Search

There is little evidence of how differentiated instruction is being implemented, if at all, in low- and middle-income contexts, which often have unique challenges such as availability of resources and large class sizes. In this paper, we present the results of a qualitative study in eight multigrade preprimary classrooms in Kenya. We used classroom observations and teacher interviews to understand how teachers approached differentiation during language and mathematics lessons, including understanding why teachers were making the moves we observed. All teachers differentiated instruction to some extent in our findings, and we provide detailed descriptions of the ways that teachers adapted content to fit the needs of their students. We also provide recommendations, including how to support teachers in creating activities that are appropriate for different abilities of students in the same classrooms, and suggest next steps for research in this area.

Protecting all people from the harmful effects of environmental exposures relies on the coordinated efforts of scientific researchers, regulatory agencies, legislators, and the public. Environmental justice addresses the disproportionate impact that harmful environmental exposures have on individuals and communities who are minoritized and marginalized. It has long been known that environmental problems disproportionately impact these groups; however, addressing these problems has been impeded by structural racism and other biases. Developing effective interventions to eliminate these disparities requires a more diverse and inclusive modern workforce produced by a bottom-up approach beginning with education and professional development of the next generation of researchers. The most effective approaches to addressing inequities rely on active input from impacted populations to ensure cultural and social acceptance and adoption of interventions. Credibly pursuing these efforts in a sustainable, inclusive manner will require a concerted shift in workforce demography. One potential strategy to address these workforce disparities features academic-industry partnerships with targeted professional development programs aimed at minoritized and underserved populations. [This paper was supported by strategic funds from the University Collaboration Office at RTI International and North Carolina Central University.]

Research has shown educators' implicit biases to be a key factor in creating and perpetuating disparities in students' experiences of schooling, learning, and longer-term outcomes, including job opportunities, wealth, and health. Current school reform and transformation efforts are aimed at addressing institutionalized racism in school policies, practices, and cultural systems by implementing implicit bias training for teachers and staff. In this paper, we explain how a school home visits program, Parent Teacher Home Visits (PTHV), is a promising intervention for counteracting implicit biases and improving outcomes for families and students. The PTHV "relational" home visit model focuses on promoting mutually supportive and accountable relationships between educators and families. We present data from a study examining the experiences of 107 educators and 68 family members who participated in PTHV, showing how educators shifted their deficit assumptions about families and students. Although the PTHV model was not created to address implicit biases, we found that the key components of these home visits align with strategies that psychological research has demonstrated effectively counteracting implicit biases and reducing discriminatory behaviors.

This report looks at the education and work outcomes of a national sample of bachelor's degree recipients four years after they earned their degrees. The findings are based on data from the 2016/20 Baccalaureate and Beyond Longitudinal Study (B&B:16/20). B&B:16/20, which took place in 2020, is the second follow-up in a national study of students who completed the requirements for a bachelor's degree during the 2015-16 academic year. The first follow-up took place in 2017 and asked respondents about their bachelor's degree programs and any education and work they had in the first year after earning their degrees. The COVID-19 pandemic, which started a few months before B&B:16/20 began data collection in June 2020, likely impacted the data presented in this report. Outcomes described include enrollment and employment status, federal student loan debt and repayment, earnings and other job characteristics, financial well-being, and teaching status. [For the summary to this report, see ED622739.]

This report looks at the education and work outcomes of a national sample of bachelor's degree recipients four years after they earned their degrees. The findings are based on data from the 2016/20 Baccalaureate and Beyond Longitudinal Study (B&B:16/20). This summary report presents selected findings from the full report including enrollment and employment status, federal student loan debt and repayment, earnings and other job characteristics, financial well-being, and teaching status. [For the full report, see ED622737.]

This summary report presents selected findings from the full report which describes the experiences of 2015-16 bachelor's degree earners during the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic, 4 years after graduation. The findings in this report are based on data from the 2016/20 Baccalaureate and Beyond Longitudinal Study (B&B:16/20), which took place in 2020. Findings include professional and personal experiences during the COVID-19 pandemic, federal student loan repayment, employment status and characteristics, changes to work arrangements, and unemployment compensation during the COVID-19 pandemic. [For the full report, see ED622730.]

This First Look presents selected findings on the work and life experiences of recent bachelor's degree earners before and during the COVID-19 pandemic. The findings in this report are based on data from the 2016/20 Baccalaureate and Beyond Longitudinal Study (B&B:16/20), which took place in 2020. B&B:16/20 is the second follow-up in a national study of students who completed the requirements for a bachelor's degree during the 2015-16 academic year. The first follow-up (ED596248) took place in 2017 and asked graduates about their bachelor's degree programs and any education or work in the first year after they earned their degree. This report describes the experiences of 2015-16 bachelor's degree earners during the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic, four years after graduation. Findings include professional and personal experiences during the COVID-19 pandemic, federal student loan repayment, employment status and characteristics, changes to work arrangements, and unemployment compensation during the COVID-19 pandemic. [For the summary to this report, see ED622732.]

This article focuses attention on a critical need for more evidence-based social emotional learning (SEL) programs for middle school students. First, we explore the definition of SEL, pointing out how it has evolved as our world has changed. We review key SEL domains and skills and describe universal school-based SEL programming as one approach to fostering students' SEL competencies. We highlight the ongoing need for evidence-based middle school SEL programs by demonstrating how few programs meet the rigorous What Works Clearinghouse (WWC), Collaborative for Academic, Social, and Emotional Learning (CASEL), and Blueprints standards for evidence. We extend our summary of these programs by noting that even when positive effects have been demonstrated, these effects were often observed in a single domain, such as substance use, or outnumbered by null effects, which undermines efforts to understand program effectiveness. We conclude by considering the unique developmental needs of early adolescents and providing recommendations for the development or refinement of SEL programs that target middle school students.

This Summary presents selected findings from "2017-18 National Postsecondary Student Aid Study, Administrative Collection (NPSAS:18-AC): First Look at Student Financial Aid Estimates for 2017-18. NCES 2021-476rev." The study includes information for about 245,000 undergraduate students and 21,000 graduate students attending 1,900 postsecondary institutions in the 50 states, the District of Columbia, and Puerto Rico. NPSAS:18-AC also provides state-level estimates for undergraduate students in 30 states. This report describes the percentages of students receiving various types of financial aid and average amounts received. [This Summary is a revision of ED614852. For the full report, see ED619354.]

This First Look publication provides the first results of the 2017-18 National Postsecondary Student Aid Study, Administrative Collection (NPSAS:18-AC), the most comprehensive national study of student financing of postsecondary education in the United States. The study includes information for about 245,000 undergraduate students and 21,000 graduate students attending 1,900 postsecondary institutions in the 50 states, the District of Columbia, and Puerto Rico. NPSAS:18-AC also provides state-level estimates for undergraduate students in 30 states. This report describes the percentages of students receiving various types of financial aid and average amounts received, by type of institution attended and institution state (for undergraduate students), and by type of institution, attendance pattern, graduate program, and income level (for graduate students). [This report is a revision of ED614851. For the Summary, see ED619355.]

We cannot continue to ask students -- and their families -- to make one of the largest and most important investments of their lives without clearer information about what their time and money will yield. Fortunately, support is broad across the country and across the political spectrum for a federal student-level data network (SLDN), which would streamline data reporting and answer key questions about students' postsecondary outcomes. Anticipating the questions that would fall to the U.S. Department of Education's National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) to answer in building and maintaining an SLDN, RTI International (RTI), a nonprofit research institute, joined IHEP, the leader of the Postsecondary Data Collaborative, both acting in an independent capacity to host a series of expert convenings to outline issues surrounding the SLDN's construction and implementation. "Implementing a Student-Level Data Network (Part III): Insights from Financial Aid Experts" is the third brief in the series emerging from those convenings to support the modernization of our postsecondary data infrastructure. The is based on individual conversations with 20 experts and a convening of 9 expert panelists from diverse institutional backgrounds, all with extensive experience in financial aid data and policy. Today's brief shares expert insights on data elements, institutional burden, timing of reporting, and use of data. [For Part II, "Insights from Institutional Representatives," see ED612952.]

This publication describes the methods and procedures used for the 2017-18 National Postsecondary Student Aid Study, Administrative Collection (NPSAS:18-AC). It also provides information that will be helpful to analysts in accessing and understanding the restricted-use files containing the NPSAS:18-AC data. NPSAS:18-AC includes cross-sectional, nationally representative samples of undergraduate and graduate students enrolled in postsecondary education in the United States. NPSAS:18 AC also includes state-representative samples of undergraduate students in some states, as well as in public 2 year and in public 4 year institution sectors within some states. The study covers topics pertaining to student enrollment with a focus on how individuals and families finance postsecondary education. NPSAS:18-AC is based solely on data collected from administrative data sources and, unlike other NPSAS studies, does not include student survey data.

This paper argues that many pedagogical reform efforts falter because they fail to consider the cultural context of teacher and student behavior. Little guidance exists on how to adapt teaching practices to be compatible with culturally influenced behaviors and beliefs. We present evidence from three studies conducted as part of a large basic education program in Tanzania showing that some teaching activities are less effective or not well implemented because of culturally influenced behaviors in the classroom, namely children's lack of confidence to speak up in class; a commitment to togetherness, fairness, and cooperation; avoidance of embarrassment; and age-graded authority. We propose ways teaching activities can be adapted to take these behaviors into account while still adhering to fundamental principles of effective learning, including student participation in their own learning, teaching at the right level, and monitoring students as a basis for adjusting instruction. Such adaptations may be made most effective by engaging teachers in co-creation of teaching activities.

This First Look report presents selected findings about student financial aid during the 2017--18 academic year. These findings are based on data from the 2017-18 National Postsecondary Student Aid Study, Administrative Collection (NPSAS:18-AC). NPSAS:18-AC is a national study of undergraduate and graduate students enrolled any time between July 1, 2017 and June 30, 2018 in institutions that can participate in federal financial aid programs. It is also a special Administrative Collection that was conducted in 2017-18 in which only administrative data from the U.S. Department of Education's data systems, institution student records, and other national administrative data sources were compiled to yield state representative data. Data were collected between July 2018 and September 2019. The main purpose of NPSAS:18-AC is to measure how students and their families pay for postsecondary education. Specific focus is placed on federal student aid given through Title IV of the Higher Education Act. Data used in this report are from about 245,600 undergraduate and 21,300 graduate students attending 1,900 institutions in the 50 states, the District of Columbia, and Puerto Rico. The sample represents about 16.6 million undergraduate and 3.6 million graduate students enrolled at Title IV eligible institutions at any time between July 1, 2017 and June 30, 2018. [For the Summary, see ED614852.]

This Summary presents selected findings from "2017-18 National Postsecondary Student Aid Study, Administrative Collection (NPSAS:18-AC): First Look at Student Financial Aid Estimates for 2017-18. NCES 2021-476." The full report is about student financial aid during the 2017-18 academic year. These findings are based on data from the 2017-18 National Postsecondary Student Aid Study, Administrative Collection (NPSAS:18-AC). NPSAS:18-AC is a national study of undergraduate and graduate students enrolled any time between July 1, 2017 and June 30, 2018 in institutions that can participate in federal financial aid programs. [For the full report, see ED614851.]

Recent findings from the Kids Activity and Learning Study complement North Carolina's multidimensional approach to promoting school readiness by emphasizing the integrated nature of motor and cognitive development in early childhood. Children whose motor skills improved the most over the course of an academic year also tended to demonstrate the biggest gains in executive function and numeracy skills. Children who participated in adaptive, group-based motor skill activities demonstrated gains in motor competence, executive function, and numeracy skills. Incorporating motor activities into established classroom practices has the potential to facilitate multiple aspects of children's development and promote school readiness. The brief includes specific recommendations for early childhood educators.

This publication describes the methods and procedures used for the 2008/18 Baccalaureate and Beyond Longitudinal Study (B&B:08/18). The B&B graduates, who completed the requirements for a bachelor's degree during the 2007-08 academic year, were first surveyed as part of the 2008 National Postsecondary Student Aid Study (NPSAS:08), and then followed up with in 2009 and 2012. The 2018 follow-up is the third and final survey for the B&B:08 cohort, conducted 10 years after completion of the bachelor's degree. This report details the methodology and outcomes of the B&B:08/18 student survey data collection and administrative records matching. [For "Baccalaureate and Beyond (B&B:08/18): First Look at the 2018 Employment and Educational Experiences of 2007-08 College Graduates. First Look. NCES 2021-241," see ED609932.]

The Early Grade Reading Assessment (EGRA) is used to evaluate studies and monitor projects that address reading skills in low- and middle-income countries. Results are often described solely in terms of a passage-reading subtask, thereby overlooking progress in related skills. Using archival data of cohort samples from Uganda at two time points in three languages (Ganda, Lango, and Runyankore-Rukiga), we explored a methodology that uses passage-reading results to create five learner profiles: Nonreader, Beginner, Instructional, Fluent, and Next-Level Ready. We compared learner profiles with results on other subtasks to identify the skills students would need to develop to progress from one profile to another. We then used regression models to determine whether students' learner profiles were related to their results on the various subtasks. We found membership in four categories. We also found a shift in the distribution of learner profiles from Grade 1 to Grade 4, which is useful for establishing program effectiveness. The distribution of profiles within grades expanded as students progressed through the early elementary grades. We recommend that those who are discussing EGRA results describe students by profiles and by the numbers that shift from one profile to another over time. Doing so would help describe abilities and instructional needs and would show changes in a meaningful way.

This First Look report presents basic findings about undergraduate student experiences during COVID-19 in spring 2020. These findings are based on preliminary data from the 2019-20 National Postsecondary Student Aid Study (NPSAS:20), a national survey of undergraduate and graduate students enrolled any time between July 1, 2019, and June 30, 2020, in institutions that can participate in federal financial aid programs. The findings in this report provide the first national estimates of the COVID-19 pandemic's impact on postsecondary students. Researchers have previously collected and reported data at institution, state, and international levels (Aristovnik et al. 2020; Aucejo et al. 2020; California Student Aid Commission 2020). The main purpose of NPSAS:20 is to measure how students and their families pay for postsecondary education at Title IV eligible institutions, with a focus on federal student aid given through Title IV of the Higher Education Act. NPSAS:20 student surveys started in March 2020, just as the pandemic began affecting students' educational experiences. Items about COVID-19 were added in April to collect information about these effects on students between January 1 and June 30, 2020. Because these items were based on effects seen early in the pandemic, they likely do not reflect all possible student experiences. Data used in this report are from 61,000 NPSAS undergraduate respondents who completed the survey after the COVID-19 items were added. Data from students who answered before the COVID-19 items were added are not included; however, the data for those who answered after the items were added are weighted to represent all undergraduates in the United States enrolled between January and June 2020. [For the summary, see ED613349.]

This Summary highlights the findings from the First Look full report. The findings in this report provide the first national estimates of the COVID-19 pandemic's impact on postsecondary students. Researchers have previously collected and reported data at institution, state, and international levels (Aristovnik et al. 2020; Aucejo et al. 2020; California Student Aid Commission 2020). The full report presents basic findings about undergraduate student experiences during the coronavirus pandemic (referred to in this report as COVID-19) in spring 2020. These findings are based on preliminary data from the 2019-20 National Postsecondary Student Aid Study (NPSAS:20), a national survey of undergraduate and graduate students enrolled any time between July 1, 2019, and June 30, 2020, in institutions that can participate in federal financial aid programs. [For the full report, see ED613348.]

Social Network Analysis (SNA) is a promising yet underutilized tool in the international development field. SNA entails collecting and analyzing data to characterize and visualize social networks, where nodes represent network members and edges connecting nodes represent relationships or exchanges among them. SNA can help both researchers and practitioners understand the social, political, and economic relational dynamics at the heart of international development programming. It can inform program design, monitoring, and evaluation to answer questions related to where people get information; with whom goods and services are exchanged; who people value, trust, or respect; who has power and influence and who is excluded; and how these dynamics change over time. This brief advances the case for use of SNA in international development, outlines general approaches, and discusses two recently conducted case studies that illustrate its potential. It concludes with recommendations for how to increase SNA use in international development.

School-related gender-based violence (SRGBV) remains difficult to measure because of high sensitivity and response bias. However, most SRGBV measurement relies on face-to-face (FTF) survey administration, which is susceptible to increased social desirability bias. Widely used in research on sensitive topics, Audio Computer-Assisted Self-Interview (ACASI) allows subjects to respond to pre-recorded questions on a computerized device, providing respondents with privacy and confidentiality. This brief contains the findings from a large-scale study conducted in Uganda in 2019 where primary grade 3 students were randomly selected to complete surveys using either ACASI or FTF administration. The surveys covered school climate, gender attitudes, social-emotional learning, and experiences of SRGBV. Through this study, we find that although most survey responses were comparable between ACASI and FTF groups, the reporting of experiences of sexual violence differed drastically: 43% of students in the FTF group versus 77% of students in the ACASI group reported experiencing sexual violence in the past school term. We also find that factor structures are similar for data collected with ACASI compared with data collected FTF, though there is weaker evidence for construct validity for both administration modes. We conclude that ACASI is a valuable tool in measuring sensitive sub-topics of SRGBV and should be utilized over FTF administration, although further psychometric testing of these surveys is recommended.

The Baccalaureate and Beyond (B&B) series of data collections allows researchers to address questions regarding bachelor's degree recipients' undergraduate experiences, including their participation in various financial aid programs, student loan debt and repayment of that debt; entrance into and progress through postbaccalaureate education; and employment, particularly for graduates who became elementary or secondary teachers. This report presents selected findings about the employment and educational outcomes of bachelor's degree recipients 10 years after they completed their degrees. These findings are based on data from the 2008/18 Baccalaureate and Beyond Longitudinal Study (B&B:08/18). B&B:08/18 is the third follow-up in a nationally representative longitudinal study of students who completed the requirements for a bachelor's degree during the 2007-08 academic year. The first follow-up (ED521881) was conducted in 2009, one year after their graduation. The second follow-up (ED545531) was conducted in 2012, four years after their graduation. This third follow up, conducted in 2018, explores labor market experiences, financial aid debt and repayment, and postbaccalaureate enrollment through the 10th year after graduation. Outcomes include financial well-being, student loan borrowing and repayment, postbaccalaureate enrollment, employment history, earnings, job characteristics, and teaching status. [For the summary to this report, see ED609936.]

The Baccalaureate and Beyond (B&B) series of data collections allows researchers to address questions regarding bachelor's degree recipients' undergraduate experiences, including their participation in various financial aid programs, student loan debt and repayment of that debt; entrance into and progress through postbaccalaureate education; and employment, particularly for graduates who became elementary or secondary teachers. This summary report presents selected findings from the full report about the employment and educational outcomes of bachelor's degree recipients 10 years after they completed their degrees. These findings are based on data from the 2008/18 Baccalaureate and Beyond Longitudinal Study (B&B:08/18). B&B:08/18 is the third follow-up in a nationally representative longitudinal study of students who completed the requirements for a bachelor's degree during the 2007-08 academic year. The first follow-up (ED521881) was conducted in 2009, one year after their graduation. The second follow-up (ED545531) was conducted in 2012, four years after their graduation. This third follow up, conducted in 2018, explores labor market experiences, financial aid debt and repayment, and postbaccalaureate enrollment through the 10th year after graduation. Outcomes include financial well-being, student loan borrowing and repayment, postbaccalaureate enrollment, employment history, earnings, job characteristics, and teaching status. [For the full report, see ED609932.]

We cannot continue to ask students -- and their families -- to make one of the largest and most important investments of their lives without clearer information about what their time and money will yield. In partnership with RTI International (RTI), operating in an independent capacity, IHEP is gathering expert insights needed to support making that critically needed information available through a student-level data network (SLDN). "Implementing a Student-Level Data Network (Part II): Insights from Institutional Representatives" is the second brief in a series to support the modernization of our postsecondary data infrastructure. Building the SLDN outlined in pending federal legislation will require the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) to make key decisions around design, construction, and implementation. "Implementing a Student-Level Data Network (Part II): Insights from Institutional Representatives" shares perspectives from 12 experts from diverse institutional backgrounds, including public two-year, private nonprofit four-year, and private for-profit four-year institutions, as well as individuals who work in public system and association offices. The representatives reflected on example file layouts and data collection models with an eye to what data are available for all students, when data are available for reporting, and other key factors that could streamline data submission or reduce reporting burdens. [For Part I, "Implementing a Federal Student-Level Data Network: Advice from Experts," see ED609423.]

This data file documentation accompanies new data files for the High School Longitudinal Study of 2009 (HSLS:09) Postsecondary Education Transcript Study and Student Financial Aid Records Collection (PETS-SR). HSLS:09 follows a nationally representative sample of students who were ninth-graders in fall 2009 from high school into postsecondary education and the workforce. The PETS-SR data collection was conducted between spring 2017 and fall 2018, approximately 4 years after high school graduation for most of the cohort. These data allow researchers to examine postsecondary coursetaking experiences and financial aid awards for the subset of fall 2009 ninth-graders who enrolled in postsecondary education after high school. [For "High School Longitudinal Study of 2009 (HSLS:09) Postsecondary Education Transcript Study and Student Financial Aid Records Collection. Data File Documentation. Appendices. NCES 2020-004," see ED607373.]

This set of Web Tables is the second in a series of four that together provide key information about 2011-12 first-time postsecondary students' characteristics and their 6-year retention, persistence, attainment, withdrawal, stopout, and transfer rates. The series draws on data collected for the 2012/17 Beginning Postsecondary Students Longitudinal Study (BPS:12/17)--a nationally representative longitudinal sample survey conducted by the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES)--which followed first-time students for 6 years after they began their postsecondary education. This second set of tables focuses on 6-year retention and attainment rates at the first institution students attended. The tables indicate the percentage of 2011-12 first-time postsecondary students who attained a certificate, an associate's degree, or a bachelor's degree by spring 2017 at the institution where they first enrolled. If they had not attained a credential at the first institution, these tables specify whether they were still enrolled at the first institution, had enrolled at a different institution, or had not enrolled at any institution after leaving the first institution. This publication first presents these retention and attainment rates at the first institution for all first-time postsecondary students (tables 1.1-A through 1.1-D). The following tables show rates for first-time postsecondary students attending institutions that vary by control (i.e., public, private nonprofit, and private for-profit) and level (i.e., less-than-2-year, 2-year, or 4-year). Tables 1.2-A through 1.2-D report rates for first-time postsecondary students who began at public 2-year colleges. Tables 1.3-A through 1.3-D and 1.4-A through 1.4-D present estimates for those who began at public and private nonprofit 4-year institutions. Subsequent tables focus on first-time postsecondary students' retention and attainment rates at different levels of private for-profit institutions, specifically, less-than-2-year institutions (tables 1.5-A through 1.5-D); 2-year institutions (tables 1.6-A through 1.6-D); and 4-year institutions (tables 1.7-A through 1.7-D). The final two sets of tables focus on 2011-12 first-time postsecondary students who began a bachelor's degree program at public (tables 1.8-A through 1.8-D) and at private nonprofit 4-year (tables 1.9-A through 1.9-D) institutions and present the percentages who completed a bachelor's degree at the first institution in 4 years or less, 5 years, or 6 years. [For the first set of Web Tables in this series, see ED607116.]

There is steadily growing consensus around a critical issue in our nation's higher education system: the need to modernize our postsecondary data infrastructure. Recognizing that building the Student-Level Data Network (SLDN) outlined in pending federal legislation will require the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) to make key decisions around design, construction, and implementation, the Institute for Higher Education Policy (IHEP) partnered with RTI International (RTI), operating in an independent capacity, to gather insights to inform the network's implementation. "Implementing a Student-Level Data Network: Advice from Experts," shares the insights from that conversation with 15 experts from institutions, state systems, think tanks, and higher education associations. This brief outlines the data elements and definitional options needed to meet pending legislative requirements, maximize the quality and utility of the data, and minimize the burden on institutions. The data elements fit in five categories: enrollment and completion; financial aid; demographics; post-completion outcomes; and institutional characteristics. The brief also highlights areas that need further investigation and identifies the most pressing near-term topics in order to provide NCES and the legislatively-mandated Advisory Committee a foundation from which to start.