEP study.

MT21 is a cross-national study of the preparation of middle school mathematics teachers. Countries participating included Chinese Taipei (Taiwan), South Korea (Korea), Bulgaria, Germany, Mexico, and the United States. Data were collected from teachers in their first and last year of preparation by sampling institutions in each country. Future teachers were asked about their backgrounds, course-taking and program activities, knowledge relevant to their teaching (mathematical and pedagogical), and beliefs and perspectives on content and pedagogy.

The 1995 Third International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS) data revealed that countries with higher achievement have teachers who teach substantially different content than that of their less accomplished counterparts (see Schmidt et al., 1996; Schmidt et al., 2001). The 1996 Report of the National Commission on Teaching and America's Future argued that what teachers know and do in the classroom matters for pupil learning. It also argued that teacher education might be a viable policy tool to improve the quality of education (National Commission on Teaching and America's Future, 1996). United States reform efforts are consistent with this line of thought. They have introduced standards to measure teacher quality as it relates to student achievement. This, in turn, led to accountability concerns regarding teacher preparation programs (INTASC, 1995; Murray, 2000; Leithwood, Edge and Jantzi, 1999; NCATE, 2000).

The MT21 Project was designed to answer the following question: how shall we prepare our future teachers to teach a more rigorous curriculum to all students? Several assumptions were made going into this work: the concepts and models defining teacher preparation are not fixed across the world. Recognizing and understanding this diversity to develop a cross-national study of teacher preparation poses a complex and challenging problem. It is hoped that the resulting international data would not only serve to provide policy insights but would also bring about change by making visible contrasts with other countries in terms of teacher preparation in the United States.

The Massachusetts Family Child Care study is a two-year evaluation, conducted by Abt Associates Inc, the Manpower Development Research Corporation (MDRC) and the National Center for Children in Poverty (NCCP), of the impacts of the LearningGames program on providers and children in family child care. LearningGames is designed to train caregivers to stimulate children's cognitive, language, and social-emotional development through a set of 200 simple games that encourage intensive, one-on-one interactions as a platform that allows the adult to engage the child in meaningful conversation, to listen to the child and respond to the child's questions and actions, and to scaffold and build on the child's growing skills at using and understanding language. The goal of LearningGames is to increase the frequency of rich language interactions between caregivers and children due to the importance of oral language development in children's understanding of words and concepts, in their ability to become competent readers, and in their long-term academic success and of the role played by rich language stimulation in promoting children's development. This evaluation of LearningGames examines the effectiveness of the program in changing the behavior of the family child care providers and the developmental outcomes for the children who are cared for by providers trained on LearningGames.

Baseline data were collected in the summer of 2005 with follow up observations taking place in the fall of 2006 and again in the winter of 2007. Of the 55 family child care provider networks in Massachusetts, 16 were sampled, resulting in 1,250 children enrolled in 353 study homes, though the study suffered a heavy overall attrition rate of 58 percent.

The data are provided in four data sets, one file containing data on the providers, a baseline observations file and two annual follow ups. The provider file (2005 Provider Data), includes data on: the provider's years of experience in family child care, their reasons for working as a family child care provider, what they would change about their job, what they believe is their responsibility for the children, their educational background, their age, sex, and race, the languages that they speak at home, the languages that they speak with the children in their care, and the types of materials that they read. Due to the descriptive sensitivity of the variables, this dataset requires a signed user agreement to access. All other datasets are publically available. The observation files include data from several measures: the QUEST Caregiver Rating Scale (subset of items), the Arnett Caregiver Interaction Scale, the revised Snapshot of Activities (from the OMLIT), the Read-Aloud Profile (from the OMLIT), and the TALK.The data include: the amount of time the provider shows interest in what children say or do, whether or not the provider seems to enjoy children, the average number of activities observed, the amount of read-alouds where the provider relates the book to group activities prior to reading the book, and whether or not the provider encourages children to do activities on their own.