Search

Recent changes in education and training policy in England continue to focus on creating a 'demand-led' system in an environment where public funds are dwindling and where more responsibility is being devolved away from central government. This raises questions about governance of the system, among others, and the roles that key system actors are expected to play. This paper broadly discusses education and training system policies that focus on workforce development in England and the US, especially with regard to the role of further education colleges (community colleges in the US), employer engagement, and local workforce development bodies. The focus is on governance at the post-secondary level, as the main interest is skills development after compulsory education. The US and England share a number of features and problems that affect the education and training system, such as lack of employer involvement, the lower status of sub-baccalaureate education and training providers despite their central role in delivering vocational education and training programmes, and insufficient links between education and training provision and the labour market. The most striking differences between the American and English systems are the governance and authority structures, which are stronger in the US and afford greater scope for strategic planning by states and between states and the federal level. The experiences of community colleges in working with employers to provide workforce training may be worth further investigation as further education colleges further develop this type of provision. The US experience is less instructive with regard to quality assurance or increasing employers' engagement with education.

This descriptive work urges U.S. policymakers to consider the English system of school inspections as a way of expanding our understanding of student achievement. Such an innovation is timely, according to the report, because the No Child Left Behind legislation is coming up for reauthorization. Using data largely from the English Office for Standards in Education (Ofsted), the report outlines the English system, including the rubrics it uses in judging teaching, some characteristics of its inspectors, and how much such a system might cost states in the United States. Readers should keep in mind that the report is an advocacy piece and not a research document. No research questions are posed, and few examples from the extensive literature on English school inspections are offered. Thus, the report does not include key research findings, be they supportive or critical, of the process or of the very concept of the inspection service. In order to make sound judgments, policymakers need clear information about alternative approaches, hence the possible attraction of publications such as the one reviewed here. Unfortunately, the potential for "On Her Majesty's School Inspection Service" to provide such help is limited by its design as an advocacy piece. (Contains 16 notes.) [This report reviews "On Her Majesty's School Inspection Service. Education Sector Reports" (ED528608).]

In fiscal year 2009, the Department of Defense's (DOD) Military Tuition Assistance (TA) Program provided $517 million in tuition assistance to approximately 377,000 service members. US Government Accountability Office (GAO) was asked to report on (1) DOD's oversight of schools receiving TA funds, and (2) the extent to which DOD coordinates with accrediting agencies and the U.S. Department of Education (Education) in its oversight activities. GAO conducted site visits to selected military education centers and interviewed officials from DOD, its contractors, Education, accrediting agencies and their association, and postsecondary institutions. GAO recommends that DOD (1) improve accountability for recommendations made by third-party quality reviews, (2) develop a centralized process to track complaints against schools, (3) conduct a systemic review of its oversight processes, (4) take actions to ensure TA funds are used only for accreditor-approved courses and programs, and (5) require and verify state authorization for all schools. DOD agreed with our recommendations. Also, DOD and Education provided technical comments on the draft report. We incorporated each agency's comments as appropriate. Appended are: (1) Scope and Methodology; (2) Selected Postsecondary Institutions GAO Interviewed at Selected Education Centers; (3) Comments from the Department of Defense; and (4) GAO Contact and Staff Acknowledgments. (Contains 1 table, 2 figures and 30 footnotes.)

Teacher evaluation has emerged as a major focus for reform at the highest levels of education policymaking, and for good reason. Most evaluations are based on scant evidence of actual effectiveness, produce inflated ratings, and provide teachers with little useful feedback. This paper offers policymakers and practitioners important "lessons learned" from TAP: The System for Teacher and Student Advancement. The TAP system is a comprehensive strategy to boost teacher effectiveness through opportunities for career advancement, professional growth, performance evaluation, and competitive compensation. TAP represents the longest sustained and most successful effort to radically transform teacher evaluation using multiple measures, including student achievement gains, in the United States today. Since its inception in 2000-2001, the TAP system has grown to serve over 10,000 teachers and 100,000 students across the country, and it will expand to reach twice that many teachers and students by the 2011-2012 school year. TAP uses a comprehensive approach to teacher evaluation which considers multiple measures of performance including student achievement gains in addition to teachers' instructional practices. Recent analyses have shown that TAP's evaluation system produces much more valid performance ratings than do traditional teacher evaluations. TAP's observational measure of classroom instruction represents a true distribution of teacher performance even before "value-added" student learning gains are calculated. TAP's Training and Certification for Evaluators is appended. (Contains 10 figures.)

This report was prepared by the National Child Care Information and Technical Assistance Center (NCCIC) in partnership with staff from the Child Care Bureau. NCCIC compiled data reported in approved CCDF Plans and relevant attachments submitted by Lead Agencies for a selected number of questions. The information presented reflects some of the activities and strategies States and Territories planned to undertake as presented in the approved CCDF Plans. This report is not a catalog of all activities undertaken by Lead Agencies since States and Territories might not have included all activities in their CCDF Plans, which also may be amended at any time during the biennial period. In addition, this report includes some text taken directly from CCDF Plans, so certain terminology may differ in particular parts of the report given variations across States and Territories. Information is provided from 51 States and 5 Territories. For the purpose of this report, the District of Columbia is categorized as a State. The five Territories are American Samoa, the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, Guam, Puerto Rico, and the Virgin Islands. Nearly all data in the tables and figures present combined information from States and Territories, rather than separate counts for each. The report includes two main sections ("Chapter 2: CCDF Plans Data Summary" and "Chapter 3: CCDF State and Territory Profiles"). The second chapter is a summary of selected data from all 56 Lead Agencies about how they comply with CCDF statute and Federal regulations, which corresponds to the CCDF Plan Preprint (Form ACF-118). Information is presented in table and figure format. The third chapter highlights selected services and activities through profiles of all States and Territories. These profiles present key information from the approved CCDF Plans about how the program is administered and implemented; eligibility criteria, reimbursement rates, and sliding fee scales; health and safety requirements; and selected activities to improve the quality of child care. These profiles provide examples for illustrative purposes as a supplement to the information presented in the second chapter. (Contains 42 tables, 2 figures and 1 footnote.)

Through this document, Lumina Foundation for Education offers a "Degree Qualifications Profile," a tool that can help transform U.S. higher education. A Degree Profile--or qualifications framework--illustrates clearly what students should be expected to know and be able to do once they earn their degrees--at any level. This Degree Profile thus proposes specific learning outcomes that benchmark the associate, bachelor's and master's degrees--which constitute the great majority of postsecondary degrees awarded by U.S. colleges and universities--regardless of a student's field of specialization. Beyond encouraging thoughtful discussion and evolution of those reference points, the Degree Profile can serve other purposes either lacking or imperfectly realized in American higher education today. While it is difficult to anticipate all of the purposes that the Degree Profile can serve, there are several obvious applications that deserve mention. At the curriculum and classroom level, instructors and students can refer to the Degree Profile as a common source of understanding and as a point of departure for agreement on more detailed and specific expectations regarding the development of programs, courses, assignments and assessments. At the college and university level, the Degree Profile provides reference points that allow faculty members to articulate and better align institutional student learning outcomes with departmental objectives. The Degree Profile also should offer students and advisers reference points for degree planning. In addition, institutions can use the Degree Profile to help align their expectations with those of other institutions and to give prospective students a clear statement of the outcomes they seek to assure. Regional accreditors should find that the Degree Profile prompts them to reach the consensus on learning outcomes that is being sought by many leaders and opinion makers. Specialized accreditors can use the Degree Profile as a platform for relating disciplinary expectations to institutional ones. A list of sources is included. (Contains 1 footnote.) [For the executive summary, see ED515341.]

The title of this document is a deliberate play on the title of the biennial reports on the progress of Bologna produced by the European Students' Union, "Bologna With Student Eyes." It is a way of paying tribute to student involvement in the Bologna reforms, and marking a parallel student working participation in the state system "Tuning" study groups in the U.S. This monograph, an expansion of the previous Bologna Club essay, draws on hundreds of documents in 8 languages, interviews with principal actors in 9 countries, and suggestions from two rounds of European reviewers, to bring to a broad academic audience in the United States an analysis of what European higher education authorities, academic leaders, faculty, and students have learned over the first decade of their considerable efforts, particularly in the challenging matters of: (1) student learning outcomes (set in what are called "qualification frameworks"); (2) the relationship of these frameworks to credits and curriculum reform; (3) the construction of new paths to student participation in higher education, including refinement of "short-cycle" degrees analogous to our Associate's, and combinations of e-learning and part-time status; (4) the reflection of all of this in the documentation of student attainment called "Diploma Supplements," and the expansion of this documentation in a lifelong "Europass' (5) the establishment of a "zone of mutual trust" through an all-encompassing culture of quality assurance, and an international accreditation register; and (6) consolidating and hence clarifying the myriad of academic credentials offered across 46 countries into common "cycles," which, in combination with qualification frameworks, a common credit system, and quality assurance, assures the recognition of degrees across national borders. These highlights help clarify, for North American readers, what Bologna is and what it is not. Some of them are extraordinarily relevant to challenges that face U.S. higher education, and are particularly applicable to accountability and access issues--in ways we simply have not considered. This document urges us to learn something from beyond our own borders that just might help us rethink our higher education enterprise. Thirteen Chapters comprise this report. They are: (1) A Tapestry of Change; (2) The Core of Bologna, Line I: Qualification Frameworks; (3) The Core of Bologna, Line II: Qualification Frameworks from the Ground-Up: the "Tuning" model and its Analogues; (4) The "Bologna-Code:" Learning Outcomes and Competences; (5) The Core of Bologna, Line III: The European Credit Transfer and Accumulation System (ECTS); (6) The Core of Bologna, Line IV: Closing the Loop with The Diploma Supplement; (7) Coda to the Accountability Loop: Quality Assurance; (8) The Core of Bologna, Line V: A Different Kind of Visit With Degree Cycles; (9) The Social Dimension of Bologna: Providing Multiple Pathways; (10) The External Dimension: Bologna Faces the World; (11) The Larger Language Landscape; (12) Bologna 2020: What is Left to be Done?; and (13) What Should the U.S. Learn?: Epiphanies for Our Eyes. Appended are: (A) Our European Colleagues; Our Translation Assistance; (B) 2007 Status of Core Bologna Features and Enabling Legislation in 46 Countries; and (C) Institutions from Which Diploma Supplements Were Received and Examined. (Contains 14 figures and 4 tables.) [For the document, "Bologna with Student Eyes, 2007," see ED500451.]

Thirty distinguished college and university presidents and chancellors shared their perceptions of institutional and programmatic accreditation in a series of interviews conducted by Council for Higher Education Accreditation (CHEA) during Spring 2005. The presidents commented on their knowledge of and involvement in accreditation, accreditation's value to institutions and accreditation's value to society. This report presents results of a data-gathering effort undertaken by the CHEA Presidents Project, an initiative focused on building presidential investment and interest in accreditation as a public policy issue. CHEA initiated this project as a result of the growing perception of its board and key member presidents that many college and university leaders tend to think of accreditation principally as a process that their institutions have to undergo, rather than as an important defining element in the policy relationship between the higher education enterprise and society. Accreditation in the United States is unique in the world as an approach to institutional development and quality assurance because it remains essentially institutionally owned and governed. CHEA believes that accreditation has reached an important place in its long and effective history--a point that requires both accreditation's and higher education's leaders to take stock of the enterprise and its role in public policy for higher education. Because of this overall commitment to building presidential engagement and investment, CHEA is vitally interested in presidential opinions about accreditation. The results of the interviews as presented in this report were designed to bring the voices of sitting presidents to conversations about the public policy role of accreditation. Results of this investigation suggest the following conclusions: (1) The nation's higher education leadership believes strongly in the purposes of accreditation and, despite the sometimes considerable costs that the process entails for institutions, supports it as the premier mechanism for assuring academic quality in the nation; (2) Presidents recognize that the benefits of accreditation to institutions are, in an important sense, up to them; (3) Despite their strong support for the process, presidents believe that there are some things that accreditors can improve; (4) Despite recent calls for it, presidents remain wary of increased public disclosure of the results of accreditation reviews; and (5) Presidents are concerned that the accreditation process is not well understood by the public and by constituents to whom it is supposed to assure quality. These views, rounded out by additional presidential opinions gathered on an ongoing basis, can help CHEA craft a more effective strategy for building public support for accreditation as the keystone in this nation's approach to assuring the quality of higher education. The following are appended: (1) Interview Protocol; (2) Interview Participants; (3) Interview Discussion Topics; (4) Accreditation and Presidential Leadership Roundtable; and (5) Accreditation and Presidential Leadership Roundtable Participants.

The purpose of this paper is to review literature on the alternative certification policy so as to identify key features and issues as the basis for suggesting a more systematic approach to the study of the policy efforts. Alternative teacher certification has become a proliferating phenomenon in the United States in response to current and projected widespread teacher shortages. The growth of alternative certification, while rapid, has not been systematic and there is little agreement on how to define, structure and ensure quality control across a diverse array of programs. In the course of nearly 20 years of implementation of alternative certification, the policy landscape has been dominated by a myriad of definitions and programs, intense debate about the professional legitimacy of the solution, and mixed, inconclusive and even contradictory research in terms of the effectiveness of such programs. Although the projected severe nationwide teacher shortages have not materialized in general, such shortages do exist in specific localities and specialties, indicating that teacher distribution rather than production is the issue. Nevertheless, despite the endeavor to solve the generic teacher production problem at the macro level, alternative teacher certification has been criticized for having fallen short of addressing teacher distribution and retention at the micro level, that is, in most hard-to-staff schools in urban and rural areas and in high-need subject areas, such as mathematics and science, English as a second language, bilingual education, and special education, and for teachers of color and male teachers. Given the complexity of issues, the continued growth, and the on-going investment of public resources associated with alternative teacher certification, a comprehensive, in depth and systematic descriptive analysis is needed to help evaluate the effectiveness of the policy in addressing teacher supply and demand, teacher production and distribution. Classification of Alternative Routes is appended.

This report is the first in a series of policy papers on the education of educators. It offers a comprehensive analysis of the university-based programs that educate the majority of the nation's school principals and superintendents. Of the approximately 250,000 school administrators employed in the United States, nearly all were trained at schools of education, primarily in programs targeted to educational administration. Over the past 15 years, these programs have faced an increasing tide of criticism and diminished reputation. As districts and states explore alternative forms of recruitment and training, hold over administrator licensure has loosened. Drawing from a four-year study of leadership programs at schools of education across the country, this report offers insight into ways in which those programs operated, incentives that drive them, and recommendations for improvement, including: (1) Eliminating incentives that favor low-quality programs; (2) Setting and enforcing minimum quality standards; (3) Redesigning educational leadership programs. Three appendixes are included: (1) Data Sources; (2) Description of the Nation's Education Schools by Carnegie Type; and (3) Acknowledgments. (Contains 62 notes and 9 tables.) [For the executive summary, see ED504143.]

This review of literature was written in preparation for conducting a research study on the U.S. community college system as a potential model for developing countries, and using Vietnam as a specific case. It is divided into four sections: (a) a discussion of the purposes of higher education (HE), (b) an examination of problems faced by the HE systems in developing countries, (c) a description of Vietnam's HE context, and (d) perspectives concerning U.S. community colleges. The literature shows that problems experienced across developing countries are representative of those faced by higher education in Vietnam. Inadequate access, funding, teacher salaries and qualifications, pedagogical materials, facility conditions, institutional autonomy, and quality assurance mechanisms are all difficult issues that must be addressed. Recommendations are discussed as thematic concepts, including diversification, establishing links between industry and HE institutions, and providing access to adult learners.

This document summarizes an extensive study of policies and practices in adult literacy and adult basic education in a number of countries undertaken by Rosa McKenna and Lynne Fitzpatrick. The original study contains considerably greater detail and analyses issues on a country-by-country basis. The countries studied--Canada, the Republic of Ireland, New Zealand, the United States of America, the United Kingdom and Australia--are all western democracies, some with federal and others with unitary systems of government. All are primarily English speaking, although Canada is bilingual, and most have significant indigenous and immigrant minorities, often disadvantaged and with special literacy needs. This summary report is organized around five headings related to the key features of effective adult literacy policy and program practices identified in the main study. These are: (1) policy contexts and concepts; (2) program development and delivery; (3) regulatory frameworks, product development and quality assurance; (4) issues for the teaching workforce; and (5) implications for Australia. The study found that adult literacy issues are widespread in the countries studied and impact on their capacity to build high-skill, knowledge-based economies and inclusive societies. The International Adult Literacy Survey (IALS), conducted in the 1990s by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) and Statistics Canada (1995, 2000) in all countries studied, has acted in most cases as a catalyst for a review of literacy policy and practice, although less so in Australia than elsewhere. The survey revealed that all countries studied have significant proportions of their adult populations--between 45% and 55%--with the lowest two levels of literacy proficiency, suggesting that these adults may have trouble with everyday tasks. The survey focused on print-based prose, document and quantitative literacies. (Contains 1 table.) [The information in this report was compiled by Robin Ryan. For "Building Sustainable Adult Literacy Provision: A Review of International Trends in Adult Literacy Policy and Programs. Support Document," see ED493938.]

This monograph addresses key issues in the current discussion between accreditation and the federal government relative to accountability and higher education. The reauthorization of the Higher Education Act (HEA) now being discussed in Congress is driving this issue to the top of the academic agenda. The paper describes some of the accountability expectations of those in government in relation to accreditation, especially accountability and evidence of institution and program performance and student learning outcomes. It contrasts these government expectations with the accountability expectations of some in higher education and accrediting organizations themselves. The paper then examines four options that are being discussed in relation to these government calls for accountability in the context of the current reauthorization. One option offered by some in higher education is to do nothing on the assumption that, in relation to the current call for accountability, "this, too, shall pass." A second option is to affirm the value and effectiveness of current accreditation practice as adequate evidence of accountability. A third option has been offered by a member of Congress and would separate accreditation from the HEA on the grounds that the differences between what accreditation does and what government wants cannot be reconciled. A fourth option offered here seeks to bridge the divide that appears to exist between what government wants and what accreditation does by urging accrediting organizations and higher education to take steps to address the current accountability expectations in this reauthorization, but only in the context of the federal government acknowledging that these organizations and institutions (not government) have primary responsibility for judgments about academic quality, including institution and program performance and student learning outcomes. Appendix A presents the United States Department of Education Recognition Standards. Appendix B presents The Effectiveness and Value of Accreditation. (Lists 6 sources.) [This report was produced by CHEA (Council for Higher Education Accreditation) Institute for Research and Study of Accreditation and Quality Assurance.]

Efforts focused on improving quality processes based upon the Malcolm Baldrige Education Criteria for Performance Excellence may hold promise for fundamentally improving K-12 education. This policy report examines the information available on improving school quality through implementation of the Baldrige criteria. It provides a snapshot of what is currently known about the application and effectiveness of Baldrige criteria in K-12 education and is intended to (1) provide useful information to educational practitioners, policymakers, and researchers about the concepts and current state of Baldrige applications in K-12 education; and (2) make specific recommendations to each group regarding potential Baldrige K-12 implementation, evaluation, and research. This report initially provides an overview of the quality movement as it first emerged in industry and a description of the Baldrige Award process. It then focuses on the adaptation of the Baldrige Model, as well as similar quality processes, to K-12 education. Included are discussions of Baldrige core elements and values as related to the educational process. The report then describes the implementation of Baldrige, TQM (Total Quality Management), and quality processes in the schools, Baldrige studies, and current large-scale Baldrige efforts. It concludes with a series of recommendations regarding Baldrige implementation, evaluation, and research for educators, policymakers, and researchers.

This document contains three papers from a symposium on standards and certification in human resource development (HRD). "Implementing Management Standards in the UK" (Jonathan Winterton, Ruth Winterton) reports on a study that explored the implementation of management standards in 16 organizations and identified 36 key themes and strategic issues regarding the following areas: setting objectives in adopting standards; embedding standards; implementing standards; identifying competence needs and assessing competence; delivering management development; using and evaluating standards; determining standards' impacts and benefits; and addressing problems in adopting standards. "The Applicability of AHRD Ethics Standards Internationally" (Lisa A. Garrett, Gary N. McLean) explores the theory-building literature on ethics standards and global application of ethics codes and discusses the problems inherent in attempting to apply ethical standards that are applicable in one culture to other cultures. "Nature and Impact of ISO (International Standards Organization) Certification on Training and Development Activities in Singapore Organizations" (Hesan A. Quazi, Ronald L. Jacobs) identifies and discusses significant changes in HRD activities in organizations in Singapore's manufacturing sector that occurred after adoption of the ISO 9001/9002 standards. All three papers contain substantial bibliographies. (MN)

This paper examines quality issues in career guidance, counseling, and information services in Europe and elsewhere from a range of different perspectives related to economic, ethical, and/or effectiveness criteria. Selected examples from the European Union member states, Canada, and the United States are used to illustrate how quality is described and measured in terms of statements, guidelines, standards, and hidden customers. National quality standards and national approaches to the definition of quality for the following items are reviewed: delivery of career guidance services; skills and qualifications required of career guidance workers; and occupational and educational information used in career guidance. The needs and adequacy of such standards and definitions are examined. Particular attention is paid to options for their use, their impact on service quality, and the implications of new approaches to career guidance for such standards. The roles of governments and professional career guidance organizations in developing, implementing, and monitoring standards and definitions are explored. The formation of genuine partnerships with national and international nongovernmental organizations, development of cross-sectoral cooperation, and establishment of a broad national lead body that includes all relevant partners are suggested as ways governments might raise the quality of career information, guidance, and counseling services. (Contains 40 references) (MN)

During the past decade, funding mechanisms for universities and technical education institutions and colleges have undergone massive restructuring in developed and developing countries alike. Governmental support has generally decreased, resulting in greater reliance on fee-based education or creation of privately sponsored engineering/technical colleges or universities. The following are some of the trends that will likely result from changes in the funding of technical education: (1) export of education will become an important component of the economies of advanced, rich countries such as Australia, New Zealand, the United Kingdom, and Canada; (2) privatization, commercialization, and marketing of education, especially business, commerce, and information technology will increasingly play a dominant role in developing countries; (3) quality management in developing countries will also move away from government monitoring to professional monitoring, as is now the case in developed countries; (4) the quality of education in developing countries will eventually be determined by market forces; (5) educational funding from individual family budgets will become increasingly difficult in developing countries as privatization results in increased fees; and (6) education will move from being a totally governmental activity to a more commerce- and industry-based activity and will eventually become a service industry. (MN)

A task force was convened to identify the nature, extent, and pattern of skill needs and shortages for managerial occupations in the United Kingdom (UK). The task force began by examining the key challenges facing managers in the UK. The following factors were among those considered: economic policies promoting liberalization and deregulation; increasingly fragmented and global product markets; and technological transformations arising from developments in microelectronics. The demand projections for managers and skills shortages (as demonstrated through recruitment problems for higher-level occupations) were reviewed along with the new skills and competencies demanded of managers. Skills related to the following management roles were detailed: managing operations, managing finance, managing people, and managing information. Each key role was subdivided into units of competence that were in turn subdivided into elements of competence. Performance criteria and range indicators were provided for each element of competence. The following key management roles were added to the original four: manage energy, manage quality, and manage projects. Existing management standards were reviewed and modified to reflect the new roles. Management training and development in schools and small and medium enterprises were discussed along with criticisms that have been leveled against competency-based management development. (Contains 112 references.) (MN)

It is suggested that approaches to research assessment vary according to national context. In the United States, higher education is dominated by market forces; in Britain and Australia, emphasis is on interinstitutional competitiveness; in northern Europe, focus is overall system efficiency. Performance indicators and peer review of research are compared. (MSE)

This paper offers a broad look at accreditation and quality assurance in higher education and how these issues are addressed around the world. Section 1 is an overview of accreditation and addresses the aims and objectives of accreditation, standards, accreditation bodies, stages of the accreditation process, the quality of that process, the role of government in the accreditation process, some critical points of view concerning the process, and present accreditation trends. Section 2 looks at accreditation and quality assurance through brief national case studies. The nations represented are France, Germany, United Kingdom, the Netherlands, Sweden, the United States, China, India, Hong Kong, South Africa, Nigeria, Kenya, and Australia. This section closes with a section comparing accreditation and quality assurance in various regions. Section 3 takes a closer and more detailed look at the accreditation process in Romania, particularly in light of the recent political and educational changes in this nation and the fairly recent decision to introduce accreditation of institutions of higher education. This examination covers accreditation principles and objectives, standards for initial and subsequent accreditation, application rules, structure of the accreditation committee and its functions, and provisions for financing accreditation. Appendixes contain institutional evaluation standards and a glossary. (Contains 27 references.) (JB)

In this chapter, the authors discuss challenges and decision-making in the process of conducting quality mixed methods research in higher education, and offer the lessons learned from their experiences. The chapter begins with a discussion of quality and the ways of establishing quality in mixed methods studies. Two examples of studies are used to illustrate the issues involved in addressing quality in conducting mixed methods studies in different higher education settings. The first example discusses the challenges associated with establishing the quality of meta-inferences in a mixed methods (quantitative to qualitative) design that was used in two studies of students' engagement and persistence in pursuing graduate degrees online in the United States. The second example presents the methodological steps and criteria for evaluating the quality of a multilevel mixed design study to explain quality management in Greek higher education. The authors also reflect on how researchers can become active participants in the co-construction of quality in mixed methods research. [For the complete volume, "Theory and Method in Higher Education Research. International Perspectives on Higher Education Research. Volume 9," see ED595152.]

The Programme for the International Assessment of Adult Competencies (PIAAC) has been planned as an ongoing program of assessment. The first cycle of the assessment has involved two "rounds." The first round, which is covered by this report, took place over the period of January 2008-October 2013. The main features of the first cycle of PIAAC are: (1) Skills assessed; (2) Other information on skills; (3) Test delivery; and (4) Adaptive testing. The following contents are included in this report: Section 1: Assessment and Instrument Design: (1) Assessment Design (Irwin Kirsch and Kentaro Yamamoto); (2) The Development of the PIAAC Cognitive Instruments (Mary Louise Lennon and Claudia Tamassia); The Development of the PIAAC Background Questionnaires (Jim Allen, Rolf van der Velden, Susanne Helmschrott, Silke Martin, Natascha Massing, Beatrice Rammstedt, Anouk Zabal, and Matthias von Davier); and (4) Translation, Adaptation, and Verification of Test and Survey Materials (Andrea Ferrari, Laura Wayrynen, Dorothée Behr and Anouk Zabal). Section 2: Platform Development: (5) Development of the Cognitive Items (Britta Upsing, Frank Goldhammer, Maya Schnitzler, Robert Baumann, Roland Johannes, Ingo Barkow and Heiko Rölke, Isabelle Jars, Thibaud Latour, Patrick Plichart, Raynald Jadoul, Christopher Henry, and Mike Wagner; (6) Development of Technical Support Tools (Britta Upsing, Frank Goldhammer, Maya Schnitzler, Robert Baumann, Roland Johannes, Ingo Barkow, Heiko Rölke, Isabelle Jars, Thibaud Latour, Patrick Plichart, Raynald Jadoul, Christopher Henry, and Mike Wagner; (7) Development of the CAPI Questionnaire Software (Thibaud Latour, Raynald Jadoul, and Mike Wagner); (8) Development of the Integrated Computer Platform (Britta Upsing, Frank Goldhammer, Maya Schnitzler, Robert Baumann, Roland Johannes, Ingo Barkow, Heiko Rölke, Isabelle Jars, Thibaud Latour, Patrick Plichart, Raynald Jadoul, Christopher Henry, and Mike Wagner); (9) The TAO platform (Raynald Jadoul, Patrick Plichart, Jérôme Bogaerts, Christophe Henry, Thibaud Latour, and Henri Tudor). Section 3: Field Operations and Quality Control: (10) Field operations (Pat Montalvan and Michael Lemay); (11) Quality Control Monitoring Activities (Pat Montalvan and Michael Lemay); (12) Scoring Reliability Studies Claudia Tamassia, Mary Louise Lennon and Kentaro Yamamoto); (13) Data Management Procedures (Ralph Carstens and Tim Daniel). Section 4: Sampling and Weighting: (14) Sampling design (Leyla Mohadjer, Tom Krenzke and Wendy Van de Kerchove); (15) Survey Weighting and Variance Estimation Leyla Mohadjer, Tom Krenzke and Wendy Van de Kerchove); (16) Indicators of the Quality of the Sample Data (Leyla Mohadjer, Tom Krenzke and Wendy Van de Kerchove). Section 5: Data Analysis and Data Products: (17) Scaling PIAAC Cognitive Data (Kentaro Yamamoto, Lale Khorramdel and Matthias von Davier); (18) Scaling Outcomes (Kentaro Yamamoto, Lale Khorramdel and Matthias von Davier); (19) Proficiency Scale Construction (Kentaro Yamamoto, Lale Khorramdel and Matthias von Davier); (20) Creating Simple and Complex Derived Variables and Validation of Background Questionnaire Data (Matthias von Davier, Jonathan Weeks, Henry Chen,Jim Allen and Rolf van der Velden); (21) PIAAC Proficiency Scales Claudia Tamassia and Mary Louise Lennon); (22) Generating Results for PIAAC (Alfred Rogers and John Barone); (23) International Database and Data Analysis Tools (Ralph Carstens, Tim Daniel, and Eugenio Gonzalez). The following are appended: (1) PIAAC main study item pool characteristics; (2) Contrast coding used in conditioning; (3) Design effect tables; (4) Changes to questionnaire items from IALS to PIAAC; (5) Mapping of ISCED levels to years of schooling; (6) PIAAC Consortium, staff, Expert Groups, National Project Managers and consultants; and (7) Data Adjudication in PIAAC (PIAAC Consortium and William Thorn, OECD). (Individual chapters contain references.)

This report is the third of a three-phase research study of teacher professional learning opportunities in the United States. In this third phase of the research, the authors conducted case studies of four professionally active states to get a deeper look at the policy frameworks that support professional development in those states. These states--Colorado, Missouri, New Jersey, and Vermont--have made significant gains in student performance on the National Assessment of Educational Progress, scoring above the national average, and showed evidence of high levels of teacher participation in professional development in the 2008 National Schools and Staffing Survey (NCES) or on other indicators of access to professional learning. The states represent pockets of promising practice, having created environments in which innovative approaches to school and instructional improvement have gradually gained a foothold. Across the four states, the authors found varied approaches to professional development policy and implementation, including differing levels of support and control at the state level and divergent strategies for monitoring and promoting professional development activity at the local level. But these states shared some common strategies for leveraging professional development access and quality, including: (1) Developing standards to guide accountability; (2) Monitoring quality; (3) Requiring induction and mentoring programs; (4) Leveraging collegial strategies for professional learning; (5) Partnering with professional organizations; (6) Creating networks of intermediary organizations; (7) Addressing federal mandates and accountability requirements in constructive ways; and (8) Skillfully marshalling resources. Appendices include: (1) NAEP Data for Four Case Study States; (2) Methodology; and (3) Professional Development Policy Provisions in Four Case Study States. (Contains 14 tables, 6 figures and 20 footnotes.) [For the related report, "Professional Learning in the Learning Profession: A Status Report on Teacher Development in the U.S. and Abroad. Technical Report", see ED504168.]