Search

COVID-19 changed the experiences of K-12 students and teachers in ways that are not yet well-documented. This report provides initial insights into teaching and learning during the pandemic from the perspectives of teachers and students at 31 public schools in three states. The analyses indicate that about two thirds of the teachers surveyed thought their students learned less than they had prior to the pandemic. In contrast, the majority of the students surveyed reported that they learned as much as or more than before the pandemic, except for students at one school. Additional analyses should provide valuable information for policymakers and educators on successes and challenges experienced by teachers and students in magnet schools during the pandemic. [Support for this report was provided by Capitol Region Education Council, LEARN Regional Educational Service Center, the School District of Lee County, Napa Valley Unified School District, New Haven Public Schools, and Pasadena Unified School District.]

The current quasi-experimental design study explored how students' choice of learning location model (either predominantly remote or hybrid) impacted their outcomes on academic assessments, school day attendance, and chronic absence in the 2020-2021 school year in the midst of the COVID-19 pandemic. Analyzing the student sample across three middle schools, we found that the predominantly remote students scored significantly lower in math assessments than the hybrid students. These predominantly remote students scored similarly to their hybrid comparison students in English language arts (ELA) and had similar attendance rates and chronic absence rates. For the Grade 11 students at the one high school, no statistically significant differences were found between the predominantly remote and the hybrid students on SAT ELA or math assessments, school attendance rates, or chronic absence rates. [This report was supported by the LEARN Regional Educational Service Center.]

Geographically based racial and economic segregation in the United States has resulted in unequal funding for schools and therefore unequal educational opportunities for students. In this report, we discuss the 50-year history of magnet schools as a voluntary desegregation mechanism. During these years, the funding policies and legal landscapes shifted in ways that supported and then undermined magnet schools' desegregation mission. Throughout the 1990s and culminating in 2007, the courts eroded the ability of magnet schools to prioritize desegregation. Post-2007, in response, magnet schools broadened their approaches to include an additional focus on innovative academic programs. We end the report with research questions that remain underexplored regarding magnet schools and their effectiveness as a desegregation mechanism. [Additional funding for this report was provided by the Pasadena Unified School District and the School District of Lee County.]

The National Math + Science Initiative (NMSI) is a nonprofit organization committed to improving educational outcomes that traces its roots back to the early 1990s. NMSI's College Readiness Program (CRP) is a long-standing program with the goal of promoting STEM education in high schools to improve students' preparation for college. The three-year program provides teacher, student, and school supports to promote high school students' success in English, mathematics, and science Advanced Placement (AP) courses, with a focus on students who are traditionally underrepresented in the targeted AP courses. Through a scale-up grant awarded to NMSI by the Investing in Innovation (i3) program, the CRP was implemented in 27 schools in the 2016-2017 school year (Treatment Schools) and in 21 schools in the 2017-2018 school year (Delayed Treatment Schools), collectively identified as Program Schools. CRESST conducted an independent evaluation of the impact of the CRP on students' AP outcomes using a randomized cluster trial with 48 CRP schools and 48 Comparison Schools in 10 states. The evaluation of the CRP consisted of three parts: (1) measuring the program's impact on selected student AP exam outcomes; (2) determining the impact of the program on school perspectives and culture; and (3) assessing of the fidelity of implementation of the CRP at the school level. AP exam data from 48 Treatment Schools, with a total of 8,778 exams in 2018 and 9,378 in 2019, and 48 matched control schools, with 7,505 exams in 2018 and 2019 in Year 3, were analyzed for this study. Program impact was evaluated using a 2-level hierarchical generalized linear model (HGLM) with students nested within schools. The analyses revealed that in 2018 the probability of a student taking an AP exam in the Program Schools was, on average, 7% higher than the paired Comparison Schools, and the difference was statistically significant. And in 2019 the effect was even greater with the probability of taking an AP exam being significantly higher in Program Schools (18%) than in Comparison Schools (3%). When looking at the probability of an exam yielding a qualifying score, in 2018, the HGLM analyses found no significant difference between the two groups. In 2019, however, exams taken at the Program Schools had a significantly higher overall probability (2%) of receiving a qualifying score than the Comparison Schools (0%). These analyses compared results to the total school population. In the next analyses, we looked only at those students who took AP exams. In 2018, overall, the fitted probability of achieving a qualifying score among the exams taken was 8% in the Program Schools, compared to 22% in the Comparison Schools. In 2019, however, the difference between the Program Schools (7%) and the Comparison Schools (9%) was not statistically significant. Fidelity of implementation was evaluated using a fidelity matrix approach (required as part of the evaluation of the i3 program), which showed that not all elements of the program were implemented with high fidelity. In 2018, results indicated that 43 out of 48 schools (90%) achieved 80% or better implementation fidelity, for an average fidelity score of 89%. Four schools achieved a perfect 100% fidelity score. In 2019, 88% of schools achieved 80% or better implementation fidelity. Ten schools achieved a perfect 100% fidelity score. In 2018 in more than 75% of schools, not all teachers fulfilled their requirements for attending the required teacher training sessions, and so this component was not implemented with fidelity. In 2019, this picture improved a little with 15 schools (31%) meeting the 80% threshold. Teacher stipends, administrator bonuses, and student qualifying score awards were paid as expected. Teacher survey data indicated that teachers found the training and professional development activities provided by the CRP to be the most beneficial program supports. Mentoring was chosen, across all years, as the least effective program component. When prompted for the second most effective CRP component, the same number of teachers selected the funding of classroom and lab supplies as did teacher training. [For "2016-2017 Implementation Evaluation of the National Math and Science Initiative's College Readiness Program," see ED615910.]

The Literacy Design Collaborative (LDC) was created to support teachers in implementing college and career readiness standards in order to teach literacy skills throughout the content areas. Teachers work collaboratively with coaches to further develop their expertise and design standards-driven, literacy-rich writing assignments within their existing curriculum across all content areas. This report presents the results on implementation of LDC in the New York City Department of Education during the third year of the intervention, and the impact of the program across multiple years. As of 2018-2019, participating schools included 13 from Cohort 1, which began implementation during the 2016-2017 school year, and 23 from Cohort 2, which commenced at the beginning of the 2017-2018 school year. Our primary impact analyses, presented in this report for the first time, pool teachers from both cohorts to measure their impact after participating in LDC for 2 consecutive years (2017-2018 student outcomes for Cohort 1 and 2018-2019 student outcomes for Cohort 2). Teachers and administrators appreciated LDC and perceived positive impact on their practice and their students' learning. Quasi-experimental analyses tended to produce positive estimates for the impact of LDC on student English language arts (ELA) assessment scores, but the differences did not reach the level of statistical significance. [For the 2017-2018 evaluation report, see ED606884.]

Engaged inthe evaluation of LDC tools since June 2011, UCLA's National Center for Research on Evaluation, Standards, and Student Testing (CRESST) is using multiple data sources and a quasi-experimental design to examine LDC implementation and impact in two cohorts of schools in two large, urban school districts. This report presents the results on implementation of LDC in the large urban school district on the West Coast during the third year of the intervention, and the impact of the program across multiple years. Findings from both participant surveys and analyses of student outcomes reveal positive results for the LDC intervention. Analysis of student outcomes provided evidence of the program's effectiveness and confirmation for participants' positive views. Quasi-experimental analyses demonstrated a statistically significant positive impact of LDC as practiced by middle school teachers with 2 years of program experience across two cohorts of schools and teachers. A statistically significant positive impact was also found for Cohort 2 middle schools after just one year of implementation. [For the original report, "Literacy Design Collaborative 2018-2019 Evaluation Report. CRESST Report 867," see ED605029.]

The Literacy Design Collaborative (LDC) was created to support teachers in implementing college and career readiness standards in order to teach literacy skills throughout the content areas. Teachers work collaboratively with coaches to further develop their expertise and design standards-driven, literacy-rich writing assignments within their existing curriculum across all content areas. This annual report reflects the second year of implementation in 14 Cohort 1 schools, which began implementation during 2016-2017, and the first year of implementation for 31 Cohort 2 schools, which commenced at the beginning of the 2017-2018 school year. Findings from multiple sources including participant surveys and analyses of student outcomes reveal positive results for the LDC intervention. Teacher, teacher leader, and administrator participants reported positive attitudes toward LDC. Participants across all groups perceived a positive impact on student outcomes. Additionally, analysis of student outcomes confirmed participants' positive views. Our quasi-experimental design study revealed that LDC had statistically significant effects on Cohort 2 middle school students' English language arts (ELA) performance, with an effect size of 0.15 for students receiving LDC instruction in all three core content areas: ELA, science, and social studies/history. [For the original report, "Literacy Design Collaborative 2017-2018 Evaluation Report. CRESST Report 863," see ED600053.]

Engaged in the evaluation of LDC tools since June 2011, UCLA's National Center for Research on Evaluation, Standards, and Student Testing (CRESST) is using multiple data sources and a quasi-experimental design to examine LDC implementation and impact in two cohorts of schools in two large, urban school districts. This report presents the results on implementation of LDC in the large urban school district on the West Coast during the third year of the intervention, and the impact of the program across multiple years. Findings from both participant surveys and analyses of student outcomes reveal positive results for the LDC intervention. Analysis of student outcomes provided evidence of the program's effectiveness and confirmation for participants' positive views. Quasi-experimental analyses demonstrated a statistically significant positive impact of LDC as practiced by middle school teachers with 2 years of program experience across two cohorts of schools and teachers. A statistically significant positive impact was also found for Cohort 2 middle schools after just one year of implementation. [For the 2017-2018 report, see ED600053.]

How do magnet schools work? Although they are an important school-choice option (on par with charters, in terms of enrollment), it is unclear what actually goes on in these schools: how do they reduce minority-group isolation? What does theme-based teaching and learning look like in practice? This report answers these questions with findings from a study of magnet schools across the country. Teachers, principals, support staff, and other magnet personnel were interviewed and asked what they believe makes their schools different and successful. They identified five critical features of magnet schools and shared six "take-aways" that, surprisingly, make sense in magnet or non-magnet schools.

The Literacy Design Collaborative (LDC) was created in 2009 to support schools' implementation of rigorous college and career ready standards for English language arts (ELA). Combining evidence-based principles of professional development with a systematic design process, LDC helps teachers to embed literacy skill development throughout their content area curricula and promotes teachers' engagement in formative assessment and continuous improvement practices. UCLA's National Center for Research on Evaluation, Standards, and Student Testing (CRESST) has served as LDC's independent evaluator since 2011 and is currently completing a 5-year, nationally funded study of LDC's implementation and impact. This policy brief summarizes study results from a large, urban district on the West Coast. The brief starts with background on LDC and study methodology and then shares study findings, which demonstrate LDC's substantial effects on student learning. [For related reports, see "Literacy Design Collaborative 2017-2018 Evaluation Report. CRESST Report 863" (ED600053) and "Literacy Design Collaborative 2017-2018 Evaluation Report. CRESST Report 867. Revised" (ED606343).]

The Literacy Design Collaborative (LDC) was created to support teachers in implementing college and career readiness standards in order to teach literacy skills throughout the content areas. Teachers work collaboratively with coaches to further develop their expertise and design standards-driven, literacy-rich writing assignments within their existing curriculum across all content areas. This annual report reflects the second year of implementation in 18 Cohort 1 schools, which began implementation in the 2016-2017, and the first year of implementation for 35 Cohort 2 schools, which commenced at the beginning of 2017-2018. Teacher, teacher leader, and administrator participants reported positive attitudes toward LDC. All measures of satisfaction or improvement were rated positively by more than half of the respondents. Participants across all groups perceived a positive impact on student outcomes. Approximately three-quarters of teachers agreed that LDC helped improve students'reading skills, literacy-performance, writing, and content knowledge. Analysis of student outcomes indicated that there were positive impacts of LDC on student learning, but the differences were not statistically significant.

In order to accurately assess the English language proficiency of special populations of English learners, student assessment programs must maintain the comparability of standard and modified assessment formats, allowing for equivalent inferences to be made across student classifications. However, given the typically small size of special populations of English learners, such as blind and low vision students, traditional calibration and item linking techniques are often incapable of ensuring sufficient levels of comparability. With this in mind, researchers at CRESST [National Center for Research on Evaluation, Standards, and Student Testing] set out to test the efficacy of a new item calibration technique: one in which the overall cut scores on the ELPA21 braille form require the same language skills and knowledge as the cut scores on the ELPA21 online form. To test their approach, the researchers recruited a panel of six educators who specialize in working with special populations of students. Using data from the 2016-2017 braille test administration, the panelists reviewed the similarities and expected differences in difficulty between test form items. They went on to estimate the proportion of students taking the braille form who would meet the target student descriptors and correctly responded to test items. In doing so, the panel was able to successfully recommend cut scores for the braille form while preserving the necessary comparability with cut scores on the online form. This process could be utilized for other assessments in which modified test items are present and cannot be said to have the same parameters as their source items. [This report was originally presented at the annual meeting of the National Council on Measurement in Education, April 2018, New York, New York.]

The Literacy Design Collaborative (LDC) was created to support teachers in implementing college and career readiness standards in order to teach literacy skills throughout the content areas. Teachers work collaboratively with coaches to further develop their expertise and design standards-driven, literacy-rich writing assignments within their existing curriculum across all content areas. This annual report reflects the second year of implementation in 14 Cohort 1 schools, which began implementation during 2016-2017, and the first year of implementation for 31 Cohort 2 schools, which commenced at the beginning of the 2017-2018 school year. Findings from multiple sources including participant surveys and analyses of student outcomes reveal positive results for the LDC intervention. Teacher, teacher leader, and administrator participants reported positive attitudes toward LDC. Participants across all groups perceived a positive impact on student outcomes. Additionally, analysis of student outcomes confirmed participants' positive views. Our quasi-experimental design study revealed that LDC had statistically significant effects on Cohort 2 middle school students' English language arts (ELA) performance, with an effect size of 0.15 for students receiving LDC instruction in all three core content areas: ELA, science, and social studies/history.

Regular participation in afterschool programs by elementary students in low income communities may lead to improved college and career readiness. This study found that students who had high levels of participation in the LA's BEST afterschool program over three years were five percent less likely to dropout and six percent more likely to complete high school on-time than were students in the same elementary schools who never participated in the program. However, students with low levels of attendance did not reap the same benefits. These results were found within the context of more rigorous California State University aligned graduation requirements by Los Angeles Unified School District. The authors recommend increased funding for afterschool programs to improve attendance and increase the number of students served. They also argue that in large, economically diverse regions such as Los Angeles, even small increases in graduation rates may positively impact opportunities for thousands of students and their families.

This report is the first in a series of five reports considering career-readiness features within high school assessments. Utilizing feature analysis and cognitive lab interviews, the primary objective of this study was to verify and validate the existence of specific career-readiness features in select math and English language arts (ELA) test items. Feature analysis is a method to characterize items and tasks by components, so that item design, revision, and instruction may benefit. Seventeen students representing three high schools in Southern California participated. Results from the preliminary feature analysis on four math and two ELA items indicated that each test item contained between eight and 13 career-readiness features. Results from the cognitive labs supported the presence of these features. That is, these features were either part of the problem-solving process, and/or were necessary to solve the problem correctly.

This report is the fourth in a series considering career-readiness factors within existing high school assessments. The primary goal of this study was to provide a preliminary validation of the career-readiness features identified in prior reports by exploring how different participant groups with different levels of experience in the career/vocational world perform on a selection of test items with high numbers of career-readiness features. Two exemplar careers, emergency medical technician (EMT) and web developer, were targeted for participation in this study. A total of 103 high school students, 111 community college students studying to become either EMTs or web developers, and 84 working EMTs or web developers participated in the study. A selection of ELA and math test items rated for career-readiness features were adapted into an 18-item test booklet. As expected, results indicated that workforce individuals scored significantly higher on the test than community college students, who in turn scored significantly higher on the test than high school students. These results suggest that having added experience in their field may lead to refining certain career-readiness skills found in high-school-level content-based assessments. Preparation for such assessments can help high school students prepare for college and/or a career, and inferences for both college and career readiness can be drawn from test performance.

This report is the second in a series considering career-readiness features within high school assessments. Experts in English language arts and math were trained to rate a selection of active Grade 8 and Grade 11 Smarter Balanced items using feature set lists that were refined within the items' respective content areas (30 features for ELA items; 22 features for math items). A total of 264 ELA items and 186 math items were rated. ELA items contained between three and 13 career-readiness features, with an average of 6.0. The most frequent features were importance of being exact or accurate, written comprehension, time sharing, deductive reasoning, and reading comprehension. Math items contained between two and 15 career-readiness features, with an average of 7.8. The most frequent features were deductive reasoning, analyzing data or information, reading comprehension, number facility, and processing information. Feature ratings of the target items were analyzed with item metadata difficulty parameters in order to explore relationships between features and item difficulty. A number of career-readiness features showed associations with item difficulty, notably, reading comprehension for Grade 8 math and deductive reasoning for Grade 11 ELA. Because career-readiness features can be used to explain item difficulty, results suggest that such features are prevalent in content-based assessments, and inferences for career readiness can thus be drawn from test performance.

This report is the third in a series considering career-readiness features within high school assessments. The goal of this study was to explore international comparisons by applying feature analysis to Korean assessment items. Twenty math test items from the Gyeonggi Province in South Korea along with performance data from roughly 4,000 Grade 12 examinees were obtained. We applied the process of feature rating and analyses explained in the first two reports in this series to the Korean assessment items. Math test items were translated and rated using the same scheme as the American items by the same math expert raters. While the mathematics content differed from the American test, career-readiness features were also found in this small set of items. Korean math items shared similar patterns of feature representation with Smarter Balanced items, with the exception of a couple of features (e.g., critical thinking and visualization were rated more frequently among Korean items). Critical thinking was positively associated with item difficulty. It is possible that the type of math content (e.g., calculus) plays a role, which should be explored in future studies with larger sets of test items, different math content, and other international data sets.

The Literacy Design Collaborative (LDC) was created to support teachers in implementing college and career readiness standards in order to teach literacy skills throughout the content areas. Teachers work collaboratively with coaches to further develop their expertise and design standards-driven, literacy-rich writing assignments within their existing curriculum across all content areas. The 2016-2017 school year was the first year of implementation, following a pilot year during which the implementation plan, instruments, data collection processes, and analytical methodologies were refined. Participants across all groups reported positive attitudes toward LDC and perceive a positive impact on student outcomes. Analysis of module artifacts suggest that teachers at the elementary school level were moderately successful in the backwards design process, particularly in developing high-quality writing tasks for students. As an ongoing multiyear intervention, the LDC implementation will continue to evolve year to year as participants provide feedback and LDC program managers make refinements. Thus, we anticipate that further significant changes to the course material and the delivery system that are already in progress for Year 2 will likely result in continued and possibly increased positive feedback. [Funding for this work was provided by the Literacy Design Collaborative.]

The National Math + Science Initiative's (NMSI's) College Readiness Program (CRP) is an established program whose goal is to promote science, technology, engineering, and mathematics education in high schools to improve students' readiness for college. The program provides teacher, student, and school supports to promote high school students' success in mathematics, science, and English Advanced Placement (AP) courses, with a focus on students who are traditionally underrepresented in the targeted AP courses. Through a scale-up grant awarded to NMSI by the Investing in Innovation (i3) program, the CRP was implemented in 28 schools in the 2016-2017 school year. CRESST conducted an independent evaluation of the impact of the CRP on students' AP outcomes using a randomized cluster trial with 28 CRP schools and 24 control schools in 10 states. The evaluation of the CRP consisted of two parts: (1) assessment of the program's impact on selected student AP exam outcomes and (2) assessment of the fidelity of implementation of the CRP. Program impact was evaluated using a 2-level hierarchical generalized linear model (HGLM) with students nested within schools The descriptive statistics showed that a higher percetange of students in the treatment schools took at least one AP course (30.7%) compared to those in the control schools (26.4%) by approximately 4.3%, however the difference was not statistically significant. In addition, students in the treatment schools were not more likely to achieve a score of 3 or higher, when compared to the delayed treatment schools. We further examined the effectiveness of the CRP using the prior year's school-level performance on the AP exam as a covariate. As with the above findings, the results indicated the probability of a student taking at least one AP course or scoring 3 or higher on at least one AP exam is not statistically different between students in the treatment schools and those in the control treatment schools. Fidelity of implementation was evaluated using a fidelity matrix approach (required as part of the evaluation of the i3 program), which showed that not all elements of the program were implemented with high fidelity. Overall results, however, indicated that 23 schools out of 28 treatment schools (82.1%) achieved 80% or better implementation fidelity, for an average fidelity score of 89.5%. Seven schools achieved a perfect 100% fidelity score. Looking at the different indicator groups (school, teacher and student), we found that all school support measures across all schools were implemented with fidelity. In over 80% of schools, not all teachers fulfilled their requirements for attending all training sessions, and so this component was not implemented with fidelity. Stipends and teacher awards were paid as expected as were student award payments. Teacher survey data indicated that teachers found the training and professional development activities provided by the CRP to be the most beneficial program supports relating to helping increase student achievement in AP courses. Teacher incentives were chosen as the least important program component relating to increasing student performance by 16% of teachers and student incentives by 12% of teachers. Teachers did, however, view the student incentives as an important program component to encourage enrollment in AP courses. Likewise, students rated the financial incentives on average as somewhat important in encouraging them to participate in AP courses.

The Literacy Design Collaborative (LDC) was created to support teachers in implementing college and career readiness standards in order to teach literacy skills throughout the content areas.Teachers work collaboratively with coaches to further develop their expertise and design standards-driven, literacy-rich writing assignments within their existing curriculum across all content areas. The 2016-2017 school year was the first year of implementation, following a pilot year during which the implementation plan, instruments, data collection processes, and analytical methodologies were refined. Participants across all groups reported positive attitudes toward LDC and perceive a positive impact on student outcomes. This annual report presents an initial look at LDC implementation in the first cohort of 20 schools in a large West Coast district during their first year of implementation. Participants across all groups reported positive attitudes toward LDC and perceived a positive impact on student outcomes. Three quarters of teachers and 95% of administrators agreed that LDC helped improve students' literacy performance. At this point, there is insufficient quantitative evidence to suggest a positive LDC impact on student test scores either at the elementary or middle school level. This finding should not be surprising given the early stage of intervention, with teachers having only completed one year of the two-year implementation process.

This report presents the results of expert panels' item-by-item analysis of the 2015 PISA Reading Literacy and Mathematics Literacy assessments and compares study findings on PISA's representation of deeper learning with that of other related studies. Results indicate that about 11% to 14% of PISA's total raw score value for reading and mathematics literacy respectively are devoted to deeper learning, defined as items addressing depth of knowledge (DOK) Levels 3 or 4, based on Norman Webb's framework (Webb, Alt, Ely, & Vesperman, 2005). These levels are compared to those in the Common Core State Standards (CCSS) and in recent tests of the CCSS. Study results suggest the complexity of establishing deeper learning benchmarks. Five appendices are included: (1) Panelist Recruitment; (2) Panelist Biographies; (3) Review Panel Training and Data Collection; (4) Reading Literacy Analyses; and (5) Mathematics Literacy Analyses.

This report addresses a renewed interest in individualized instruction, driven in part by advances in technology and assessment as well as a persistent desire to increase the access, efficiency, and cost effectiveness of training and education. Using computer-based instruction we delivered extremely efficient instruction targeted to low knowledge learners in sixth-grade algebra readiness classes and eighth-grade Algebra 1A classes. Our research questions were the following: (1) To what extent can very brief exposure to instruction result in learning? and (2) How effective is the instruction compared to no exposure? We found that computer-based "instructional parcels" can be developed to provide very brief instruction that results in learning of mathematics content. The following are appended: (1) Summary of Design Guidelines Implemented in Instruction; (2) Student Background Detail; (3) Student Background Measures; (4) Sample of Pretest Items and (5) Transfer Test Items.

This study examines the extent to which deeper learning is expected to be present in the new college and career ready (CCR) standards. This is done by examining the distribution of items and tasks at high levels of cognitive demand (DOK3 and DOK4) in the summative test blueprints developed by the Partnership for Assessment of Readiness for College and Careers (PARCC) and the Smarter Balanced Assessment Consortium (Smarter Balanced). The study found that while only 10-20% of the consortia's assessment items and tasks appear to require higher levels of cognitive demand, approximately 30-45% of the total possible raw scores are allocated to deeper learning. Furthermore, the analyses indicated that while the end-of-year (EOY) exams are focused on relatively lower level items, components of the performance tasks primarily concentrate on deeper learning and higher levels of thinking. If the consortia maintain the levels of cognitive demand specified in their blueprints, there is no doubt that this will result in an increase in intellectual demand from prior state tests. "Smarter Balanced Summative Assessment Grade-Level Results" are appended.

The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation invested in the Literacy Design Collaborative (LDC) as one strategy to support teachers' and students' transition to the Common Core State Standards (CCSS) in English language arts. This report provides an early look at the implementation of LDC in eighth-grade history/social studies and science classes in two states, and the effectiveness of the intervention in these settings. The study found that across states and subjects, teachers understood LDC and implemented it with fidelity. Teachers also generally reported positive attitudes about the effectiveness of LDC and its usefulness in introducing literacy instruction into content area classrooms. Quasi-experimental analyses using Coarsened Exact Matching (CEM) techniques and hierarchical linear modeling (HLM) found a small statistically significant positive effect on reading scores in the one state where suitable data were available, but no effects on writing scores. However, students generally performed at low levels on assessments designed to align with the intervention, suggesting the challenge of meeting CCSS expectations. Exploratory analyses suggest that LDC may have been most effective for higher achieving students. However understandable, the findings thus suggest that, in the absence of additional scaffolding and supports for low-achieving students, LDC may be gap enhancing.

This study employs a potential outcomes modeling approach to estimate the causal effect of the National Math + Science Initiative's College Readiness Program on Advanced Placement test taking and qualifying score earning for three recent cohorts of schools. Results indicate substantial and significant increases in both AP test taking and qualifying score earning for all students. In addition, significant effects for AP test taking and qualifying score earning over baseline were found for female students and minority students when analyzed separately. This study provides evidence of the effectiveness of a College Readiness Program that is having a significant and important impact on preparing more students to succeed in math and science careers and improve the future of math and science education in this country.

The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation invested in the Literacy Design Collaborative (LDC) as one strategy to support teachers' and students' transition to the Common Core State Standards (CCSS) in English language arts. This report provides an early look at the implementation of LDC in sixth-grade Advanced Reading classes in a large Florida district, and the effectiveness of the intervention in this setting. The study found that teachers understood LDC and implemented it with fidelity and that curriculum modules were well crafted. Teachers also generally reported positive attitudes about the effectiveness of LDC and its usefulness as a tool for teaching CCSS skills. Although implementation results were highly positive, quasi-experimental analyses employing matched control group and regression discontinuity designs found no evidence of an impact of LDC on student performance on state reading or district writing assessments. Furthermore, students generally performed at basic levels on assessments designed to align with the intervention, suggesting the challenge of meeting CCSS expectations. Exploratory analyses suggest that LDC may have been most effective for higher achieving students. However understandable, the findings thus suggest that, in the absence of additional scaffolding and supports for low-achieving students, LDC may be gap enhancing. Two appendices are included: (1) LDC Instruments and Rubrics; and (2) Summary Report: Developing an Assignment Measure to Assess Quality of LDC Modules (Abby Reisman, Joan Herman, Rebecca Luskin, and Scott Epstein).

With support from the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, researchers and experts in mathematics education developed the Mathematics Design Collaborative (MDC) as a strategy to support the transition to Common Core State Standards in math. MDC provides short formative assessment lessons known as Classroom Challenges for use in middle and high school math classrooms. UCLA CRESST's study of ninth-grade Algebra 1 classrooms in Kentucky implementing MDC showed strong support from teachers for the intervention and a statistically significant positive impact on student scores on the PLAN Algebra assessment, as compared to similar students statewide in Kentucky. The following are appended: (1) MDC Instruments and Rubrics, (2) MDC Teacher Log Descriptives; (3) MDC Teacher Survey Descriptives; (4) Analysis of MDC Student Work Artifacts; and (5) Quasi-Experimental Analysis of MDC Effects.

We present a logistic function of a monotonic polynomial with a lower asymptote, allowing additional flexibility beyond the three-parameter logistic model. We develop a maximum marginal likelihood based approach to estimate the item parameters. The new item response model is demonstrated on math assessment data from a state, and a computationally efficient strategy for choosing the order of the polynomial is demonstrated and tested.

Magnet schools are one of the largest sectors of choice schools in the United States. In this study, we explored whether there is heterogeneity in magnet school effects on student achievement by examining the effectiveness of 24 recently funded magnet schools in 5 school districts across 4 states. We used a two-step analysis: First, separate magnet school effects were estimated using a propensity score matched regression approach to address selection bias. Second, the magnet effects were synthesized across schools using a multi-level random-effects meta-analytic framework. Results indicated that there is significant variation in magnet school effects on student outcomes, with some magnet schools showing positive effects, and others showing negative effects. This variation can be explained by program implementation and magnet support. Demographic Statistics for Matched Samples by District is appended.

This study investigates the effects of integrating literacy instruction with biology coursework on high school student learning. It would investigate the relationship between the growth in reading achievement and biology learning. It will target schools serving especially large populations of African American and Latino students. The project will include use a randomized experimental design with multiple measures of student learning, classroom observations, surveys, and interviews for validating quantitative results. The researchers have consulted research studies of reading practices. The project would create a professional development reading apprenticeship program to prepare teachers. Teachers will also be provided with funds to supplement their textbooks with science magazines, trade books, and fiction related to biology topics in the state curriculum frameworks. The study will occur in cities of California. Teachers will be assigned to immediate or delayed intervention randomly assigned to treatment and control groups.

In an effort to identify and incorporate quality practices into existing and future afterschool programs, the U.S. Department of Education commissioned the National Partnership for Quality Afterschool Learning (National Partnership) to study high functioning 21st Century Community Learning Center programs. The purpose of this study was to document practices to be used to develop resources and professional development that address issues relating to the establishment and sustainability of afterschool programs, to provide models and indicators of promising practices, and to highlight other descriptive information that local sites can access in planning new afterschool programs or improve existing ones. Fifty-three afterschool programs, representing eight regional divisions of the nation, including rural and urban programs and community-based and school district related programs, were identified using rigorous methods. Promising practices in content delivery, program organization, and program structure were studied. The findings were synthesized into the National Partnership's Afterschool Training Toolkit, which was made available to programs nationwide via the World Wide Web. Based on the study findings, the National Partnership conducted professional development consistently and extensively throughout the nation. [This report was produced by the National Partnership for Quality Afterschool Learning with funding from the Department of Education's Office of Academic Improvement and Teacher Quality Programs.]