Search

The aim of this pamphlet is to make secondary school students aware of the interdependence of peoples throughout the world and of their own responsibility to the world at large. The pamphlet is written from a Christian and a socioeconomic perspective. The text is arranged into the following broad areas of continuing world problems: the Third World, population, food, poverty, refugees, race, resources, and "one world." It is recommended that these sections be used with a map or globe, and that they be supported by additional materials from current newspapers, magazines, and television documentaries. Each section is divided into subtopics, which are often presented in question-answer format. Maps and graphs accompany the text, and several sections are followed by assignment suggestions relating to the topic, or by illustrative quotations from the Bible and other sources. A list of organizations where students may obtain additional information and a brief syllabus of suggested readings for both teachers and students are also provided. (Author/MK)

This "At a Glance" highlights data from "The Condition of Education 2023" including statistics in the following categories: (1) Family Characteristics; (2) Preprimary, Elementary, and Secondary Education; (3) Postsecondary Education; (4) Population Characteristics and Economic Outcomes; and (5) International Comparisons. [For "Report on the Condition of Education 2023. NCES 2023-144," see ED628286.]

Support from caregivers is critical for children's learning both at home and at school. However, the COVID-19 pandemic and disruption of education systems globally created additional expectations for parents to support their children's learning at home. This particularly affected the most marginalized children as the crises exacerbated already existing inequalities in education. This document introduces the approach and purpose of a set of resources to support the marginalized caregivers of children with disabilities with inclusive education. It presents lessons learned from proof-of-concept pilots in Armenia and Uzbekistan, followed by step-by-step guidelines on how to adopt and adapt the resources for education ministries and others who want to implement them in their education system. The Directory of Associations and Organizations to Support Caregivers of Children with Disabilities is a template to develop a directory of local associations, organizations and networks that exist to connect and support parents and caregivers of children with disabilities. [For "Teacher Guide to Supporting Marginalized Caregivers of Children with Disabilities," see ED624392. For "School Guide to Supporting Marginalized Families of Children with Disabilities," see ED624391. For "Caregivers' Guide to Inclusive Education," see ED624390. For "Directory of Resources to Support Caregivers of Children with Disability," see ED624411. For "Workbook: Tools to Support Caregivers of Children with Disabilities," see ED624414.]

This report presents data on public elementary and secondary education revenues and expenditures at the local education agency (LEA) or school district level for fiscal year (FY) 2019. Specifically, this report includes the following types of school district finance data: (1) revenue, current expenditure, and capital outlay expenditure totals; (2) revenues by source; (3) current expenditures by function and object; and (4) revenues and current expenditures per pupil. School district finance expenditure functions include instruction, instructional staff support services, pupil support services, general administration, school administration, operations and maintenance, student transportation, other support services (such as business services), food services, and enterprise operations. The finance data used in this report are from the School District Finance Survey (F-33), a component of the Common Core of Data (CCD). The tables and figures in this report present descriptive information on revenues and expenditures for FY 19. Table 1 presents the revenues and current expenditures of the 100 largest school districts in the United States in order of their enrollment. Table 2 presents current expenditure detail of the two largest school districts by enrollment in each state by region, while table 3 presents median inflation-adjusted revenues and current expenditures per pupil by region and locale. Table 4 provides a comparison of independent charter school district per pupil finances to noncharter and "mixed" school district per pupil finances by state. ("Mixed" school districts include both noncharter and charter schools.) Tables 5 and 6 present federal and local revenues, respectively, by specific source of revenue and state. Table 7 presents total revenues per pupil by poverty quartile for each state. Table 8 provides capital outlay expenditure detail by state. The selected findings discussed within the report demonstrate the range of information available when using F-33 data and are not intended to emphasize any particular issue(s). [For "Revenues and Expenditures for Public Elementary and Secondary School Districts: FY 18. Finance Tables. NCES 2020-308," see ED607969.]

This resource clarifies the roles intermediaries play in college and career pathways systems. It can be useful for envisioning a brand-new organization or strengthening the intermediary functions of an existing organization. Your organization can use this guide during a strategic planning process or at any time to reflect on its practices, shift its focus, or reconnect to its mission.

Intermediaries that design and build work-based learning delivery systems believe that postsecondary credentials--certifications and degrees (both associate's and bachelor's)--are a requirement for most good jobs. Indeed, such credentials increase access to economic mobility and, ultimately, greater equity. When coupled with work-based learning experiences, postsecondary credentials become even more powerful. But many intermediaries have little experience working with higher education partners to make sure that students earn the credentials they need. This guide draws on Jobs for the Future's (JFF's) long experience and lessons learned supporting intermediaries and their community college partners to form productive and lasting relationships that benefit young people. This guide outlines the steps intermediaries can take to launch a successful partnership with a local community college. It covers preparing to form a new connection, identifying the right contacts, making your case, and centering your goal: to provide high school students with opportunities to earn college credits that will help them build their future careers.

This guide was designed to help state and local education agencies conduct needs assessments to better understand the strengths, challenges, and needs unique to schools serving American Indian students. It includes surveys developed collaboratively with communities that serve American Indian students to reflect the most relevant topics. Using results from these surveys, the guide provides examples of how to target and monitor improvement efforts that reduce gaps in outcomes between American Indian students and other students.

This report presents data on students in the United States attending kindergarten through grade 12. The focus of the report is on parent and family involvement in the students' education during the 2018-19 school year, as reported by the students' parents. It includes the percentage of students who participated in selected family activities. Demographic information about students and families is presented, including students' poverty status and parents' education and language spoken at home, as well as school characteristics, such as school size and school type. These data represent circumstances before the implementation of coronavirus pandemic restrictions. The data for this report come from the Parent and Family Involvement in Education (PFI) Survey, administered as part of the 2019 National Household Education Surveys Program (NHES:2019). When weighted, the PFI data in this report are nationally representative of the nonhomeschooling population of students in grades kindergarten through 12, including children enrolled in public, private, and virtual schools. The total number of cases used in this report is 15,950 students, representing a population of 51.5 million nonhomeschooled students in kindergarten through grade 12. This "First Look" report presents selected descriptive information. The variables examined in this report are just a few of the variables that can be examined in these data; they were selected to demonstrate the range of information available from the study. The release of this report is intended to encourage in-depth analysis of the data using more sophisticated statistical methods. [For "Parent and Family Involvement in Education: 2019. First Look--Summary. NCES 2020-076," see ED606749.]

Attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) and learning disabilities are the most commonly diagnosed neurodevelopmental disorders in children and often coexist. Previous research has suggested that the prevalence of these conditions may differ by race and Hispanic origin. Using timely, nationally representative data, this report examines the reported prevalence of ADHD and learning disabilities by race and ethnicity and select demographic characteristics that are associated with the diagnosis of these conditions.

Well over six decades after the Supreme Court declared "separate but equal" schools to be unconstitutional in "Brown v. Board of Education," schools remain heavily segregated by race and ethnicity. The lack of progress in integrating schools: (1) depresses education outcomes for black students; (2) widens performance gaps between white and black students; (3) reflects and bolsters segregation by economic status; and (4) it means that the promise of integration and equal opportunities for all black students remains an ideal rather than a reality. Findings on school segregation and student performance come from the National Center for Education Statistics' National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), the most comprehensive study of education performance in the country. The author uses the most recently released data to describe school segregation and its consequences for math performance of eighth-graders. This brief, published by Economic Policy Institute (EPI) to highlight education issues for Black History Month, shows data that are part of ongoing EPI research on student performance and education inequalities.

In Maryland, one way children's wellbeing is measured is by looking at the data from the Kindergarten Readiness Assessment (KRA). While the data can illustrate how children perform on various indicators across literacy, math, social-emotional development and physical well-being, it's really a reflection of the "readiness" of Maryland communities, families, schools, and early childhood programs to prepare children for the future. This year, the state held steady at 47% of the students demonstrating readiness to engage in the kindergarten curriculum, although many local jurisdictions showed real progress. Last spring, Maryland conducted a comprehensive statewide needs assessment, including 18 town hall meetings across the state, 17 regional focus groups, and several surveys. Some of the key findings were: (1) Many Marylanders experience limited access to early childhood education services, especially vulnerable families including families of children with special needs, families of English learners, immigrant families, low-income families and families living in rural areas; (2) Families struggle to navigate the early childhood system, and parents often do not know about programs and services available to them, including critical mental health services; and (3) Early education professionals experience access barriers to teacher preparation and professional development programs which leads to a shortage of a qualified workforce across the state. Based on these and other results from the needs assessment, the state is finalizing its five-year prenatal-to-age-eight strategic plan to ensure that families, communities, and Maryland's schools and early childhood programs have the resources they need to support children's success. [For "Readiness Matters: The 2018-2019 Kindergarten Readiness Assessment Report," see ED604311.]

For more than 20 years, Advocates for Children of New Jersey has published the Newark Kids Count Data Book, a one-stop source for child well-being data on the state's largest city. Newark Kids Count includes the latest statistics, along with five-year trend data, in the following areas: demographics, family economic security, food insecurity, child health, child protection, child care, education and teens. This year's data book features a special section on the importance of the upcoming 2020 Census for Newark. [For "Newark Kids Count 2019: A City Profile of Child Well-Being," see ED616480.]

This report is a compendium of indicators about the Nation's young people. This report, the 23rd produced by the Federal Interagency Forum on Child and Family Statistics (Forum), presents 41 key indicators on important aspects of children's lives. These indicators are drawn from the most reliable Federal statistics, are easily understood by broad audiences, are objectively based on substantial research, are balanced so that no single area of children's lives dominates the report, are measured often to show trends over time, and are representative of large segments of the population rather than one particular group. The report continues to present key indicators in seven domains: (1) family and social environment; (2) economic circumstances; (3) health care; (4) physical environment and safety; (5) behavior; (6) education; and (7) health. To ensure that the information stays relevant, the Forum periodically revises indicators, data sources, and features to maintain the relevance of the report. Accordingly, updates have been made to improve the quality and breadth of this year's report, including changes to the "Child Care" indicator. [For "America's Children in Brief: Key National Indicators of Well-Being, 2018," see ED590203.]

This report uses data from the 2016 Early Childhood Program Participation Survey (ECPP) of the National Household Educational Surveys Program (NHES). It provides findings about percentages of children who received any nonparental care, the type (relative care, nonrelative care, center-based care, or multiple arrangements), associated costs of care, assistance received, and the factors that influenced parents' decisions about childcare arrangements.

This report uses statistics to examine current conditions and changes over time in education activities and outcomes for different racial/ethnic groups in the United States. The indicators in this report show that some traditionally disadvantaged racial/ethnic groups have made strides in educational achievement, but that gaps still persist. The primary focus of this report is to examine differences in educational participation and attainment of students in the racial/ethnic groups of White, Black, Hispanic, Asian, Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander, American Indian/Alaska Native, and Two or more races. The secondary focus of this report is to illustrate the changing demographics in the United States. Measuring population growth and diversity is important for anticipating the needs of schools and teachers. This report shows that over time, students in these racial/ethnic groups have completed high school and continued their education in college in increasing numbers. Despite these gains, the rate of progress has varied among these racial/ethnic groups and differences by race/ethnicity persist in terms of increases in attainment and progress on key indicators of educational performance. It uses the most recent data available and reports on demographics, preprimary, elementary, and secondary education participation, student achievement, student behaviors and persistence, postsecondary education, and outcomes of education.

The Early Childhood Longitudinal Study, Kindergarten Class of 2010-11 (ECLS-K:2011) is the third in a series of longitudinal studies of young children conducted by the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES), within the U.S. Department of Education's Institute of Education Sciences. The ECLS-K:2011 collected information about the early educational experiences of a nationally representative sample of children who were in kindergarten or who were of kindergarten age in ungraded classrooms or schools in the 2010-11 school year. This brief report focuses on information from the data collection conducted in the spring of 2016, when the majority of the ECLS-K:2011 students were in fifth grade. It is intended to provide a snapshot of the children in the ECLS-K:2011 cohort who were in kindergarten for the first time in the 2010-11 school year and in fifth grade 5 years later during the spring of 2016. Information is presented on selected child and family characteristics, such as poverty status, parental education, family type, and primary home language, obtained when the children were in kindergarten. Estimates for these characteristics can be compared to those provided in previously released ECLS-K:2011 reports.

Throughout every region of North Carolina, leaders of organizations in all fields -- business, education, government, community, faith-based, and others -- agree that the future prosperity and well-being of the state's citizens requires successfully educating all of its children. That means effectively supporting children of every race and ethnicity, economic level, family background, and location, from the most rural to the most urban. However, North Carolina's current education system fails to meet the educational needs of many of its children and thereby fails to provide for the future success of these individuals, their communities, and the state. The Supreme Court of North Carolina's decision in "Leandro v. the State of North Carolina" (1997) ("Leandro") affirmed that the state has a constitutional responsibility to provide every student with an equal opportunity for a sound basic education and that the state was failing to meet that responsibility. As documented in this action plan, the challenges of meeting this responsibility have increased since the original decision, and the state needs to significantly increase its commitment and efforts to provide for the education of every student. This action plan provides recommendations for actions that will advance the state's efforts to achieve compliance with the "Leandro" decision. It identifies the highest leverage and most critical actions that the state needs to take immediately and over the next six years and beyond to transform the education system and provide the necessary foundational opportunities for all students.

The "Annual Disability Statistics Supplement" is a companion report to the "Annual Disability Statistics Compendium" (ED595182). The "Supplement" presents statistics on the same topics as the "Compendium" with additional categorizations by demographic characteristics including age, gender and race/ethnicity. In addition to the "Supplement," a companion "Annual Report" (ED595177) is available, providing graphic representations of key findings. [For the 2017 Supplement, see ED583259.]

"Ohio Education by the Numbers" offers busy policy makers, journalists, and civic and business leaders simple and easy-to-use vital statistics about Ohio's schools and the students they serve. The facts and figures contained within offer an overview of Ohio's students; where they go to school; their achievement on national and state exams; and their readiness for success in college and career. It also presents a few statistics about Ohio's educators and school funding. This edition includes the most recent data available as of December 2018, including enrollment and state exam results from the 2017-18 school year and from the 2017 round of the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP).

For more than 20 years, Advocates for Children of New Jersey has published the Newark Kids Count Data Book, a one-stop source for child well-being data on the state's largest city. Newark Kids Count includes the latest statistics, along with five-year trend data, in the following areas: demographics, family economic security, food insecurity, child health, child protection, child care, education and teens. This year's data book features a special section on young men of color in Newark. [Additional funding for this report was provided by My Brother's Keeper Newark. For "Newark Kids Count 2018: A City Profile of Child Well-Being," see ED616479.]

This year's "America's Children in Brief: Key National Indicators of Well-Being" continues more than a decade of dedication and collaboration by agencies across the Federal Government to advance our understanding of our Nation's children and what may be needed to bring them a better tomorrow. "America's Children in Brief, 2018" uses both established and previously untapped data sources to characterize vulnerable children across several of the domains included in the Forum's conceptual framework. The measures included provide emerging insight on children who face special and heightened risks to their well-being. Each section of the report addresses why the measure of at-risk children is important and presents information on characteristics of the population of at-risk children. In addition to providing descriptive information on trends on the size of the population ages 0 to 17, this year's report features the following measures: (1) Poverty and extreme poverty; (2) Health insurance continuity; (3) Homelessness; (4) Exposure to violence; (5) Prescription opioid misuse and use disorders; and (6) Residential placement of juveniles. [For the 2016 "Brief," see ED590231. For "America's Children: Key National Indicators of Well-Being, 2017," see ED577338.]

This is the first in a planned series of United Nations Children's Fund (UNICEF) reports tracking progress on the child-related indicators in the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). The report highlights, through a data lens, the enormous task ahead for countries in meeting the 2030 Agenda for children. Through the development of projections to 2030, the report identifies areas where greater efforts are needed and reveals the alarming inadequacies of data to track progress. It also examines trends among subsets of children, including girls and boys, and children in urban and rural areas, to identify groups of children most at risk of being left behind. [For the Executive Summary, see ED590001.]

This manual provides guidance and documentation for users of the longitudinal kindergarten-fourth grade (K-4) public-use data file of the Early Childhood Longitudinal Study, Kindergarten Class of 2010-11 (ECLS-K:2011), which includes the first release of the public version of the third-grade data. This manual mainly provides information specific to the third-grade round of data collection. The first chapter provides an overview of the ECLS-K:2011. Subsequent chapters provide details on the third-grade data collection instruments and methods, including a description of how the third-grade data collections differ from the earlier rounds; the direct and indirect child assessments; the sample design; weighting procedures; response rates; and data file content, including composite variables.

At the end of each school year, each school district compiles, verifies, and submits summary data on truancy petitions to the Office of Superintendent of Public Instruction (OSPI). This is the second year the OSPI has collected truancy data at the student level, specifically whether a student has had a truancy petition filed on them. In the 2018-19 school year, OSPI began using the Comprehensive Education Data and Research System (CEDARS) to collect additional details on what occurs after a petition is filed. These data elements include referral to a community truancy board or other coordinated intervention; whether the stay was lifted and the student went to court; if there was an alternate less restrictive disposition; and if they were sent to detention. Beginning next year, OSPI will be able to report this data. Data elements required in this truancy report include: (1) the total number of unexcused absences; (2) the number of students with five or more unexcused absences in a month or ten or more unexcused absences in the school year; and (3) the number of truancy petitions filed with the courts. The expanded tables for grades 1-8, grades 9-12, and all grades include information on enrollment, unexcused absences, truancy petitions, and more.

For over 20 years, Advocates for Children of New Jersey has published the Newark Kids Count Data Book, a one-stop source for child well-being data on the state's largest city. Newark Kids Count includes the latest statistics, along with five-year trend data, in the following areas: demographics, family economic security, food insecurity, child health, child protection, child care, education and teens. This year's data book features a special section on childhood lead exposure and prevention efforts in Newark. [The Greater Newark LISC and New Jersey Health Initiatives, the statewide grant making program of the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, along with the Fund for New Jersey and the Victoria Foundation funded this year's special section on lead. For "Newark Kids Count 2017: A City Profile of Child Well-Being," see ED616477.]

"Digital Play for Global Citizens" is an introduction to how educators and parents can use a multitude of innovative technology tools to help their students and children learn about, understand, and engage with our increasingly interconnected world. Educating students to become "macro-minded" (habits of mind that are associated with a world-wide outlook) global citizens empowers them to embody the essential tenets of global competence--the ability to investigate the world, recognize perspectives, communicate ideas, and take action--in a manner that is fun, engaging, and synchronized with our fast-paced, technologically advanced 21st century. Divided into three parts, "Digital Play for Global Citizens" introduces tools to help students build awareness of themselves and the world around them, recognize and investigate the complex and systemic causes of events across cultures and history, and use digital play to explore the natural world. From exploring boundaries, borders, and geography in context to developing empathy and understanding of diversity; from investigating the systemic causes of economic injustice to developing a sense of curiosity and wonder about nature; this document introduces tools and techniques for using digital play to develop all aspects of global competence. [Foreword by Tony Jackson.]

It is important for every student in Ohio to attend school every day. Missing too much school has longterm, negative effects on students, such as lower achievement and graduation rates. There are many reasons students miss school, but districts often can directly impact their students' attendance. By using data to identify and support students who may need extra support and services, districts can target supports to get students to school every day. The purpose of this resource guide is to assist school districts in strategically planning and implementing prevention and interventions universally and at the student-level to reduce absenteeism because it is important for Ohio's students to be in school every day ready to learn. Oftentimes, non-academic barriers keep students from attending school every day. By systematically incorporating student supports into district and school improvement activities, many of these barriers can be addressed before they keep Ohio's students out of the classroom. Further, community partnerships can augment this work and inform the work of schools and districts. Lastly, developing personalized attendance plans for students who are chronically absent or habitually truant allows teams to address unique barriers to attendance. This guidance will answer six key questions for schools and districts: (1) What is chronic absenteeism? (2) What factors impact attendance? (3) Why is chronic absenteeism a priority for Ohio? (4) What can a district do to improve attendance? (5) Who else can be involved to reduce absenteeism? and (6) What are examples of strategies that schools are implementing to meet the needs of students that may help address attendance concerns? This guide also provides resources to assist districts in implementing attendance policies, implementing preventative and supportive strategies for attendance and discipline, and facilitating conversations about attendance with students and families.

The share of students eligible for free and reduced-price lunch (FRPL) via meal applications is often used as a proxy for the share of students from low-income households at a school. But the recent adoption of universal meal programs, such as the Community Eligibility Provision, make it more difficult to consistently measure student poverty within and across states. The Urban Institute's Model Estimates of Poverty in Schools (MEPS) is a school-level measure of the share of students living in poverty that is comparable across states and time. The MEPS measure reflects, as closely as possible, the students who attend each school (i.e., the measure is distinct from a neighborhood measure). The scale of the poverty measure aligns with the district-level estimates from the US Census Bureau's Small Area Income and Poverty Estimates (SAIPE), capturing students with family incomes up to 100 percent of the federal poverty level.

The 2015-16 National Teacher and Principal Survey (NTPS) is a nationally representative sample survey of public K-12 schools, principals, and teachers in the 50 states and the District of Columbia. This report presents selected findings from the Public School Data File of NTPS. NTPS is a redesign of the Schools and Staffing Survey (SASS). SASS was conducted on behalf of the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) on a 4-year cycle, beginning with the 1987-88 school year and ending in the 2011-12 school year. This report represents the initial results of the first collection of NTPS. The purpose of NTPS is to collect information that can provide a detailed picture of U.S. elementary and secondary schools and their staff. This information is collected through school, principal, and teacher surveys, and information can be linked across all three surveys. The 2015-16 NTPS uses a school-based sample of public schools. Because of this school-based design, principals associated with public schools were included in the sample. Teachers associated with a selected school were sampled from a teacher list provided by the school, collected from school websites, or purchased from a vendor. The selected samples include about 8,300 traditional and charter public schools and public school principals, and 40,000 public school teachers. The samples were drawn to support estimates by geography, grade span, and charter school status. The reader is referred to the Survey Documentation for the 2015-16 National Teacher and Principal Survey (Cox et al. forthcoming) for details about these estimation domains and their precision criteria. The data were collected via mailed questionnaires and internet instruments with telephone and in-person field follow-up. The first questionnaires were mailed in September 2015, and data collection ended in August 2016. The weighted unit response rate was 72.5 percent for public schools. The purpose of this First Look report is to introduce new data through the presentation of tables containing descriptive information. Selected findings chosen for this report demonstrate the range of information available on the 2015-16 NTPS Public School Restricted-Use Data File. The selected findings do not represent a complete review of all observed differences in the data and are not meant to emphasize any issue. This First Look report highlights findings from the NTPS public school survey. Findings from the principal and teacher surveys will be presented in two companion First Look reports: (1) Characteristics of Public Elementary and Secondary School Principals in the United States: Results From the 2015-16 National Teacher and Principal Survey First Look (NCES 2017-070); and (2) Characteristics of Public Elementary and Secondary School Teachers in the United States: Results From the 2015-16 National Teacher and Principal Survey First Look (NCES 2017-072). The following are appended: (1) Standard Error Tables; (2) Methodology and Technical Notes; and (3) Description of Variables. For the companion reports, "Characteristics of Public Elementary and Secondary School Principals in the United States: Results from the 2015-16 National Teacher and Principal Survey. First Look. NCES 2017-070," see ED575191; and "Characteristics of Public Elementary and Secondary School Teachers in the United States: Results from the 2015-16 National Teacher and Principal Survey. First Look. NCES 2017-072," see ED575193.

This report uses statistics to examine current conditions and changes over time in education activities and outcomes for different racial/ethnic groups in the United States. This report shows that over time, students in the racial/ethnic groups of White, Black, Hispanic, Asian, Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander, American Indian/Alaska Native, and Two or more races have completed high school and continued their education in college in increasing numbers. Despite these gains, the rate of progress has varied among these racial/ethnic groups and differences by race/ethnicity persist in terms of increases in attainment and progress on key indicators of educational performance. The indicators in this report show that some traditionally disadvantaged racial/ethnic groups have made strides in educational achievement over the past few decades, but that gaps still persist. The report begins with demographic information (Chapter 1) and then is organized roughly according to the chronology of an individual's education, starting with indicators on preprimary, elementary, and secondary participation (Chapter 2), and continuing with student achievement (Chapter 3), student behaviors and persistence in education (Chapter 4), postsecondary education (Chapter 5), and outcomes of education (Chapter 6). The following are appended: (1) Guide to Sources; and (2) Glossary.

DC KIDS COUNT tracks indicators of child well-being at the neighborhood and Ward level, so that parents, service providers, advocates and policymakers can see outcomes for children more clearly. The DC KIDS COUNT Data Tool 2.0 allows the user to explore neighborhood-level data interactively. However, because DC is organized politically by its eight Wards, Ward-level data and advocacy is especially important. Ward-level data, in comparison to District-wide data, captures a more representative picture of child well-being than do District-wide averages. Each Ward snapshot includes DC KIDS COUNT indicators in five categories: (1) Demographics; (2) Economic well-being; (3) Health; (4) Family and Community; and (5) Education. The left side column includes the outcomes for each Ward in 2010 compared with more recent data. The right side column compares changes in a Ward to changes in DC over the same time period. The graph on page one of each snapshot illustrates the race/ethnicity composition of children under 18 in each Ward. The graph on page two highlights longitudinal changes in the child poverty rate by Ward between 2000 and 2015. A brief list of sources and notes is included. [DC KIDS COUNT is a project of DC Action for Children with support from the Annie E. Casey Foundation.]

For 20 years, Advocates for Children of New Jersey has published the Newark Kids Count Data Book, a one-stop source for child well-being data on our state's largest city. Newark Kids Count includes the latest statistics, along with five-year trend data, in the following areas: demographics, family economic security, food insecurity, child health, child protection, child care, education and teens. [For "Newark Kids Count 2015: A City Profile of Child Well-Being," see ED616497.]

This report is a compendium of indicators about our Nation's young people. The report, the 20th produced by the Forum, presents 41 key indicators on important aspects of children's lives. These indicators are drawn from the most reliable Federal statistics, are easily understood by broad audiences, are objectively based on substantial research, are balanced so that no single area of children's lives dominates the report, are measured often to show trends over time, and are representative of large segments of the population rather than one particular group. The report continues to present key indicators in seven domains: family and social environment, economic circumstances, health care, physical environment and safety, behavior, education, and health. To assure that the information stays relevant, the Forum periodically revises indicators, data sources, and features to maintain the relevance of the report. Accordingly, updates have been made to improve the quality and breadth of this year's report, including changes to the following indicators: "Child Maltreatment, Illicit Drug Use, Diet Quality" and "High School Academic Coursetaking." In addition to updating data sources and expanding several indicators, this year's report presents a special feature on peer victimization among 3rd-graders in the United States. [This report was written by the staff of the Forum, including Traci Cook, Forum Coordinator; Julia Beckhusen, U.S. Census Bureau; Sheila Franco and Ashley Woodall, National Center for Health Statistics; Grace Kena and Lauren Musu-Gillette, National Center for Education Statistics; Dan Axelrad, Environmental Protection Agency; Barry Steffen, Department of Housing and Urban Development; Shannon Catalano and Rachel Morgan, Bureau of Justice Statistics; Jessica Cotto, National Institute on Drug Abuse; Brett Brown, Administration for Children and Families; Matthew Rabbitt, Economic Research Service; Lisa Williamson, Bureau of Labor Statistics; Denise Pintello, National Institute of Mental Health; James Singleton and Cindi Knighton, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention; Beth Han, Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration; and Hazel Hiza, Center for Nutrition Policy and Promotion.]

Among all children under 18 years in the U.S., 43 percent live in low-income families and 21 percent--approximately one in five--lives in a poor family. This means that children are overrepresented among our nation's poor; they represent 23 percent of the population but comprise 33 percent of all people in poverty. Many more children live in families with incomes just above the poverty threshold. Young children under age 6 years appear to be particularly vulnerable, with 45 percent living in low-income and 23 percent living in poor families. Parental education and employment, race/ethnicity, and other factors are associated with children's experience of economic insecurity. This fact sheet describes the demographic, socioeconomic, and geographic characteristics of young children and their parents. It highlights important factors that appear to distinguish low-income and poor children in this age group from their less disadvantaged counterparts.

Among all children under 18 years in the U.S., 43 percent live in low-income families and 21 percent--approximately one in five--lives in a poor family. This means that children are overrepresented among our nation's poor; they represent 23 percent of the population but comprise 33 percent of all people in poverty. Many more children live in families with incomes just above the poverty threshold. Parental education and employment, race/ethnicity, and other factors are associated with children's experience of economic insecurity. This fact sheet describes the demographic, socioeconomic, and geographic characteristics of children and their parents. It highlights the important factors that appear to distinguish low-income and poor children from their less disadvantaged counterparts.

This document reports data from the 2015 School Crime Supplement (SCS) to the National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS). The Web Tables show the extent to which students with different personal characteristics report being bullied. Estimates include responses by student characteristics: student sex, race/ethnicity, grade, and household income. The U.S. Census Bureau (Census) appended additional data from the 2013-14 Common Core of Data (CCD) and the 2013-14 Private School Universe Survey (PSS) to the SCS to show the extent to which bullying victimization is reported by students in schools with different characteristics. School characteristics appended to the file are: region; sector (public or private); locale; level; enrollment size; student-to-full-time-equivalent (FTE) teacher ratio; percentage of combined American Indian/Alaska Native, Asian/Native Hawaiian/Other Pacific Islander, Black/African American, Hispanic/Latino, and students of two or more races; and percentage of students eligible for free or reduced-priced lunch. The SCS data tables show the relationship between reported bullying victimization and other crime-related variables, such as reported presence of gangs, guns, drugs, and alcohol, and hate-related graffiti at school; selected school security measures; student criminal victimization; and personal fear, avoidance behaviors, fighting, and weapon carrying at school. A glossary of all the variables used in the tables in this report is included.

Each year since 1997, the Federal Interagency Forum on Child and Family Statistics has published a report on the well-being of children and families. The "America's Children" series provides accessible compendiums of indicators drawn across topics from the most reliable official statistics; it is designed to complement other more specialized, technical, or comprehensive reports produced by various Forum agencies. The "America's Children" series makes Federal data on children and families available in a nontechnical, easy-to-use format in order to stimulate discussion among data providers, policymakers, and the public. Pending data availability, the Forum updates all 41 indicators annually on its website (http://childstats. gov) and alternates publishing a detailed report, "America's Children: Key National Indicators of Well-Being," with a summary version, "America's Children in Brief," which highlights selected indicators. The data in this report come from a variety of sources--featuring both sample and universe surveys--often with different underlying populations, as appropriate for the topic. Indicators are chosen because they are easy to understand, are based on substantial research connecting them to child well-being, cut across important areas of children's lives, are measured regularly so that they can be updated and show trends over time, and represent large segments of the population rather than one particular group. These indicators span seven domains: (1) Family and Social Environment, (2) Economic Circumstances, (3) Health Care, (4) Physical Environment and Safety, (5) Behavior, (6) Education, and (7) Health. To provide a more in-depth perspective across report domains, this year's "America's Children in Brief" highlights selected indicators by race and ethnicity. This report reveals that the adolescent birth rate declined across all race and Hispanic origin groups and the rate of immediate college enrollment increased among White, non-Hispanic; Black, non-Hispanic; and Hispanic high school completers. Poverty rates and percentages of children living in food-insecure homes remain higher for Black, non-Hispanic and Hispanic children than for their White, non-Hispanic counterparts. New this year is a supplemental poverty measure for White, non-Hispanic; Black, non- Hispanic; Hispanic; and Asian, non-Hispanic children. The "Brief" concludes with its usual "At a Glance" summary table displaying the most recent data for all 41 indicators. [For the previous "Brief," see ED533560. For "America's Children: Key National Indicators of Well-Being, 2015," see ED564158.]

This report presents data on students in the United States attending kindergarten through grade 12. The main focus of the report is on parent and family involvement in the students' education during the 2011-12 school year as reported by the students' parents. It also includes the percentage of students who participated in selected family activities. Demographic information about students and families is presented, including students' poverty status and parents' education and language spoken at home, as well as school characteristics, such as school size and school type. The data for this report come from the National Household Education Surveys Program of 2012 (NHES:2012), Parent and Family Involvement in Education (PFI) Survey. The PFI survey is designed for students who are enrolled in kindergarten through grade 12 or are homeschooled for equivalent grades and asks questions about various aspects of parent involvement in education, such as help with homework, family activities, and parent involvement at school. For homeschooled students, the survey asks questions related to the student's homeschooling experiences, the sources of the curriculum, and the reasons for homeschooling. This report (NCES 2013-028.REV2) is revised from an earlier version (NCES 2013-028.REV) that was released in May 2015. This updated version corrects an error in the standard error estimates presented in table C-1. The correction was made to the standard errors reported for the estimated total number of students in kindergarten through grade 12 by school, student, and family characteristics. All other estimates and findings presented in the report remain unchanged. [For the original report, "Parent and Family Involvement in Education, from the National Household Education Surveys Program of 2012. First Look. NCES 2013-028.Rev," see ED556339.]

Texas Guaranteed Student Loan Corporation (TG) provides critical support to schools, students, and borrowers at every stage of the federal student aid process--from providing information on how to pay for a higher education including financial aid options, to facilitating successful loan repayment after graduation. This 2016 issue of "State of Student Aid and Higher Education in Texas" offers Texas policymakers, their staff members, and members of the student financial aid community an overview of key facts that describe student financial aid in Texas. Additionally, it serves as a resource for those in search of information concerning demographic changes, educational attainment, college costs, financial aid programs, and student debt. The report is divided into the following sections: (1) Texas Demographics; (2) Texas College Readiness; (3) Profile of Texas College Students; (4) Cost of Education and Sources of Aid in Texas; (5) Grant Aid and Net Price in Texas; (6) Loans; (7) Need and Work; (8) Texas College Attainment; (9) Delinquencies, Defaults, and Collections; and (10) Texas Higher Education Policy. [For the 2015 issue, "State of Student Aid and Higher Education in Texas," see ED567196.]

This document, based on the statistical yearbook, "Children in Israel 2014," presents data on the population of young children in Israel. The document presents a current picture of the well-being of young children in Israel intended to assist policy-makers and practitioners to understand the situation of this group of children and to provide a foundation for creating interventions based on these data. Such data are essential for the promotion of policy, planning services, and employing interventions with young children and their families as appropriate. The uniqueness of this document is its focus on young children, from birth to age six. It is known today that early childhood is a critical period in the child's development and therefore warrants a focused examination separate from data presented on the total population of children. No other source in Israel provides a comprehensive, up-to-date examination of the situation of young children across all areas of young children's lives. The data are presented by age or age groups. Unfortunately, it was not always possible to provide data on children aged 0-6, for example, in data on poverty and family structure in Israel. In these cases, the data are presented within a broader age group. This document contains nine chapters dealing with various areas pertaining to the lives of young children, including: demography, education, health, welfare, immigration, poverty, accidents, and child abuse.

For the last 30 years, the Public Policy Forum has collected and analyzed education data to produce an annual report on the demographics, academic performance, and finances of public school districts in southeast Wisconsin. In the three decades of producing this report, few years have exhibited as much change and transformation as this one. The 2014-15 school year saw a number of changes to student demographics, as well as a shifting regulatory environment. Southeast Wisconsin continues to enroll the majority of public school students in the state, but the number and makeup of those students both are changing. A new state assessment aligned to new academic standards--the Badger Exam--was implemented, but just as quickly discarded. The biennial budget process served as a vehicle for lawmakers to propose and adopt a number of provisions that modify and change state education policies. This report chronicles these and other changes while providing trend analysis to quantify and understand the educational landscape in southeast Wisconsin. The following are appended: (1) Glossary of Terms; and (2) Union District Breakdown. [Additional sponsors of this research include Children's Hospital of Wisconsin; Multiple Listing Service; and Southeastern Wisconsin Schools Alliance. For the 2013-2014 report, see ED566691.]

Approximately, 6.3 million Asian Americans and 347,501 Native Hawaiian and Pacific Islander (NHPIs) live in California. The Asian American, Native Hawaiian, and Pacific Islander community is one that is both significant in size and in diversity. It also represents the fastest growing racial/ethnic group in the state. Ensuring their access to and success in California's public higher education system is critical for the California economy. With 87 percent of Asian Americans and 73 percent of NHPIs starting their college career in one of California's public community colleges or four year universities, the impact of state funding, policy, and admissions practices are especially critical. The diversity of migration histories and experiences contributes to the contemporary social and economic conditions and educational opportunities of Asian Americans and NHPIs today. Although some Asian Americans and NHPIs have achieved success in higher education, others face significant barriers that limit their educational opportunity. There is great diversity of educational outcomes within the larger Asian American category and between Asian American and NHPI individuals. This report is a first of its kind in attempting to share a much deeper analysis of higher education outcomes within these diverse groups in California higher education. This report seeks to portray a more accurate picture of Asian Americans and NHPIs in higher education in California by analyzing data disaggregated by ethnicity when possible in order to bring to light the needs and issues facing Asian American and NHPI students. It is the hope that policymakers, business leaders, and community advocates use the information presented in this report to inform state budget and policy conversations along with encouraging targeted college practices aimed at improving educational outcomes for the Asian American and NHPI community in California. Proposed recommendations include: (1) Create a statewide plan for higher education; (2) Ensure colleges successfully move students through pre-college level courses, quickly and with improved retention rates; (3) Provide clear transfer pathways to four-year degrees; (4) Expand college knowledge in middle and high school and invest in support services students need to succeed; (5) Grow state funding to expand enrollment capacity so all California eligible students have a spot in our public higher education system; (6) Strengthen financial support options for low- to moderate-income college students; (7) Use disaggregated data to improve educational outcomes for Asian American and NHPI students. Act on closing gaps in access and success in California's public higher education system; and (8) Ensure federal funding for Asian American and Native American Pacific Islander serving institutions is focused on student support and improving student outcomes for those students. "The Racial and Ethnic Categorization of Asian Americans and Pacific Islanders" is appended. [Joanna Lee and Michele Siqueiros contributed to this report. Additional funding was provided by the Sand Hill Foundation.]

Despite improvements, the primary education system in Haiti remains highly inefficient: children start primary school 2 years late on average, and fewer than 60% will reach the last grade of the cycle. While the official age for beginning primary school is 6, the average child enters first grade for the first time at 7.8 years old, after having spent 2 or more years in some form of preschool. This distortion grows over time, as about 10% of children repeat and 2-6% drop out of each grade of primary. These repetition rates are higher than the averages in the rest of Latin America and the Caribbean (LAC) and Sub-Saharan Africa. Using a simulated cohort approach, these rates imply that only about 58% of children in first grade will arrive at sixth grade, and only 29% will ever reach the final year of upper secondary. For those who do eventually complete primary, the average ages by grade suggest that it takes 7 to 8 years on average to complete 6 years of primary school. Most importantly, many students, particularly in poor communities, seem to learn little. "Ministère d'Education Nationale et Formation Profesionnelle" (MENFP) partnered with the World Bank and two organizations (Institut de Formation du Sud--IFOS and FHI360) to collect data in a sub-sample of 97 schools that had taken part in the original "Initiative de Renforcement des Services Scolaires" (IRSS) project. The observations were conducted using a French translation of the Stallings Classroom Snapshot instrument that has recently been used in six Latin American and Caribbean countries (Bruns and Luque 2015). The instrument was originally developed by Jane Stallings in the 1970s to measure the efficiency and quality of primary teachers in the United States (Stallings 1977; Stallings and Mohlman 1988). The Stallings instrument generates quantitative data on four central aspects of teacher classroom practice: use of class time; use of materials; core pedagogical practices; and ability to engage students. The instrument generates robust, quantitative, and comparable data, making it useful in developing country contexts. The results from the Stallings classroom observations provide several valuable insights into what is happening inside Haitian classrooms. Given that at least basic motivation to teach appears to be present for most teachers, equipping them with the skills and tools to do it effectively--through targeted and practical in-service training, scripted lessons, and other means--is a high priority. In the long-run, improved teacher training that enables mastery of content, provides classroom practice and feedback, and that aligns with standards based on a revised curriculum could contribute to improved instruction and student learning. New instruction methods in Haiti should demand students to ask questions, compare, analyse, solve problems, and discuss, among others activities. This should become the norm rather than the exception. In the short-term, given the weaknesses of existing teacher training programs, scripted instruction methods in which teachers are guided through each class, albeit with adequate support and coaching, could be a way to foster student learning in the classroom.

The State-specific summary report serves as an assessment of Tennessee's annual Race to the Top implementation. The Year 4 report for Phase 2 grantees highlights successes and accomplishments, identifies challenges, and provides lessons learned from implementation from approximately September 2013 through September 2014. Given that Delaware and Tennessee's initial four-year grant periods ended in June and July 2014, respectively, for Phase 1 grantees, the Year 4 report includes the beginning of the no-cost extension year (Year 5). In Year 4, each of the eight regional Center of Regional Excellence (CORE) offices continued to provide content-specific supports to local educational agencies (LEAs) and schools through regionally delivered training, including courses targeting literacy and leadership. Students showed gains on Tennessee's State assessment across grade levels in English language arts (ELA) and mathematics from school year (SY) 2010-2011 to SY 2013-2014. Tennessee implemented a variety of activities across its reform plan to achieve its goals related to increasing student achievement and maintained participation of all LEAs in the State in its Race to the Top plan. Ten LEAs statewide piloted a new principal evaluation rubric aligned to the Tennessee Instructional Leadership Standards (TILS) to enable the State to gather feedback and make refinements prior to statewide implementation in SY 2014-2015. While the State fully implemented Common Core State Standards (CCSS) in all grades and subjects in SY 2013-2014, changes to the State's approach for transitioning to college- and career-ready assessments resulted in challenges communicating and clarifying expectations for LEAs and educators. Additionally, the State faced challenges meeting its targets for recruitment, retention, and placement in UTeach and Teach Tennessee and worked to gather and analyze data on these programs and other alternative preparation programs to continue to refine its approach to recruiting and training highly-effective teachers for high-need subject areas in the future. A glossary is included. [For "Race to the Top. Tennessee Report. Year 3: School Year 2012-2013. [State-Specific Summary Report]," see ED580339.]

This State-specific summary report serves as an assessment of New York's annual Race to the Top implementation. The Year 4 report for Phase 2 grantees highlights successes and accomplishments, identifies challenges, and provides lessons learned from implementation from approximately September 2013 through September 2014. In Year 4, New York continued to make progress in all areas of its Race to the Top plan, prioritizing ongoing communications with educators and other stakeholders to gather feedback and continuously refine supports for implementation. The Performance Management Office fully implemented a quarterly reporting system for vendors and Language Experience Approachs (LEAs) that better enabled it to track implementation progress and assess impact, address gaps and areas for improvement, and begin planning for sustainability. As it fully implemented Common Core Learning Standards (CCLS) in school year (SY) 2013-2014, New York provided ongoing statewide face-to-face trainings through five Network Team Institutes and a State website containing curricular and professional development resources for Boards of Cooperative Educational Services (BOCES), LEAs, educators, and parents. With an average of 26,000 weekly visits and 22,000 unique weekly visitors, EngageNY.org continued to be a comprehensive resource to support implementation of college- and career-ready standards for stakeholders within and beyond New York. The State also gathered information about EngageNY.org users' experiences to refine the modules, videos, and other training tools available. Following the administration of spring 2014 assessments, the State accelerated the timeline for providing results to LEAs and expanded resources to better enable LEAs and educators to make adjustments to instructional practices. In spring 2014, the State also launched a public data site including data from SY 2012-2013 educator evaluation system implementation and State assessment results. A glossary is included. [For "Race to the Top. New York Report. Year 3: School Year 2012-2013. [State-Specific Summary Report]," see ED580331.]

The State-specific summary report serves as an assessment of Delaware's annual Race to the Top implementation. The Year 4 report for Phase 2 grantees highlights successes and accomplishments, identifies challenges, and provides lessons learned from implementation from approximately September 2013 through September 2014. Given that Delaware and Tennessee's initial four-year grant periods ended in June and July 2014, respectively, for Phase 1 grantees, the Year 4 report includes the beginning of the no-cost extension year (Year 5). Delaware has made significant strides toward accomplishing its Race to the Top goals, though it encountered some implementation challenges and delays. Some of Delaware's accomplishments in Year 4 include, the Delaware Department of Education (DDOE) implementing its Race to the Top reforms with an eye towards long-term sustainability. Working toward this goal, in Year 4 the State better integrated its project management office within the State educational agency's (SEA) overall structure. The State refined its LEA performance management routines to increase SEA staff collaboration. The State also continued to investigate ways to align other federal funds with Race to the Top projects. Delaware supported its LEAs and schools through State-provided programs and resources that focused on the State's transition to college- and career-ready standards and aligned high quality assessments. Through the year, 99 of Delaware's 236 schools participated in the Common Ground for the Common Core program, a program supporting full instructional implementation of the CCSS. Delaware prepared for the transition to Smarter Balanced assessments in SY 2014-2015 by providing training and resources to help ensure that educators understood the difference between the level of rigor of the Delaware Comprehensive Assessment System (DCAS) and Smarter Balanced assessments. The State also developed new strategies to increase student participation and success in Advanced Placement (AP) courses and continued to pay for Preliminary Scholastic Aptitude Test (PSAT) and Scholastic Aptitude Test (SAT) for all Delaware high school sophomores and juniors. In Year 4, Delaware continued its focus on ensuring broad use of education data to improve student achievement. Throughout Year 4, Delaware continued to analyze educator evaluation, development, placement, recruitment, and retention data, and used its findings to improve DDOE policies and practices. Some challenges for Delaware this year are DDOE supported many LEAs and schools transitioning to full instructional implementation of the CCSS through the "Common Ground for the Common Core" program in Year 4, but not all LEAs and schools took advantage of the voluntary program. In Year 4, it remained challenging for DDOE to meet goals related to stakeholder use of data provided through the State's longitudinal data system, and the State is still at an early phase of some projects geared toward ensuring access to effective teachers and leaders in every Delaware school. Among plans for SY 2014-2015 (Year 5), Delaware indicated that it will continue implementing its highest priority reforms and continue its use of data to drive decision-making. The State intends to continue its focus on increasing the number of college- and career-ready Delaware students by continuing statewide implementation of the PSAT and SAT and implementing initiatives to increase the number of students taking, successfully completing, and passing AP courses and exams. In Year 5, DDOE plans to link the Delaware Performance Appraisal System II (DPAS-II) and student achievement results to teacher preparation programs and publicly report teacher preparation program effectiveness data. Delaware also plans to continue providing supports to the State's lowest-achieving schools, while focusing on improving school leadership within the schools requiring intervention and support. A glossary is also provided. [For "Race to the Top. Delaware Report. Year 3: School Year 2012-2013. [State-Specific Summary Report]," see ED580330.]

This State-specific summary report serves as an assessment of Rhode Island's Year 3 Race to the Top implementation, highlighting successes and accomplishments, identifying challenges, and providing lessons learned from implementation from approximately September 2013 through September 2014. Building upon the successes of Years 1 through 3, in Year 4 the State continued implementation of all planned projects and supported local education agencies (LEAs) in building their capacity to continue this work after the grant period. The State maintained its performance management processes within Rhode Island Department of Education (RIDE) and between RIDE and LEAs to ensure projects were being implemented as planned. The Collaborative Learning for Outcomes sessions provided LEA leaders with an opportunity to problem solve and share best practices. With many work streams occurring at the LEA level, RIDE shifted its focus to providing targeted technical assistance to LEAs through trainings, online modules and materials, and face-to-face supports across project areas. In addition, RIDE worked to draw connections between initiatives, in particular the State's work around standards and assessments and evaluation system implementation. By the end of Year 4 the State provided all planned supports for the standards transition and completed development of the full range of planned Common Core State Standards (CCSS)-aligned interim assessments. In SY 2013-2014 all Rhode Island LEAs implemented new educator evaluation systems for the second year and the State provided multiple kinds of professional development to support instructional practice. In Year 4, RIDE worked with educator preparation programs to develop resources to implement the new standards. In addition, RIDE released educator preparation program profiles online, which include the number of program completers to attain certification and find employment in the State, evaluation data on newly hired completers, demographic data, and information on the academic achievement of candidates. Rhode Island executed nearly all its Race to the Top plan by the end of the four-year grant period, with a few projects planned for the no-cost extension period. During the grant period the State added value to LEAs' efforts by drawing attention to critical implementation components, for example, by providing analyses of new data sources like the evaluation system, and by convening groups of teachers, leaders, and superintendents to discuss the assessments transition and data system updates. As of the end of Year 4, the State's fiscal constraints limited the extent to which the State could provide supports or create opportunities for LEA collaboration, which will require the State to consider alternative strategies. [For "Race to the Top. Rhode Island Report. Year 1: School Year 2010-2011. [State-Specific Summary Report]," see ED529328. For Race to the Top. Rhode Island Report. Year 2: School Year 2011-2012. [State-Specific Summary Report], see ED539243. For "Race to the Top. Rhode Island Report. Year 3: School Year 2012-2013. [State-Specific Summary Report]," see ED580326.]

This State-specific summary report serves as an assessment of Ohio's annual Race to the Top implementation. The Year 4 report for Phase 2 grantees highlights successes and accomplishments, identifies challenges, and provides lessons learned from implementation from approximately September 2013 through September 2014. Given that Delaware and Tennessee's initial four-year grant periods ended in June and July 2014, respectively, for Phase 1 grantees, the Year 4 report includes the beginning of the no-cost extension year (Year 5). In Year 4, or school year (SY) 2013-2014, the State made improvements in its collection and analysis of data. The Ohio Department of Education (ODE) utilized various data collection methods, including the Year 4 Implementation Survey, to assess the quality of each local educational agencies' (LEAs') implementation of the grant and provide targeted supports based on this data. ODE also leveraged its regional support structure to support grant implementation in the field and developed a revised regional support model to provide differentiated supports based on LEA-specific needs. The State continued to experience uncertainty during the year as a result of changes in leadership, including the Race to the Top Director and three education reform area leads. In addition, legislative changes throughout Year 4 caused ODE to make midcourse corrections to its implementation and posed significant communication challenges for the State. A glossary is included. [For "Race to the Top. Ohio Report. Year 3: School Year 2012-2013. [State-Specific Summary Report]," see ED580310.]

This State-specific summary report serves as an assessment of the District of Columbia's annual Race to the Top implementation. The Year 4 report for Phase 2 grantees highlights successes and accomplishments, identifies challenges, and provides lessons learned from implementation from approximately September 2013 through September 2014. Given that Delaware and Tennessee's initial four-year grant periods ended in June and July 2014, respectively, for Phase 1 grantees, the Year 4 report includes the beginning of the no-cost extension year (Year 5). For a majority of Year 4, the Office of the State Superintendent of Education (OSSE) reported that the agency's Race to the Top and content expert positions were fully staffed, including in areas such as data and research, student learning objectives (SLOs), and STEM, enabling OSSE to provide effective oversight and support. During Year 4, OSSE enhanced its resources on transitioning to college- and career-ready standards and assessments. In the area of "Great Teachers and Leaders," OSSE continued to provide participating LEAs with support to implement educator evaluation systems, OSSE released its SLO guidance in fall 2013 and provided intensive training on developing and implementing SLOs to local educational agencies (LEAs) in spring and summer 2014. The Charter School Teacher Residency (Pipelines) and Professional Learning Communities for Effectiveness (PLaCEs) consortia and one of the Expanded Growth Measures competitive grantees continued to implement their plans with high quality. Although the Pipelines subgrants concluded at the end of school year (SY) 2012-2013, both LEAs opted to continue their respective Pipelines programs with alternate funding sources. During Year 4, OSSE completed another agency staff audit and restructuring which produced new structures and processes for working across OSSE divisions. As a result, OSSE sometimes stalled in decision-making and experienced delays in carrying out certain activities. OSSE continued to support the transition to more rigorous college- and career-ready standards and assessments, but experienced mixed results. OSSE supported LEAs to fully implement educator evaluation systems, but experienced challenges after a contractor error affected the calculation of value-added growth measures (VAM) and Median Growth Percentile (MGP) data for SY 2012-2013. After struggling to develop a comprehensive strategy for PLA school interventions in Years 1-3, OSSE amended its intervention strategy and budget for persistently lowest-achieving (PLA) schools in December 2013. During Year 4, OSSE made significant progress on implementing its activities in STEM, but it still remains delayed in meeting its commitments and performance measures in this area of work. A glossary is included. [For "Race to the Top. District of Columbia Report. Year 3: School Year 2012-2013. [State-Specific Summary Report]," see ED580295.]

Year after year, in every state and community in our nation, students from low-income families are less likely than other students to reach advanced levels of academic performance, even when demonstrating the potential to do so. These income-based "excellence gaps" appear in elementary school and continue through high school. It is a story of demography predetermining destiny, with bright low-income students becoming what one research team referred to as a "persistent talent underclass." Through educating the nation's youth, our schools cultivate our next generation's talent, and students who do well in school are more likely to become productive contributors to society. By setting state-wide policies encouraging excellence, states can encourage all schools to provide advanced learning opportunities for high-ability students. This report examines the performance of America's high-ability students, with an emphasis on those who come from low-income backgrounds. The report examines a range of state-level interventions that are intended to foster academic talent, with the goal of identifying the policies currently in use that should be implemented more widely. Working with an expert advisory panel, the project team identified a range of indicators related to state-level policy inputs and student outcomes. Ultimately, 18 indicators were included in the analyses, representing nine distinct state-level policies and nine specific student outcomes. All data were collected at the state level, as changes to state-level policies are believed to be the most likely to improve the country's education of high-ability students, especially students from low-income families. States were then graded on both their policy interventions and their student outcomes. To help states build on this groundwork, the Jack Kent Cooke Foundation plans to conduct this survey periodically, with an increasingly broadened set of indicators and data sources, to inform the national dialogue about how best to educate our most advanced students, especially those from low-income families. As a starting point, recommendations to states include the following: (1) Make high-performing students highly visible; (2) Remove barriers that prevent high-ability students from moving through coursework at a pace that matches their achievement level; (3) Ensure that all high-ability students have access to advanced educational services; and (4) Hold local education agencies (LEAs) accountable for the performance of high-ability students from all economic backgrounds. The following are appended: (1) Indicator Descriptions and Data Sources; (2) State Data Tables; and (3) State Report Cards.