Search

The purpose of this study was to address Advanced Placement (AP)® policy-related questions from administrators at the University System of Georgia (USG) using current AP Exam records and student course performance at four institutions. Specifically, comparisons of sequent or subsequent course grades were made between AP and non-AP students. This report details the AP Exam titles and institutions studied, analysis methods, and results, as well as data considerations to note. This study focused on examining the credit and placement policy or policies at the four institutions across multiple subject areas. Therefore, one research question was proposed for each exam title: How do AP Exam credit-holding students perform in sequent or subsequent courses compared to students without credit who took the corresponding introductory course at the institution? Four representative institutions, one from each USG institutional sector, were selected by USG for study: (1) Abraham Baldwin Agricultural College (ABAC); (2) Clayton State University (CSU); (3) Kennesaw State University (KSU); and (4) University of Georgia (UGA). Students in this study were first-time entering first-year students in the fall of 2013. Two academic years of course data for this cohort were included: 2013-14 and 2014-15. Course records from the institutions were matched to College Board AP Exam records using student identifying information. Due to varying AP Exam volumes, not all institutions were included in analyses for each AP Exam title. The combination of AP English Language and Composition and AP English Literature and Composition (referred to as "English") is the only area where all four institutions were able to be studied. Full Comparison Results are appended.

Campus security and safety is an important feature of postsecondary education. The Department of Education is committed to assisting schools in providing students nationwide a safe environment in which to learn and to keep students, parents and employees well informed about campus security. These goals were advanced by the Crime Awareness and Campus Security Act of 1990. The Department is committed to ensuring that postsecondary institutions are in full compliance with that Act, and enforcement of the Act is a priority of the Department. This handbook was developed by the U.S. Department of Education to present step-by-step procedures, examples, and references for higher education institutions to follow in meeting the campus safety and security requirements of the Higher Education Act of 1965, as amended. This handbook replaces the 2011 version and includes information on how institutions can comply with the changes the Violence Against Women Reauthorization Act of 2013 made to the Clery Act. Three appendices are included: (1) Links to the "Higher Education Act of 1965" Safety- and Security-related Laws and Regulations; (2) Sample Letter to a Local Law Enforcement Agency to Request Crime Statistics; and (3) Checklist for Campus Safety and Security Compliance.

The Australian education and training system offers a range of options for young people. This publication provides a summary of the statistics relating to young people aged 15 to 19 years who participated in an education and training activity during 2013 Information on participation is presented for VET in Schools students, higher education students, apprentices and trainees, and other publicly funded vocational education and training (VET) students. Table 1 provides an estimate of participation in education and training in Australia by 15 to 19-year-olds at a point in time--August 2013. The sectoral tables (tables 2 to 10) provide statistics on all education and training activities undertaken by young people from 2009 to 2013, by sector.

Since the 1970s, the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) has monitored the academic performance of 9-, 13-, and 17-year-old students with what have become known as the long-term trend assessments. Four decades of results offer an extended view of student achievement in reading and mathematics. Results in this report are based on the most recent performance of more than 50,000 public and private school students who, by their participation, have contributed to our understanding of the nation's academic achievement. Both 9- and 13-year-olds scored higher in reading and mathematics in 2012 than students their age in the early 1970s (figure A). Scores were 8 to 25 points higher in 2012 than in the first assessment year. Seventeen-year-olds, however, did not show similar gains. Average reading and mathematics scores in 2012 for 17-year-olds were not significantly different from scores in the first assessment year. Closing achievement gaps is a goal of both national and state education policy. The results from the 2012 NAEP long-term trend assessments show some progress toward meeting that goal. Appended are: (1) Percentage of students assessed in NAEP reading, by age group and selected characteristics: Various years, 1971-2012; (2) Percentage of students assessed in NAEP mathematics, by age group and selected characteristics: Various years, 1978-2012; (3) Percentage of students identified as students with disabilities and/or English language learners excluded in NAEP reading and mathematics, as a percentage of all students, by subject and age group: Various years, 1990-2012; and (4) Percentage of 9-, 13-, and 17-year-old students with disabilities (SD) and/or English language learners (ELL) identified, excluded, and assessed in NAEP reading and mathematics, as a percentage of all students, by SD/ELL category: 2012. (Contains 38 figures and 10 tables.)

"Shake, Rattle, & Roll" is a new program developed by The Actuarial Foundation with Scholastic, provides dynamic real-world math content designed to build student skills while showing students the relevance of math to understanding their world and planning for their future. Math skills are increasingly important for students. According to the U.S. Department of Labor, computer and mathematical science occupations, are projected to add 967,000 jobs and grow fastest among the professional groups by 2014. [A poster that accompanies this teaching guide can be viewed and/or retrieved at: http://www.actuarialfoundation.org/pdf/Poster.pdf.]

The U.S. Census Bureau conducts a Census of Government Finances and an Annual Survey of Government Finances as authorized by law under Title 13, U.S. Code, Sections 161 and 182. The Census of Government Finances has been conducted every 5 years since 1957, while the Annual Survey of Government Finances has been conducted annually since 1977 in years when the Census of Government Finances is not conducted. The 2010 Annual Survey of Government Finances, similar to previous annual surveys and censuses of governments, covers the entire range of government finance activities--revenue, expenditure, debt, and assets (cash and security holdings). This report contains financial statistics relating to public elementary-secondary education. It includes national and state financial aggregates and displays data for each public school system with an enrollment of 10,000 or more. Appended are: (1) Definitions of Selected Terms; (2) Notes Relating to Education Finance Data; (3) Two-Letter State Abbreviations; and (4) F-33 Survey Form. (Contains 6 figures and 19 tables.) [For 2009 report, "Public Education Finances, 2009," see ED520204.]

The Educational Policy Improvement Center (EPIC) conducted an investigation of the Intersegmental Committee for the Academic Senates (ICAS) Statements of Competencies for Mathematics and Academic Literacy. The purpose of this work is to understand how the ICAS competencies relate to college and career readiness, as represented by the augmented Common Core State Standards (CCSS) adopted by the California State Board of Education (SBE) on August 2, 2010. This study investigated a crosswalk analysis between (a) the Academic Literacy (ELA) ICAS competencies and the CCSS ELA Anchor Standards and (b) the mathematics ICAS competencies and the CCSS Standards for Mathematical Practice and the High School Mathematics Standards at the cluster level. Overall, the study finds that the ICAS competencies do relate to the augmented Common Core State Standards. This study also reveals the absence of certain "habits of mind" and English as a Second Language (ESL) standards in the CCSS ELA standards, and the absence of discrete mathematics and calculus in the augmented CCSS mathematics standards. The ICAS framework is broader than the CCSS ELA standards in addressing additional components related to supporting ESL students and includes key cognitive strategies all students need to be successful in postsecondary settings. The results of this study also raise the issue of the level of desired preparation in mathematics for high school graduates in California. The CCSS mathematics standards strongly relate to the ICAS competencies identified as "essential" for all students, but have gaps with the ICAS competencies deemed "desirable" for all students. Appended are: (1) Standards and Competencies; and (2) Competencies and Frequencies of Ratings. (Contains 5 figures, 17 tables, and 5 footnotes.) [This paper was prepared for Policy Analysis for California Education (PACE).]

Across the country, teachers are working to provide individualized instruction to the students in their classes. Teachers use their professional judgement to modify teaching to suit the learning needs of students. Occasionally, this modification is required as a result of students being formally identified as having a learning exceptionality. As classrooms become more diverse, the teacher's task becomes more difficult. The challenges associated with teachers adapting to meet individual student needs can be made more difficult given the trend toward standardization in education. It is counterintuitive to be focussing on individualized instruction while at the same time hoping for standardized outputs on a standardized assessment. This paper presents some of the specific conditions of practice necessary for teachers to properly support inclusive schools and classrooms. (Contains 5 charts and 15 endnotes.)

The purpose of these modules is to provide an introduction to the world of probability and statistics to accelerated mathematics students at the high school level. The modules also introduce students to real world math concepts and problems that property and casualty actuaries come across in their work. They are designed to be used by teachers and students of AP courses (primarily AB and BC Calculus) after the AP exam, but of course they can be used at any time. Statistical thinking is critical in today's society. Data are everywhere and students will see and recognize misinterpretations all the time. "Probability & Statistics: Modular Learning Exercises" cover: (1) Basic Statistics Concepts; (2) The Normal Model; (3) Discrete Probability Distributions; and (4) Correlation and Regression.

The purpose of these modules is to provide an introduction to the world of probability and statistics to accelerated mathematics students at the high school level. The materials are centered on the fictional town of Happy Shores, a coastal community which is at risk for hurricanes. Actuaries at an insurance company figure out the risks and possible losses associated with hurricanes and tropical storms in Happy Shores. Students use historical data to create models about possible damages if hurricanes of certain strengths hit. "Probability & Statistics: Modular Learning Exercises" cover: (1) Basic Statistics Concepts; (2) The Normal Model; (3) Discrete Probability Distributions; and (4) Correlation and Regression. Definitions are appended.

The Canada Education Savings Program (CESP) has been an initiative of the Government of Canada since 1998. As part of the Department of Human Resources and Skills Development Canada, the program administers the Canada Education Savings Grant (CESG) and the Canada Learning Bond (CLB). These two initiatives help Canadian families save for a child's post-secondary education in Registered Education Savings Plans (RESPs). Although any person can be named by a subscriber of an RESP to receive money for education after high school, the "Annual Statistical Review 2012" only reports on those who have previously received the Government of Canada incentives to save in RESPs which are available to children 0 to 17 years of age. This report provides annual statistics on the CESP and RESPs in Canada for January 1 through December 31, 2012 as well as historical data that show trends since program inception. The primary source of data used to produce this report is the CESP's Reporting Database, which compiles CESG and CLB data supplied by RESP providers. CESG statistics were calculated based on the date on which transactions were made such as the date that a contribution or an Education Assistance Payment was made; whereas the CLB statistics were calculated based on a processing date, which is the date that the grant is paid. [For "Canada Education Savings Program: Annual Statistical Review 2011," see ED543303.]

Representative samples of fourth- and eighth-grade public school students from 21 urban districts participated in the 2011 National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) in reading. Eighteen of the districts participating in the 2011 NAEP Trial Urban District Assessment (TUDA) participated in earlier assessment years, while three districts participated for the first time in 2011. Between 900 and 2,700 students in each district were assessed at grades 4 and 8. Findings include: (1) No significant change in scores for most districts compared to 2009. At grade 4, average reading scores did not change significantly from 2009 to 2011 for public school students in the nation, large cities, or any of the 18 urban districts that participated in both years (figure A). At grade 8, average reading scores were higher in 2011 than in 2009 for public school students in the nation and large cities; (2) Among the 21 urban districts that participated in the 2011 reading assessment, scores for both fourth- and eighth-graders in 5 districts were higher than the scores for public school students attending schools in large cities (i.e., cities with populations of 250,000 or more) overall; and (3) Compared to large cities, scores for lower-income students are higher in six districts at grade 4 and four districts at grade 8. At grade 4, average scores for both higher- and lower-income students in Charlotte, Hillsborough County, Jefferson County, Miami-Dade, and New York City were higher than the scores for their peers in large cities (figure B). At grade 8, average scores for both higher- and lower-income students in Charlotte and Hillsborough County were higher than the scores for their peers in large cities. (Contains 22 figures and 25 tables.)

Representative samples of fourth- and eighth-grade public school students from 21 urban districts participated in the 2011 National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) in mathematics. Eighteen of the districts participating in the 2011 NAEP Trial Urban District Assessment (TUDA) participated in earlier assessment years, while three districts participated for the first time in 2011. Between 1,000 and 2,700 students in each district were assessed at grades 4 and 8. Findings include: (1) Scores higher than in 2009 for four districts at grade 4 and six districts at grade 8. At grade 4, average mathematics scores were higher in 2011 than in 2009 for public school students in the nation, large cities, and 4 of the 18 urban districts that participated in both years (figure A). At grade 8, average mathematics scores were higher in 2011 than in 2009 for public school students in the nation, large cities, and 6 of the 18 urban districts that participated in both years; (2) Among the 21 urban districts that participated in the 2011 mathematics assessment, scores for both fourth- and eighth-graders in 6 districts were higher than the scores for public school students attending schools in large cities (i.e., cities with populations of 250,000 or more) overall. Fourth- and eighth-graders in 10 districts scored lower than their peers in large cities; and (3) Compared to large cities, scores for lower-income students are higher in eight districts at grade 4 and five districts at grade 8. At grade 4, average scores for both higher- and lower-income students in Austin, Charlotte, and Hillsborough County were higher than the scores for their peers in large cities (figure B). At grade 8, average scores for both higher- and lower-income students in Austin and Boston were higher than the scores for their peers in large cities. (Contains 21 figures and 25 tables.)

This study of the 2011 administration focused on principal component scores based on the 2008 and 2009 SERU (Student Experience in the Research University) administrations. The first analysis is a traditional nonresponse examination where the response rates of various groups are compared to determine if the responding students represent the larger student body. Table 1 displays response rates for nine demographic distributions including: grade point average, SAT scores, gender, entry from high school or other college, class level, race/ethnicity, area of major (CIP), residency and financial independence. Table 2 presents the results of a test of subgroup differences, analysis of variance, and relies on variance explained to identify important differences. Table 3 displays the difference between the mean of each principal component factor score as computed from the respondents and from a distribution weighted by the proportions in the population. Table 4 addresses the possibility that subgroups of students participated at different rates over the collection period and that some are more or less likely to respond early or late. (Contains 4 tables and 4 footnotes.)

This report presents results of the 2011 National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) in mathematics at grades 4 and 8. Nationally representative samples of 209,000 fourth-graders and 175,200 eighth-graders participated in the 2011 National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) in mathematics. At each grade, students responded to questions designed to measure what they know and can do across five mathematics content areas: number properties and operations; measurement; geometry; data analysis, statistics, and probability; and algebra. The results from the 2011 assessment are compared to those from previous years, showing how students' performance in mathematics has changed over time. Findings reveal: (1) Both fourth- and eighth-graders score higher in 2011 than in previous assessment years; (2) Highest percentages to date of fourth- and eighth-graders performing at or above the "Proficient" level; and (3) Scores in 18 states and jurisdictions higher than in 2009 at grade 4 or 8 and lower in 2 states. Appendix tables are included. (Contains 42 tables and 34 figures.)

Drawing upon data from the 2007-08 National Postsecondary Student Aid Study (NPSAS:08), a nationally representative survey of all postsecondary students, this Statistics in Brief offers an overview of the enrollment characteristics of graduate and first-professional students, when they started their programs, how they combined school and work, the price of attending, and the types and amounts of aid they receive to help pay for their education in 2007-08. Except where otherwise indicated, it includes students enrolled at public, private nonprofit, and for-profit 4-year institutions. Data are reported separately by degree level and within level, for selected degree programs with sufficient numbers to report separately. Financial aid information is presented for all students in a program regardless of whether they attended full or part time. Details on financial aid for full-time, full-year attendees can be found in Cataldi and Ho (2010b). Information on student demographic characteristics can be found in Cataldi and Ho (2010a). (Contains 17 figures and 13 footnotes.)

The National Center for Education Statistics collects data on crime and violence in U.S. public schools through the School Survey on Crime and Safety (SSOCS). This First Look report presents findings from the 2009-10 School Survey on Crime and Safety data collection. Developed and managed by the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) within the Institute of Education Sciences and supported by the Office of Safe and Drug-Free Schools of the U.S. Department of Education, SSOCS asks public school principals about the frequency of incidents, such as physical attacks, robberies, and thefts, in their schools. Portions of this survey also focus on school programs, disciplinary actions, and the policies implemented to prevent and reduce crime in schools. Appended are: (1) Standard Error Tables A-1; (2) Methodology and Technical Notes; (3) Description of Variables; and (4) 2009-10 School Survey on Crime and Safety Questionnaire. (Contains 25 tables and 11 footnotes.)

In 1988, the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) introduced a proposal to develop a private school data collection that would improve on the sporadic collection of private school data dating back to 1890 and improve on commercially available private school sampling frames. Since 1989, the U.S. Bureau of the Census has conducted the biennial Private School Universe Survey (PSS) for NCES. The PSS is designed to generate biennial data on the total number of private schools, students, and teachers, and to build a universe of private schools to serve as a sampling frame of private schools for NCES sample surveys. For more information about the methodology and design of the PSS, please see the Technical Notes in appendix B of this report. The target population for the PSS is all schools in the 50 states and the District of Columbia that are not supported primarily by public funds, provide classroom instruction for one or more of grades kindergarten through 12 (or comparable ungraded levels), and have one or more teachers. Organizations or institutions that provide support for home schooling, but do not provide classroom instruction, are not included. The 2009-10 PSS data were collected between September 2009 and May 2010. All data are for the 2009-10 school year except the high school graduate data, which are for the 2008-09 school year. Because the purpose of this report is to introduce new NCES survey data through the presentation of tables containing descriptive information, only selected findings are listed. These findings are purely descriptive in nature and are not meant to imply causality. These findings have been chosen to demonstrate the range of information available from the 2009-10 PSS rather than to discuss all of the observed differences, emphasize any particular issue, or make comparisons over time. The tables in this report contain totals and percentages generated from bivariate crosstabulation procedures. All of the results are weighted. Comparisons drawn in the bullets have been tested for statistical significance at the 0.05 level using Student's statistics to insure that the differences are larger than those that might be expected due to sampling variation. Many of the variables examined are related to one another, and complex interactions and relationships have not been explored. Appendices include: (1) Glossary; (2) Technical Notes; and (3) Standard Error Tables. (Contains 31 tables and 1 footnote.)

These Web Tables use data from the 2007 School Crime Supplement (SCS) to the National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS) to show the relationship between bullying and cyber-bullying victimization and other variables of interest such as the reported presence of gangs, guns, drugs, and alcohol at school; select school security measures; student criminal victimization; and personal fear, avoidance behaviors, fighting, and weapon-carrying at school. The tables are grouped into four sections. Section 1 is an overview table, showing the number and percentage of students ages 12 through 18 who reported being bullied at school and cyber-bullied anywhere, by type of bullying or cyber-bullying (table 1.1). Section 2 focuses on bullying at school, displaying estimates for the location of bullying, the percentage distribution of the frequency of bullying, and the type of bullying reported by students ages 12 through 18, by selected student and school characteristics (tables 2.1-2.6). Section 3 focuses on cyber-bullying anywhere, providing estimates for the percentage distribution of the frequency of cyber-bullying and the type of cyber-bullying reported by students ages 12 through 18, by selected student and school characteristics (tables 3.1-3.4). Section 4 displays the percentages of students who were bullied at school or cyber-bullied anywhere by student reports of unfavorable school conditions; by student reports of selected school security measures; by student reports of criminal victimization at school; and by student reports of personal fear, avoidance behaviors, fighting, and weapon-carrying at school (tables 4.1-4.4). (Contains 3 endnotes.)

The Canada Education Savings Program has been an initiative of the Government of Canada since 1998. As part of the Department of Human Resources and Skills Development, the program administers the Canada Education Savings Grant and the Canada Learning Bond. These two initiatives help Canadian families save for a child's post-secondary education in Registered Education Savings Plans (RESPs). Although any person can be named by a subscriber of an RESP to receive money for education after high school, the Annual Statistical Review only reports on those who have received any of the Government of Canada incentives to save in RESPs which are available to children 0 to 17 years of age. This report provides annual statistics on the CESP and RESPs in Canada from January 1 through December 31, 2011. The report is made available online for the benefit of a range of external partners and stakeholders (i.e. financial institutions, other government departments, provincial and territorial governments and members of the general public). The primary source of data used to produce this report is the Canada Education Savings Program's Reporting Database, which compiles Canada Education Savings Grant and Canada Learning Bond data supplied by RESP providers. Canada Education Savings Grant statistics are calculated based on the transaction date, which is the date that an application is filed or a transaction is made, while Canada Learning Bond statistics are calculated based on the processing date (to be consistent with the reporting of Canada Learning Bond payments), which is the date that the grant is paid. Two major changes have been made to this report: the use of 2011 Census data to calculate program participation rates and the use of new postal code and address information obtained from Statistics Canada to assign address data more accurately to provinces and territories. As a result, some provincial statistics may not be comparable to those reported in 2010.

This report provides statistical information about the participation of women, minorities, and persons with disabilities in science and engineering education and employment. Its primary purpose is to serve as an information source. It offers no endorsement of or recommendations about policies or programs. National Science Foundation reporting on this topic is mandated by the Science and Engineering Equal Opportunities Act (Public Law 96-516). This digest, new for 2011, highlights key statistics drawn from the wide variety of data sources used to provide this information. Data and figures in this digest are organized into six topical areas--enrollment, field of degree, employment status, occupation, academic employment, and persons with disabilities. Surveys conducted by the Science Resources Statistics division of the National Science Foundation provided a large portion of the data used in this report. During the report's production, the America COMPETES Reauthorization Act of 2010 was signed into law. Section 505 of the bill renames the Division of Science Resources Statistics as the National Center for Science and Engineering Statistics (NCSES). The new name signals the central role of NCSES in the collection, interpretation, analysis, and dissemination of objective data on the science and engineering enterprise. Furthermore, the technical notes for this report provide information on specific data sources, including the survey population, data collection procedures, and sampling errors. This digest includes data on people with degrees in science, engineering, and health fields, constituted in this report by the following fields: astronomy, chemistry, physics, atmospheric sciences, earth sciences, oceanography, mathematics and statistics, computer sciences, agricultural sciences, biological sciences, psychology, social sciences, engineering, medical sciences, and other life sciences. Glossary and a list of online resources are also included.

This paper provides an overview of U.S. Department of Education programs authorized and funded under federal law. It includes information as well on the laboratories, centers, and other facilities funded by the Department that provide important resources for education. Readers will find funding information, contact information, and a web site for more information about each program. Each entry, which gives a brief overview of a program or resource, is listed initially by a broad topical heading. The "Guide" is organized alphabetically according to these topical headings, and then alphabetically by program title within each heading. The program title and any commonly or formerly used names for the program come next, followed by the name of the principal office that administers the program. The Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance (CFDA) or ED number follows. Programs that do not have CFDA or ED numbers assigned are listed as "None" in this field. After the CFDA or ED number, information is provided about the entities that are eligible to apply to each program. Next comes information on any current competitions and the types of assistance available. Funding levels for fiscal year (FY) 2010 and the previous two fiscal years follow next. Most of the programs in the Guide received funding in FY 2010. Programs covered in this Guide are presented in the areas of: (1) Academic Improvement; (2) Adult Education; (3) Assessment; (4) Career and Technical Education; (5) Child Care; (6) Civics; (7) Correctional Education; (8) Disability and Rehabilitation Research; (9) Disadvantaged Persons; (10) English Language Acquisition; (11) Federal Student Aid; (12) Foreign Language Instruction; (13) Higher and Continuing Education; (14) Impact Aid; (15) Indian Education; (16) International Education; (17) Migrant Education; (18) Postsecondary Improvement; (19) Professional Development; (20) Reading; (21) Rehabilitation; (22) Research; (23) Safe and Drug-Free Schools; (24) School Improvement; (25) Special Education; (26) Statistics; (27) Teacher and Principal Quality; (28) Technical Assistance; (29) Technology; and (30) Telecommunications. This guide also includes the following indexes and related websites: Program Title Index; Subject Index; Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance (CFDA) Index; Education Level Index; Index of Programs Funded Under the "American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009"; and Related Web Sites.

The Common Core of Data (CCD) is an annual collection of public elementary and secondary education data by the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) in the Institute of Education Sciences of the U.S. Department of Education. The data are reported by state education agencies (SEAs). The finance data are reported to the U.S. Census Bureau, which acts as the data collection agent for NCES. The data are collected through an online data collection site. Student membership data are reported to the U.S. Department of Education's ED"Facts" data collection system. This report presents findings on public education revenues and expenditures using fiscal year 2008 (FY 08) data from the National Public Education Financial Survey (NPEFS) of the CCD survey system. Programs covered in the NPEFS include regular, special, and vocational education; charter schools (if they reported data to the SEA); and state-run education programs (such as special education centers or education programs for incarcerated youth). While the tables in this report include data for all NPEFS respondents, the discussion in the text is limited to the 50 states and the District of Columbia. Appendices include: (1) Methodology and Technical Notes; and (2) Common Core of Data Glossary. (Contains 8 tables, 3 figures, and 3 footnotes.) [For the Fiscal Year 2007 edition, see ED504440.]

This report presents tabulations for the 2008 Academic Libraries Survey (ALS) conducted by the United States Department of Education's National Center for Education Statistics (NCES), within the Institute of Education Sciences. This First Look summarizes services, staff, collections, and expenditures of academic libraries in 2- and 4-year, degree-granting postsecondary institutions in the 50 states and the District of Columbia. Among the many findings: (1) During Fiscal year (FY) 2008, there were about 138.1 million circulation transactions from academic libraries' general collection; (2) At the end of FY 2008, there were 226 academic libraries that held 1 million or more books, serial backfiles, and other paper materials including government documents; (3) Academic libraries reported 93,438 full-time equivalent (FTE) staff working in academic libraries during the fall of 2008; (4) Academic libraries' expenditures totaled approximately $6.8 billion during FY 2008; (5) In Fall 2008, some 72 percent of academic libraries provided library reference service by e-mail or the Web; and (6) During FY 2008, some 46 percent of academic libraries reported that their postsecondary institution defined information literacy or the information literate student. (Contains 36 tables.)

This report marks the third release of library statistics data from the Institute of Museum and Library Services (IMLS). It contains data on state library agencies in the 50 states and the District of Columbia for state fiscal year (FY) 2008. The data were collected through the State Library Agencies (StLA) Survey, the product of a cooperative effort between the Chief Officers of State Library Agencies (COSLA), IMLS and the U.S. Census Bureau. This cooperative effort makes possible the 100 percent unit response rate achieved for this survey. The frame or source of the list of respondents for this survey is based on the list that COSLA maintains of state library agencies. Appendices include: (1) Technical Notes; (2) State Library Agency Applicants to the Universal Service (E-Rate Discount) Program; (3) Recipients of Other Federal Income, by State and Type of Income Received; (4) Survey Instrument and Instructions; and (5) Supplemental Tables. (Contains 15 figures, 51 tables and 14 footnotes.) [For the 2007 report, see ED514999.]

This First Look presents national and state level data on student enrollment by grade and by race/ethnicity within grade, the numbers of teachers and other education staff, and several student/staff ratios for the 2007-08 school year. It uses data from the State Nonfiscal Survey of Public Elementary/Secondary Education of the Common Core of Data (CCD) survey system. The CCD is an annual collection of data that are reported by state education agencies to the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) through the U.S. Department of Education's EDFacts data collection system. Among the findings were that public elementary and secondary schools had 49.3 million students in membership in school year 2007-08. This was a decrease of less than 0.1 percent from student membership in school year 2006-07. Summing across grades, 34.3 million students were enrolled in pre-kindergarten through grade 8 and ungraded classes; 15.0 million students were enrolled in grades 9-12 in the 2007-08 school year. When examining students for whom race/ethnicity was reported in the 2007-08 school year, 55.8 percent were White, non-Hispanic; 21.1 percent were Hispanic; 17.0 percent were Black, non-Hispanic; 4.8 percent were Asian/Pacific Islander; and 1.2 percent were American Indian/Alaska Native (table 2). The percentage of students who were White, non-Hispanic decreased from 56.5 percent for White, non-Hispanic students in school year 2006-07. In school year 2007-08, public elementary and secondary schools and local education agencies employed a total of 6.2 million FTE staff. This was an increase of less than 1 percent from the number of FTE staff employed in school year 2006-07. Of the FTE staff in the 2007-08 school year, 51.1 percent were teachers, 15.3 percent were instructional aides, instructional coordinators and supervisors, guidance counselors, or librarians, and 23.1 percent were student and other support staff. About 3.5 percent were school or district administrators and 7.0 percent were administrative support staff. The student/teacher ratio in public schools in school year 2007-08 was 15.5 (i.e., there were about 16 students for every FTE teacher employed). The ratio ranged from a high of 23.7 in Utah to a low of 10.7 in Vermont. The elementary student/teacher ratio was 20.1, while the secondary student/teacher ratio was 11.9. The category of other instructional and student support includes instructional aides, instructional coordinators and supervisors, librarians, library support, and student support services staff. In the 2007-08 school year, there were about 43 students for every instructional and student support staff member. Appended to this report is (1) Methodology and Technical Notes; and (2) Common Core of Data Glossary. (Contains 4 tables and related data files.

This report presents results of the 2009 National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) in mathematics at grades 4 and 8. The results from the 2009 assessment presented in this report are compared to those from previous years, showing how students' performance in mathematics has progressed over time. Results for students in the nation, the 50 states, the District of Columbia, and Department of Defense schools are reported as average scores and as percentages of students performing at or above three achievement levels: Basic, Proficient, and Advanced. Scores are also reported at selected percentiles, showing changes in the performance of lower-, middle-, and higher-performing students. Results for groups of students defined by various background characteristics (e.g., race/ethnicity, gender, and students' eligibility for free or reduced-price school lunch) are included, as well as sample assessment questions with examples of student responses. Additional technical notes and appendix tables provide information on NAEP samples, school and student participation rates, the exclusion and accommodation of students with disabilities and English language learners, and additional state-level results. Highlights of the national results show that gains in overall average scores seen in earlier years did not continue at grade 4 but did continue at grade 8. While still higher than the scores in the six assessment years from 1990 to 2005, the overall average score for fourth-graders in 2009 was unchanged from the score in 2007. The upward trend seen in earlier assessments for eighth-graders continued with a 2-point increase from 2007 to 2009. There were no significant changes from 2007 to 2009 in the score gaps between White and Black students or between White and Hispanic students at either grade 4 or grade 8. State results for grade 4 show score increases since 2007 in 8 states and decreases in 4 states and jurisdictions. At grade 8, scores were higher in 2009 than in 2007 in 15 states and jurisdictions, and no states showed a decline. (Contains 24 figures and 31 tables.)

This report builds upon a series of National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) reports on high school dropout and completion rates that began in 1988. It presents estimates of rates in 2007, provides data about trends in dropout and completion rates over the last 3 decades (1972-2007), and examines the characteristics of high school dropouts and high school completers in 2007. Four rates are presented to provide a broad picture of high school dropouts and completers in the United States, with the event dropout rate, the status dropout rate, the status completion rate, and the averaged freshman graduation rate each contributing unique information. Among findings in the report was that among reporting states in 2006, the averaged freshman graduation rate (AFGR) was 73.2 percent. The rate provides an estimate of the percentage of public high school students who graduate with a regular diploma 4 years after starting 9th grade. The report also shows that students living in low-income families were approximately 10 times more likely to drop out of high school between 2006 and 2007 than were students living in high-income families. In October 2007, approximately 3.3 million civilian noninstitutionalized 16- through 24-year-olds were not enrolled in high school and had not earned a high school diploma or alternative credential. Appended are: (1) Technical Notes; (2) Glossary; and (3) Standard Error Tables. (Contains 27 tables and 6 figures.)

"Projections of Education Statistics to 2018" is the 37th report in a series begun in 1964. It includes statistics on elementary and secondary schools and degree-granting institutions. Included are projections of enrollment, graduates, teachers, and expenditures to the year 2018. This is the first edition of the "Projections of Education Statistics" to include projections of first-time freshmen in public and private postsecondary institutions. In addition to projections at the national level, the report includes projections of public elementary and secondary school enrollment and public high school graduates to the year 2018 at the state level. The projections in this report were produced to provide researchers, policy analysts, and others with state-level projections developed using a consistent methodology. The projections presented in this report are based on the 2000 census and assumptions for the fertility rate, internal migration, net immigration, and mortality rate. Appendix A describes the methodology and assumptions used to develop the projections; appendix B presents supplementary tables; appendix C describes data sources; appendix D is a list of abbreviations; appendix E presents the references; and appendix F is a glossary of terms. (Contains 71 tables and 47 figures.) [For "Projections of Education Statistics to 2017. Thirty-Sixth Edition. NCES 2008-078," see ED502632.]

This report presents statistics on how Association of Research Libraries (ARL) member libraries spend money on electronic resources. This report indicates that 109 ARL libraries purchased 32,329,187 electronic books. In 2007-2008, there was a median of 28,319 acquisitions of electronic books by ARL libraries (this includes one institution that purchased 969,057 electronic books). Ninety-eight ARL libraries reported spending a total of $30,563,758 for electronic books in 2007-2008. A total of 1,072,452 virtual reference transactions were recorded by 100 ARL libraries. Seventy-five ARL libraries reported 184,481,145 log-ins to institutional networked e-resources. 180,009,988 virtual visits to the library catalog were noted by 69 ARL libraries. 131,792 total digital collections were reported, containing 50,393,720 items, which were accessed 876,787,949 times. In 2007-2008, ARL institutions reported $29,621,505 in the direct costs of digital collections personnel and $6,949,595 in the costs of digital collections equipment. The following are included in this report: (1) ARL Library Data Tables, 2007-2008; (2) Rank Order Tables, 2007-2008; (3) ARL Supplementary Statistics Worksheet, 2007-2008; (4) Footnotes to the ARL Supplementary Statistics, 2007-2008; and (5) ARL Member Libraries as of January 1, 2009. (Contains 4 tables.) [For the ARL Supplementary Statistics, 2006-2007, see ED528636.]

This report presents statistics on how Association of Research Libraries (ARL) member libraries spend money on electronic resources. This report indicates that 108 ARL libraries purchased 25,006,758 electronic books. In 2006-2007, there was an ARL median of 243,725 acquisitions of electronic books (this includes one institution that purchased 801,640 electronic books). ARL libraries reported spending a total of $26,387,282 for electronic books in 2006- 2007. A total of 787,625 virtual reference transactions were recorded by 99 ARL libraries. Seventy-three ARL libraries reported 152,083,681 log-ins to institutional networked e-resources. 116,840 total digital collections were reported, containing 79,786,819 items, which were accessed 662,537,647 times. In 2006-2007, ARL institutions reported $21,641,025 in the direct costs of digital collections personnel and $9,230,896 in the costs of digital collections equipment. The following are included in this report: (1) ARL Library Data Tables; (2) Rank Order Tables; (3) ARL Supplementary Statistics Worksheet, 2006-2007; (4) Footnotes to the ARL Supplementary Statistics, 2006-2007; and (5) ARL Member Libraries as of January 1, 2008. (Contains 4 tables.) [For the "ARL Supplementary Statistics, 2007-2008", see ED528635.]

"ARL Statistics 2007-2008" is the latest in a series of annual publications that describe collections, staffing, expenditures, and service activities for the 123 members of the Association of Research Libraries (ARL). Of these, 113 are university libraries; the remaining 10 are public, governmental, and nonprofit research libraries. Data reported by libraries are presented in a series of tables. In addition, trends in service activities, serial unit costs, and ownership and access are highlighted and their implications for libraries discussed. The following are appended: (1) ARL Member Libraries as of January 1, 2008; and (2) Bibliography. (Contains 28 tables and 6 graphs.) [For ARL Statistics, 2006-2007, see ED503842.]

This handbook was developed for high school teachers looking for new sources of timely information and ways to make courses more engaging and relevant to students. The American Community Survey (ACS) provides a wide online array of social, economic, and demographic information about the nation, states, and local communities. These data can be used to teach concepts and skills, such as statistical literacy, and content areas, including social studies, geography, and mathematics. The ACS is updated annually, providing fresh, timely data for students each year. The handbook begins with a brief overview of the ACS: what it is, how it came about, and why it is important to high school teachers and students. Types of information and geographic areas covered by the ACS are described and explained to assist in understanding and correctly interpreting ACS data. Online access and examples that illustrate how you can incorporate ACS data into your activities or lesson plans to address a variety of social studies, geography, and mathematics standards. Eight technical appendixes are provided that discuss advanced applications and issues with the ACS: (1) Understanding and Using Single-Year and Multiyear Estimates; (2) Differences Between ACS and Decennial Census Sample Data; (3) Measures of Sampling Error; (4) Making Comparisons; (5) Using Dollar-Denominated Data; (6) Measures of Nonsampling Error; (7) Implications of Population Controls on ACS Estimates; and (8) Other ACS Resources. A glossary is included. (Contains 19 footnotes, 24 figures and 10 tables.)

This report marks the second release of library statistics data from the Institute of Museum and Library Services (IMLS). It contains data on state library agencies in the 50 states and the District of Columbia for state fiscal year (FY) 2007. The data were collected through the State Library Agencies (StLA) Survey, the product of a cooperative effort between the Chief Officers of State Library Agencies (COSLA), IMLS and the U.S. Census Bureau. This cooperative effort makes possible the 100 percent response rate achieved for this survey. The frame or source of the list of respondents for this survey is based on the list that COSLA maintains of state library agencies. The FY 2007 survey is the 14th in the StLA series. Appendices include: (1) Technical Notes; (2) State Library Agency Applicants to the Universal Service (E-Rate Discount) Program; (3) Recipients of Other Federal Income, by State and Type of Income Received; (4) Survey Instrument and Instructions; and (5) Supplemental Tables. (Contains 51 tables and 7 footnotes.)

This report presents tabulations for the 2006 Academic Libraries Survey (ALS) conducted by the United States Department of Education's National Center for Education Statistics (NCES), within the Institute of Education Sciences. An academic library is defined as an entity in a postsecondary institution that provides all of the following: An organized collection of printed or other materials, or a combination thereof; a staff trained to provide and interpret such materials as required to meet the informational, cultural, recreational, or educational needs of the clientele; an established schedule in which services of the staff are available to the clientele; and the physical facilities necessary to support such a collection, staff, and schedule. This definition includes libraries that are part of learning resource centers. Branch and independent libraries are defined as auxiliary library service outlets with quarters separate from the central library that houses the basic collection. The central library administers the branches. In ALS, libraries on branch campuses that have separate NCES identification numbers are reported as separate libraries. These academic libraries are informational resources within degree-granting postsecondary institutions in the United States, including institutions that are eligible for Title IV aid and branch campuses of Title IV-eligible institutions. When academic libraries are referred to in this report, they will always be entities that are part of the degree-granting postsecondary institutions in the United States, including institutions that are eligible for Title IV aid and branch campuses of Title IV, eligible institutions. Appended are: (1) Technical Notes; and (2) Questionnaire and Instructions. (Contains 16 tables.) [For "Academic Libraries: 2004. First Look. NCES 2007-301," see ED494016.]

This publication provides an overview of U.S. Department of Education programs authorized and funded under federal law for fiscal year 2008. This reference guide also includes information on the laboratories, centers, and other facilities funded by the Department that provide important resources for education. Readers will find funding information, contact information, and a web site for more information about each program. Each entry, which gives a brief overview of a program or resource, is listed initially by a broad topical heading, to which the table of contents is keyed. The program title and any commonly used names for the program come next, followed by the name of the principal office that administers the program. The Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance (CFDA) or ED number follow. Programs that do not have CFDA or ED numbers assigned are listed as "None" in this field. After the CFDA or ED number, information is provided about the entities that are eligible to apply to each program. Next comes information on any current competitions and the types of assistance available. Funding levels for fiscal year (FY) 2008 and the previous two fiscal years follow next. Most of the programs in the Guide received funding in FY 2008. A few programs that received no funding in FY 2008 also are included in the Guide because they are still disbursing continuation funds from previous years. Programs covered in this Guide are presented in the areas of (1) Academic Improvement; (2) Adult Education; (3) Assessment; (4) Career and Technical Education; (5) Child Care; (6) Civics; (7) Correctional Education; (8) Disability and Rehabilitation Research; (9) Disadvantaged Persons; (10) English Language Acquisition; (11) Federal Student Aid; (12) Foreign Language Instruction; (13) Higher and Continuing Education; (14) Impact Aid; (15) Indian Education; (16) International Education; (17) Migrant Education; (18) Postsecondary Improvement; (19) Professional Development; (20) Reading; (21) Rehabilitation; (22) Research; (23) Safe and Drug-Free Schools; (24) School Improvement; (25) Special Education; (26) Statistics; (27) Teacher and Principal Quality; (28) Technical Assistance; (29) Technology; and (30) Telecommunications. The Guide includes program and subject indexes; a CFDA Index; an Education Level index; and related web sites. New programs in the Guide include: College Access Challenge Grant Program; Hispanic-Serving Institutions--Science, Technology, Engineering, or Mathematics (STEM); Special Olympics Education Programs; Strengthening Asian American and Native American Pacific Islander-serving Institutions; Strengthening Native American-serving Nontribal Institutions; Strengthening Predominantly Black Institutions; Teacher Education Assistance for College and Higher Education (TEACH) Grants; Teachers for a Competitive Tomorrow: Baccalaureate STEM and Foreign Language Teacher Training; and Teachers for a Competitive Tomorrow: Masters STEM and Foreign Language Teacher Training. [For "Guide to U.S. Department of Education Programs, 2007," see ED499022.]

The primary purpose of the "Digest of Education Statistics" is to provide a compilation of statistical information covering the broad field of American education from prekindergarten through graduate school. The "Digest" includes a selection of data from both government and private sources, and draws especially on the results of surveys and activities carried out by the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES). To qualify for inclusion, material must be nationwide in scope and of current interest and value. The publication contains information on a variety of subjects in the field of education statistics, including the number of schools and colleges, teachers, enrollments, and graduates, in addition to educational attainment, finances, federal funds for education, libraries, and international comparisons. Although the "Digest" contains information on federal education funding, more detailed information on federal activities is available from federal education program offices. In addition to updating many of the statistics that have appeared in previous years, this edition contains new material, including (1) Percentage distribution of kindergarten through 12th-grade students by school type (public assigned, public chosen, or private) or participation in homeschooling and selected child, parent, and household characteristics; (2) Child care arrangements of 22- to 25-month-old children, by type and quality of arrangement, and selected child, parent, and household characteristics; (3) Percentage of public schools with enrollment under, at, or over capacity, by selected school characteristics; (4) Percentage of 22- to 25-month-old children demonstrating specific cognitive and motor skills, by selected child, parent, and household characteristics; (5) Average civics scale score and percentage of students attaining civics achievement levels, by grade level and selected student characteristics; (6) Average economics scale score of 12th-graders, percentage attaining economics achievement levels, and percentage with different levels of economics coursework, by selected student and school characteristics; (7) Percentage distribution of public and private high school graduates, by level of mathematics and science courses completed and selected student characteristics; (8) Estimated rate of 2003-04 high school graduates attending degree-granting institutions in fall 2004, by state; (9) Employees in degree-granting institutions, by sex, employment status, control and type of institution, and primary occupation; (10) Average amount of financial aid awarded to full-time, full-year undergraduates, by type and source of aid and control and type of institution; and (11) Total expenditures of private for-profit degree-granting institutions, by purpose and type of institution. Supplemental information on population trends, attitudes on education, education characteristics of the labor force, government finances, and economic trends provides background for evaluating education data. The document includes seven chapters: (1) All Levels of Education; (2) Elementary and Secondary Education; (3) Postsecondary Education; (4) Federal Programs for Education and Related Activities; (5) Outcomes of Education; (6) International Comparisons of Education; and (7) Libraries and Educational Technology. Preceding these chapters is an Introduction that provides a brief overview of current trends in American education, which supplements the tabular materials in chapters 1 through 7. An additional six tables are included in Appendix A. Appended are: (1) Guide to Sources; (2) Definitions; and (3) Index of Table Numbers. (Contains 29 figures and 418 tables.) [For the 2006 "Digest of Education Statistics," see ED497523.]

Understanding the concept of the sampling distribution of a statistic is essential for the understanding of inferential procedures. Unfortunately, this topic proves to be a stumbling block for students in introductory statistics classes. In efforts to aid students in their understanding of this concept, alternatives to a lecture-based mode of instruction have been introduced in the literature with some of these approaches using in-class activities, simulations using statistical software, and web-based applets. In this article, the use of statistical software, for the purpose of illustrating sampling distributions, is revisited through the use of Minitab macros, an approach that has not been observed in the literature. The result is a user-friendly way for students in introductory statistics classes to explore the concept of the sampling distribution of a statistic. Although the focus of this article will be on the sampling distribution, the methods described here are applicable to instruction of other statistical concepts. including confidence intervals and power. (Contains 4 figures.)

This report marks the first release of library statistics data from the Institute of Museum and Library Services. It contains data on state library agencies in the 50 states and the District of Columbia for state fiscal year (FY) 2006. The data were collected through the State Library Agencies (StLA) Survey, the product of a cooperative effort between the Chief Officers of State Library Agencies (COSLA), the U.S. National Commission on Libraries and Information Science (NCLIS), the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES), and the U.S. Census Bureau. The body of this report is composed of tables providing an overview of state library agencies during the 2006 fiscal year. The tables present data on seven main topics: (1) Governance, Allied Operations, Electronic Services, and Internet Access--describes the organizational location of state library agencies within state governments, related operations that are usually beyond the scope of state library agencies, and statewide electronic services and information and networks; (2) Services to Libraries and Cooperatives--identifies activities and programs that support public, academic, school, special libraries, and library cooperatives; (3) Outlets and User Groups, Public Service Hours, and Collections--describes the availability of state library locations and bookmobiles providing services to the public or specific constituencies, public service hours during a typical week, and state library holdings of materials in various formats; (4) Service Transactions--characterizes library use, such as circulation and reference transactions; (5) Staff--reviews functions performed by employees of state library agencies; (6) Revenue--identifies various sources of revenue; and (7) Expenditures--describes how state library funds are expended. (Contains 7 footnotes and 51 tables. Appended are the following: Technical Notes; State Library Agency Applicants to the Universal Service (E-Rate Discount) Program; Recipients of OtherFederal Income, by State and Type of Income Received; Survey Instrument and Instructions; and Supplemental Tables.)

This publication is the 12th edition of the "Mini-Digest of Education Statistics," a pocket-sized compilation of statistical information covering the broad field of American education from kindergarten through graduate school. The statistical highlights are excerpts from the "Digest of Education of Statistics, 2006" [ED497523] and they provide a quantitative description of the current American education scene. Areas covered in this publication include information on the number of schools and colleges, teachers, enrollments, and graduates, in addition to educational outcomes, finances, and federal funds for education. (Contains 42 tables and 1 figure.)

The primary purpose of the "Digest of Education Statistics" is to provide a compilation of statistical information covering the broad field of American education from prekindergarten through graduate school. The "Digest" includes a selection of data from both government and private sources, and draws especially on the results of surveys and activities carried out by the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES). To qualify for inclusion, material must be nationwide in scope and of current interest and value. The publication contains information on a variety of subjects in the field of education statistics, including the number of schools and colleges, teachers, enrollments, and graduates, in addition to educational attainment, finances, federal funds for education, libraries, and international comparisons. Although the "Digest" contains information on federal education funding, more detailed information on federal activities is available from federal education program offices. In addition to updating many of the statistics that have appeared in previous years, this edition contains new material, including (1) Average base salary for full-time public elementary and secondary school teachers with a bachelor's degree as their highest degree, by years of full-time teaching experience and state; (2) Average base salary for full-time public elementary and secondary school teachers with a master's degree as their highest degree, by years of full-time teaching experience and state; (3) Averaged freshman graduation rates for public secondary schools, by state; (4) Average reading scale scores of 4th- and 8th-graders, by selected student and parent characteristics and school type; (5) Average mathematics scale scores of 4th-, 8th-, and 12th-graders, by selected student and parent characteristics and school type; (6) Average science scale scores and achievement-level results of 4th-, 8th-, and 12th-graders, by selected student characteristics and percentile; (7) Number and percentage of students expelled and suspended from public elementary and secondary schools, by sex, race/ethnicity, and state; (8) Bachelor's, master's, and doctor's degrees conferred by degree-granting institutions, by field of study; and (9) Current postsecondary education and employment status, wages earned, and living arrangements of special education students out of secondary school up to 4 years, by type of disability. Supplemental information on population trends, attitudes on education, education characteristics of the labor force, government finances, and economic trends provides background for evaluating education data. The document includes seven chapters: (1) All Levels of Education; (2) Elementary and Secondary Education; (3) Postsecondary Education; (4) Federal Programs for Education and Related Activities; (5) Outcomes of Education; (6) International Comparisons of Education; and (7) Libraries and Educational Technology. Preceding these chapters is an Introduction that provides a brief overview of current trends in American education, which supplements the tabular materials in chapters 1 through 7. An additional 6 tables are included in Appendix A. Appended are: (1) Guide to Sources; (2) Definitions; and (3) Index of Table Numbers. (Contains 29 figures and 427 tables.) [For 2005 "Digest", see ED492945.]

This document presents results of the 2005-06 Association of Research Libraries (ARL) Law Library Statistics Questionnaire. Of 113 ARL university libraries, 75 responded to the survey. Results for each library are presented in the following data tables: (1) collections, including volumes in library, volumes added, monographs purchased, current serials, microform units, government documents, computer files, archives and manuscripts, cartographic materials, graphic materials, audio materials, and video and film; (2) expenditures, including monographs, current serials, other library materials, miscellaneous materials, total library materials, contract binding, salaries and wages for professional staff, salaries and wages for support staff, salaries and wages for student assistants, total salaries and wages, other operating expenditures, and total expenditures; (3) expenditures for electronic resources, including computer files, electronic serials, total e-materials and e-materials as percentage of library materials; and (4) personnel and public services, including professional staff, support staff, student assistants, service points and hours, library presentations to groups, participants in group presentations, reference transactions, initial circulation transactions, total circulation transactions, total items loaned, and total items borrowed. Rank Order tables are included for volumes in library, volumes added, current serials, total expenditures, total staff and total electronic materials are included. A copy of the ARL questionnaire and instructions, as well as footnotes to the statistics, are included. An appendix lists ARL member libraries as of June 1, 2007.

This report contains data on state library agencies in the 50 states and the District of Columbia for state fiscal year (FY) 2005.The data were collected through the State Library Agencies (StLA) Survey, the product of a cooperative effort between the Chief Officers of State Library Agencies (COSLA), the U.S. National Commission on Libraries and Information Science (NCLIS), the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES), and the U.S. Census Bureau. This cooperative effort makes possible the 100 percent response rate achieved for this survey. The frame or source of the list of respondents for this survey is based on the list that COSLA maintains of state library agencies. The FY 2005 survey is the twelfth in the StLA series. This report presents selected findings and background information about the survey. The body of this report is composed of tables providing an overview of state library agencies during the 2005 fiscal year. Appended are: (1) Technical Notes; and (2) Survey Instrument and Instructions. (Contains 11 tables and 6 footnotes.) [For "State Library Agencies, Fiscal Year 2004. E.D. TAB," see ED486464.]

This report presents tabulations for the 2004 Academic Libraries Survey (ALS) conducted by the United States Department of Education's National Center for Education Statistics (NCES). An academic library is defined as an entity in a postsecondary institution that provides all of the following: An organized collection of printed or other materials, or a combination thereof; a staff trained to provide and interpret such materials as required to meet the informational, cultural, recreational, or educational needs of the clientele; an established schedule in which services of the staff are available to the clientele; and the physical facilities necessary to support such a collection, staff, and schedule. This definition includes libraries that are part of learning resource centers. Branch and independent libraries are defined as auxiliary library service outlets with quarters separate from the central library that houses the basic collection. The central library administers the branches. In ALS, libraries on branch campuses that have separate NCES identification numbers are reported as separate libraries. These academic libraries are informational resources within degree-granting postsecondary institutions in the United States, including institutions that are eligible for Title IV aid and branch campuses of Title IV, eligible institutions. When academic libraries are referred to in this report, they will always be entities that are part of the degree-granting postsecondary institutions in the United States, including institutions that are eligible for Title IV aid and branch campuses of Title IV, eligible institutions. Two appendixes follow this report. Appendix A contains technical notes, survey methodology, methodology tables, and a glossary. Appendix B contains the survey questionnaire and instructions. (Contains 16 tables.)

The purpose of this study was to determine the effectiveness of a typical California community college Intermediate Algebra course in preparing students for success in the transfer level mathematics courses for which Intermediate Algebra was the prerequisite. The subsequent mathematics course taken by each of the 986 students who received a grade in Intermediate Algebra at Saddleback College for the Fall, 2002 semester was determined and the grade received in that subsequent mathematics course identified. Fifty-two percent of these students successfully completed the Intermediate Algebra course by receiving a grade of C or higher. Of the 513 students who successfully completed the Intermediate Algebra course, 443 students later enrolled in a transfer level mathematics course either at Saddleback College or Irvine Valley College. Nearly two-thirds of these 443 students were successful in their subsequent mathematics course, however the rates of success varied significantly over the various available transfer level courses. While 85 percent of the students were successful in College Algebra, only 54 percent were successful in Introduction to Statistics and 52 percent were successful in Trigonometry. Students who earned an A grade in Intermediate Algebra were quite likely to be successful in their subsequent mathematics class. Students who earned grades of B or C in Intermediate Algebra were at significant risk of being unsuccessful if they enrolled in either Introduction to Statistics or Trigonometry as their subsequent course. Students who earned a grade of C in Intermediate Algebra were likely to be successful in College Algebra and Mathematics for Liberal Arts Students, but were unlikely to be successful in Introduction to Statistics and Trigonometry. Nearly ninety percent of the students, who enrolled in another mathematics course during the four-year period following their Intermediate Algebra class, took that subsequent class within one year of completing the Intermediate Algebra class. Sixty-two percent of the students who waited more than a year to enroll in a subsequent mathematics course successfully completed that class. The distribution of these successful students over the semesters from Spring, 2004 through Spring, 2006 did not suggest that students were less likely to succeed if they chose a longer delay between their Intermediate Algebra course and their subsequent mathematics course. Appended is: Distribution of Fall, 2002 Intermediate Algebra (Math 253) Students Categorized by the Grade Earned in Math 253 and the Subsequent Mathematics Course Taken in the South Orange County Community College District. (Contains 15 tables.)

"Projections of Education Statistics to 2015" is the 34th report in a series begun in 1964. This report provides revisions of projections shown in "Projections of Education Statistics to 2014." It includes statistics on elementary and secondary schools and degree-granting institutions. Included are projections of enrollment, graduates, teachers, and expenditures to the year 2015. In addition to projections at the national level, the report includes projections of public elementary and secondary school enrollment and public high school graduates to the year 2015 at the state level. This is the first edition of the "Projections of Education Statistics" to include projections of enrollment at degree-granting institutions by race/ethnicity. The summary of projections provides highlights of the national and state data, while the reference tables and figures present more detail. The following are appended: (1) Projection Methodology; (2) Supplementary Tables; (3) Data Sources; and (4) Glossary. (Contains 68 tables and 45 figures.) [For the thirty-third (2005) edition of this publication, see ED485958.]

The National Forum on Education Statistics (Forum) is a cooperative of state, local, and federal education agencies. The goal of Forum activities is to improve the quality of education data gathered for use by policymakers and programmatic decision-makers. One approach to furthering this goal has been to pool the collective experiences of Forum members to produce "best practice" guides in areas of high interest to those who collect, maintain, and use data about elementary and secondary school students. Standardizing the way data systems record changes in student enrollment--that is, developing common exit codes--is one of those areas. In reviewing the existing literature about dropout and graduation rates, Forum members determined that there was a real need for a common format for reporting when students transferred, completed high school, dropped out, or otherwise changed their enrollment status. In response to this need, in 2004 the Forum established a task force to develop such a standardized format. This guide is the product of the task force's efforts. [This document was prepared by the National Forum on Education Statistics.]

This report investigates current trends in libraries and museums regarding the use of digitization and other technologies. In 2001, the Institute of Museum and Library Services conducted the first-ever study of the status of new technology adoption and digitization in the nation's museums and libraries. The baseline study identified pockets of digitization activity and planning that were making library and museum collections widely available. While gaps existed between large and small institutions, basic technologies had found their way into a majority of libraries and museums. This second study seeks to dig deeper and find out more about how and why our cultural institutions use technology and digitize their collections. It explores barriers as well as capacity and planning issues. The 2004 survey was conducted among five groups: museums, public libraries, academic libraries, archives, and state library administrative agencies. This survey report tells us statistically about the kinds of technology in use, the extent of digitization activities, and the adoption, maintenance, funding of, and staffing for technology and digitization activities at museums and libraries. Among the key findings: (1) Small museums and public libraries have made dramatic progress, although they still lag behind their larger counterparts; (2) Libraries and museums are putting services and activities online to manage their institutions and provide enhanced public service; (3) Insufficient funding and staff time are barriers to implementing technology; (4) Assessment of user and visitor needs is strongest among academic libraries and state library administrative agencies and weak among other groups; (5) Digitization activities have increased for all groups, with state library administrative agencies and archives leading the way; (6) While more institutions have digitization policies in place than was the case in 2001, many institutions that are digitizing do not have digitization policies; (7) With a substantial number of materials left to digitize, institutions are held back by lack of funding, lack of staff time, and other pressing priorities; (8) While collaborative digitization efforts are underway, they are not yet widespread; and (9) Only a small portion of museums and libraries assess user and visitor needs for digitized collections and services. Survey instruments are appended. (Contains 160 figures.)

This report contains the results of the Association of Research Libraries' survey of academic Health Sciences libraries for 2004-05. Data are presented on collections, expenditures, and personnel and public services. Out of 113 ARL university libraries, 67 responded to the survey. Health Sciences libraries reported median values of 243,011 volumes held and 4,041 gross volumes added. The full-time equivalent of 2,537 staff were employed by these libraries during the year. Responding libraries reported total expenditures of $229,669,155. Library materials made up the largest portion of that total, with 44.95% of aggregated expenses falling under that category. Health sciences libraries reported a total of $40,211,607 on electronic materials, or a median of 42.85% of their total materials budgets. This includes a total of $36,656,698 on electronic serials. Includes appendix: ARL Member Libraries as of June 1, 2006. (Contains 1 figure, 10 tables, and 2 footnotes.)

This report contains data on state library agencies in the 50 states and the District of Columbia for state fiscal year (FY) 2004. The data were collected through the State Library Agencies (StLA) Survey, the product of a cooperative effort between the Chief Officers of State Library Agencies (COSLA), the U.S. National Commission on Libraries and Information Science (NCLIS), the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES), and the U.S. Census Bureau. The purpose of the StLA Survey is to provide state and federal policymakers, researchers, and other interested users with descriptive information about state library agencies. The data collected are useful to (1) chief officers of state library agencies; (2) policymakers in the executive and legislative branches of federal and state governments; (3) government and library administrators at the federal, state, and local levels; (4) the American Library Association and its members; (5) library and public policy researchers; and (6) the public, journalists, and others. Decision-makers use this survey to obtain information about services and fiscal practices. This report presents selected findings and background information about the survey. The body of this report is composed of tables providing an overview of state library agencies during the 2004 fiscal year. The tables present data on the following five main topics: (1) Governance--describes the organizational location of state library agencies within state governments; (2) Collections and Services--characterizes state library agencies in terms of holdings, library service transactions, and services to libraries and systems; (3) Service Outlets and Staff--describes the availability of state library agency locations and bookmobiles providing services to the public or specific constituencies and characterizes staff and the functions they perform; (4) Revenue--identifies various sources of state library agency revenue or income; and (5) Expenditures--describes how state library agency funds are spent. Finally, references and two appendixes supply supporting information. Appendix A provides technical information about the survey, data processing, and response rates. Appendix B contains the survey instrument, instructions, and definitions of terms used in the survey and this report. The survey asks each state library agency about the kinds of services it provides, its staffing practices, its collections, its income and expenditures, and more. The data include services and financial assistance provided to public, academic, and school libraries, and to library systems. When added to the data collected through the NCES surveys of public, academic, and school libraries, these data help complete the national picture of library service. (Contains 11 tables.)