Search

This technical assistance paper provides policy and guidance to individuals with test administration responsibilities in adult education programs. The Florida assessment policies and guidelines presented in this technical assistance paper are appropriate for state and federal reporting. Therefore, guidance and procedures regarding the selection and use of appropriate student assessment are included. The following important information for adult education programs is provided: (1) Definition of key terms and acronyms; (2) Selection of appropriate assessments by student and program type; (3) Appropriate student placement into program and instructional level; (4) Verification of student learning gains, EFL, and/or program completion; (5) Accommodation for students with disabilities and other special needs; (6) Assessment procedures for Distance Education; and (7) Training for all staff who administer the standardized assessments.

A college credential can expand the range of career opportunities available to young adults. However, existing barriers to enrollment for prospective students pose equity gaps in college access and success, particularly for Black college aspirants. In Florida, racial and ethnic disparities in college enrollment contribute to disparities in educational attainment. Only 31% of Black Floridians hold a college degree. This report examines the attainment gap by exploring various factors contributing to Florida college applicants' decisions to enroll. This paper uses survey and enrollment information from two Florida community colleges (Hillsborough Community College and Miami Dade College) to identify factors related to college applicants' enrollment decisions. In the summer of 2021, nearly 15,000 applicants to the two colleges were surveyed about their pre-college experiences, and roughly 1,200 responded, resulting in a response rate of 8%. Of the respondents, 997 applicants identified as Black (i.e., African American, Black Hispanic, African, or West Indian/Caribbean).

This technical assistance paper provides policy and guidance to individuals with test administration responsibilities in adult education programs. The Florida assessment policies and guidelines presented in this technical assessment paper are appropriate for state and federal reporting. Therefore, guidance and procedures regarding the selection and use of appropriate student assessment are included in this technical assistance paper. Additionally, the following important information for adult education programs is reviewed: (1) Definition of key terms and acronyms; (2) Selection of appropriate assessments by student and program type; (3) Appropriate student placement into program and instructional level; (4) Verification of student learning gains, Educational Functioning Level and/or program completion; (5) Accommodations for students with disabilities and other special needs; (6) Assessment procedures for Distance Education; and (7) Training for all staff who administer the standardized assessments. [For the 2021-2022 report, see ED616047.]

This technical assistance paper provides policy and guidance to individuals with test administration responsibilities in adult education programs. The Florida assessment policies and guidelines presented in this technical assessment paper are appropriate for state and federal reporting. Therefore, guidance and procedures regarding the selection and use of appropriate student assessment are included in this technical assistance paper. Additionally, the following important information for adult education programs is reviewed: (1) The definition of key terms and acronyms; (2) Selection of appropriate assessments by student and program type; (3) Appropriate student placement into program and instructional level; (4) Verification of student learning gains, Educational Functioning Level, and/or program completion; (5) Accommodations for students with disabilities and other special needs; (6) Assessment procedures for Distance Education; and and (7) Training for all staff who administer the standardized assessments. [For the "2019-2020 Florida Adult Education Assessment Technical Assistance Paper," see ED600585.]

This technical assistance paper provides policy and guidance to individuals with test administration responsibilities in adult education programs. The Florida assessment policies and guidelines presented herein are appropriate for state and federal reporting. Therefore, guidance and procedures regarding the selection and use of appropriate student assessment are included. Additionally, the following important information for adult education programs is reviewed: (1) the definition of key terms and acronyms; (2) selection of appropriate assessments by student and program type; (3) appropriate student placement into program and instructional level; (4) verification of student learning gains, Educational Functioning Level and/or program completion; (5) accommodations for students with disabilities and other special needs; (6) assessment procedures for Distance Education; and (7) training for all staff who administer the standardized assessments. [For the "2020-2021 Florida Adult Education Assessment Technical Assistance Paper," see ED609706.]

For more than two decades, tax-credit scholarship (TCS) policies have helped American families provide their children with the learning environment that meets their individual needs. Now available in 19 states, nearly 300,000 students nationwide use tax-credit scholarships to attend the school of their family's choice. TCS policies create an incentive for taxpayers to contribute to nonprofit scholarship organizations that aid families with tuition and, in some states, other K-12 educational expenses. As with other policies, their ultimate success or failure depends greatly on how they are designed. This paper explores the central design features of TCS policies--such as eligibility, the tax credit value, credit caps, and academic accountability provisions--and outlines the different approaches taken by the TCS policies in each state. The paper also offers suggestions regarding each feature for policymakers who want to design a TCS policy that most likely to succeed at its central purpose: empowering families to provide their children with the education that works best for them. To that end, the paper recommends designing each policy element in such a way that they maximize the incentive that taxpayers have to contribute to scholarship organizations, maximize the number of families that can benefit from the scholarships, and maximize the freedom and flexibility that scholarship organizations have to serve those families. A summary of these suggestions can be found in the conclusion. Finally, the appendix offers policymakers a wide variety of additional resources, including model legislation, parent satisfaction and public opinion surveys, research of fiscal effects, various policy briefs on tax-credit scholarships, information about the constitutional landscape, and public relations resources. [Introduction by Theodor Rebarber. Foreword by Kendra Espinoza.]

This technical assistance paper provides policy and guidance to individuals with test administration responsibilities in adult education programs. The Florida assessment policies and guidelines presented in this paper are appropriate for state and federal reporting. Therefore, guidance and procedures regarding the selection and use of appropriate student assessment are also included. Additionally, the following important information for adult education programs is reviewed: (1) The definition of key terms and acronyms; (2) Selection of appropriate assessments by student and program type; (3) Appropriate student placement into program and instructional level; (4) Verification of student learning gains, Educational Functioning Level, and/or program completion; (5) Accommodations for students with disabilities and other special needs; (6) Assessment procedures for Distance Education; and and (7) Training for all staff who administer the standardized assessments. [For the "2018-2019 Florida Adult Education Assessment Technical Assistance Paper," see ED600582.]

Throughout the years, career and technical education (CTE) has focused on teaching technical competencies and related academic skills that prepare students to enter and advance in a variety of career fields and postsecondary education. Program and course descriptions are reviewed on a regular basis to ensure that the technical and academic skills identified for each program or course meet industry standards as well as requirements established by regulatory boards. The purpose of this paper is to provide information on the following: (1) legal basis for basic skills assessment in CTE; (2) procedures to be followed throughout the assessment process; (3) counseling of students who do not meet the basic skills exit requirements; (4) exemptions or waivers of basic skills requirements; (5) accommodations for students with disabilities; and (6) legislative changes.

The Adult High School (AHS) program enables an adult student, as defined in section (s.)1004.02(5), Florida Statutes (F.S.), to complete the required courses and state assessments to earn a standard high school diploma. Course requirements in adult high school programs are designed in accordance with core content standards per s. 1003.41, F.S. A program of instruction for both traditional and co-enrolled AHS students shall be based on the Florida Department of Education (FDOE) adult education curriculum frameworks found in the 2019-2020 Adult General Education Curriculum Frameworks. Instructional methodologies may include, but are not limited to, traditional lecture instruction, competency- and performance-based adult education, distance learning and computer-assisted instruction. Provided is information for adult high schools regarding the following topics: (1) enrollment criteria; (2) criteria for entering into an AHS co-enrollment program; (3) tuition; (4) assessing students for the National Reporting System (NRS); (5) accountability and reporting; (6) graduation requirements; (7) granting high school credits and diplomas to adults; (8) statewide assessments; (9) assessment requirements for students with disabilities; (10) transfer of credit guidelines; (11) diploma/completion options; (12) course code directory; and (13) adult education instructor certification requirements. [For the "2018-2019 Florida Adult High School Technical Assistance Paper," see ED600584.]

This study finds that, breaking with decades of slow improvement, U.S. reading and math scores on the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) and other assessments have seen historic declines since most states implemented national Common Core English and math curriculum standards six years ago. This descriptive analysis is designed to be understood by a general, non-technical readership. It primarily compares student achievement gains on the NAEP after implementation of Common Core to student achievement gains in the years preceding implementation of Common Core. Since test score results, by their nature, tend to "bounce" somewhat from one year to the next and gains are rarely perfectly smooth, a significant part of the analysis determines the average annual gain since implementation of Common Core and compares that to the average annual gain before implementation of Common Core. This report also includes a section addressing defenses by Common Core advocates denying responsibility for the poor results. The following state samples are included: (1) California; (2) Florida; (3) Georgia; (4) Illinois; (5) Kentucky; (6) Massachusetts; and (7) New York.

This technical assistance paper provides policy and guidance to individuals with test administration responsibilities in adult education programs. The Florida assessment policies and guidelines presented in this paper are appropriate for state and federal reporting. Therefore, guidance and procedures regarding the selection and use of appropriate student assessment are also included. Additionally, the following important information for adult education programs is reviewed: (1) The definition of key terms and acronyms; (2) Selection of appropriate assessments by student and program type; (3) Appropriate student placement into program and instructional level; (4) Verification of student learning gains, Educational Functioning Level, and/or program completion; (5) Accommodations for students with disabilities and other special needs; (6) Assessment procedures for Distance Education; and (7) Training for all staff who administer the standardized assessments. [For the "2017-2018 Florida Adult Education Assessment Technical Assistance Paper," see ED591498.]

The Adult High School (AHS) program enables an adult student, as defined in section (s.)1004.02(5), Florida Statutes (F.S.), to complete the required courses and state assessments to earn a standard high school diploma. Course requirements in adult high school programs are designed in accordance with core content standards per s. 1003.41, F.S. A program of instruction for both traditional and co-enrolled AHS students shall be based on the Florida Department of Education (FDOE) adult education curriculum frameworks found in the 2018-2019 Adult General Education Curriculum Frameworks. Instructional methodologies may include, but are not limited to, traditional lecture instruction, competency- and performance-based adult education, distance learning and computer-assisted instruction. Provided is information for adult high schools regarding the following topics: (1) enrollment criteria; (2) criteria for entering into an AHS co-enrollment program; (3) tuition; (4) assessing students for the National Reporting System (NRS); (5) accountability and reporting; (6) graduation requirements; (7) granting high school credits and diplomas to adults; (8) statewide assessments; (9) assessment requirements for students with disabilities; (10) transfer of credit guidelines; (11) diploma/completion options; (12) course code directory; and (13) adult education instructor certification requirements. [For the "2017-2018 Florida Adult High School Technical Assistance Paper," see ED591367.]

This technical assistance paper provides policy and guidance to individuals with test administration responsibilities in adult education programs. Rule 6A-6.014, Florida Administrative Code (F.A.C.), titled, General Requirements for Adult General Education Programs, requires all adult education programs to report all student measurable educational gains and demographic information to Florida's reporting system. State policies outlined in this rule apply to the state-approved assessments that programs may use to report educational gains and are in compliance with both the state and National Reporting System (NRS) requirements. The NRS is the accountability system for the federally funded adult education program, mandated by the Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act (WIOA). There are three important reasons for creating a data-driven accountability system for adult education programs: (1) The U.S. Department of Education (USDOE) requires each state to establish and utilize performance measures for making continued funding decisions for federal grant programs. Furthermore, each state is expected to institute a system for program monitoring and continued technical assistance that is centered on program enrollment and performance. (2) The Florida Department of Education (FDOE) has enhanced its monitoring processes by instituting a data-driven system for determining program performance. (3) The FDOE program administrators can focus attention on establishing program performance targets and program improvement. To assist programs with student and program performance reporting and accountability, Florida's data reporting system and the NRS are uniform and compatible for measuring student's educational gains. Progress is measured in Literacy Completion Points (LCPs). The term, Literacy Completion Point, used by the state is synonymous with the federal term Measurable Skill Gain (MSG). LCPs are required to be reported to show gains and progression in Educational Functioning Levels (EFLs) for NRS. The Florida assessment policies and guidelines presented in this technical assessment paper are appropriate for state and federal reporting. Therefore, guidance and procedures regarding the selection and use of appropriate student assessment are included in this technical assistance paper. Additionally, the following important information for adult education programs is reviewed: (1) The definition of key terms and acronyms; (2) Selection of appropriate assessments by student and program type; (3) Appropriate student placement into program and instructional level; (3) Verification of student learning gains, Educational Functioning Level, and/or program completion; (4) Accommodations for students with disabilities and other special needs; (5) Assessment procedures for Distance Education; and (6) Training for all staff who administer the standardized assessments. [For the 2016-2017 version of this paper, see ED579162.]

Throughout the years, career and technical education (CTE) has focused on teaching technical competencies and related academic skills that prepare students to enter and advance in a variety of career fields and postsecondary education. Program and course descriptions are reviewed on a regular basis to ensure that the technical and academic skills identified for each program or course meet industry standards as well as requirements established by regulatory boards. The purpose of this paper is to provide information about: (1) the legal basis for basic skills assessment in career and technical education (CTE); (2) procedures to be followed throughout the assessment process; (3) counseling of students who do not meet the basic skills exit requirements; (4) exemptions or waivers of basic skills requirements; (5) accommodations for students with disabilities and English Language Learners (ELL); and (6) legislative changes.

The Adult High School (AHS) program enables an adult student, to complete the required courses and state assessments to earn a standard high school diploma. Course requirements in adult high school programs are designed in accordance with core content standards. A program of instruction for both traditional and co-enrolled AHS students shall be based on the Florida Department of Education (FDOE) adult education curriculum frameworks. Instructional methodologies may include, but are not limited to, traditional lecture instruction, competency- and performance-based adult education, distance learning and computer-assisted instruction. Adult general education programs are authorized by s. 1004.93, F.S., and defined as comprehensive instructional programs designed to improve the employability of the state's workforce through adult basic education, adult secondary education, English for Speakers of Other Languages (ESOL), applied academics for adult education instruction, and instruction for adults with disabilities in s. 1004.02(3), F.S. The AHS curriculum framework is correlated to the Florida Standards, and courses offered are the same as those offered in the K-12 school system. The FDOE AHS curriculum frameworks provide a minimum set of standards to be used by all facilitators delivering AHS education programs. AHS education includes both adult high school diploma programs and co-enrollment courses of study. Students in the AHS program must meet all state and local graduation requirements for a standard high school diploma, unless otherwise noted in this guide. Provided is information for adult high schools regarding the following topics: (1) enrollment criteria; (2) tuition and out-of-state fees; (3) assessing students for National Reporting System (NRS) reporting; (4) accountability and reporting; (5) graduation requirements; (6) statewide assessments; (7) assessment requirements for students with disabilities; (8) transfer of credit guidelines; (9) diploma/completion options; (10) course code directory; and (11) adult education instructor certification requirements. [For the 2016-2017 version of this paper, see ED579163.]

The University of Florida (UF) established a Strategic Communications Planning Committee in May 2009 to coordinate a campuswide effort to promote strategic communications planning, strengthen the university's brand, unify key themes and messages, maximize use of available research and resources, and identify and propagate best practices and cost-effective communications strategies. As part of the effort, UF partnered with CASE to promote and distribute a benchmarking survey. This CASE white paper reports on the high-level findings of the UF/CASE survey. The following are appended: (1) Survey Instrument; (2) Survey Data Summary; and (3) Survey Invitations.

This technical assistance paper provides guidance to individuals with test administration responsibilities in adult education programs. These policies apply to the approved assessments that programs may use to report educational gains in compliance with the National Reporting System (NRS) requirements. The NRS is the accountability system for the federally funded adult education program, mandated by the Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act (WIOA). NRS identifies twelve Educational Functioning Levels (EFLs) in its accountability measures. Four EFLs are in Adult Basic Education (ABE), two in Adult Secondary Education (ASE), and six in English for Speakers of Other Languages (ESOL). The descriptors of each EFL are entry-level descriptors and illustrate student performance expectations at the particular level. The Florida assessment policy guidelines include the selection and use of appropriate student assessment and procedures for the following: (1) accurate student placement into appropriate program and instructional level; (2) diagnostic information to guide instruction; (3) pre- and post-testing to monitor progress toward goals; and (4) verification of level and program completion. These policy guidelines also include staff training and test security requirements for all staff who administer the standardized assessments and use the results from these assessments. [For the 2015-2016 version of this paper, see ED579158.]

The Adult High School (AHS) program enables an adult no longer enrolled in public high school to complete the required courses and state assessments to earn a standard high school diploma. Course requirements are in accordance with standards established by the state. A program of instruction for both traditional and co-enrolled AHS students shall be based on the State of Florida adult education frameworks and the Florida Standards. Instructional methodologies may include, but are not limited to, traditional lecture instruction, competency and performance-based adult education, distance learning, and computer-assisted instruction. This guide provides information for adult high schools regarding the following topics: (1) enrollment criteria; (2) tuition and out-of-state fees; (3) assessing students for National Reporting System (NRS) reporting; (4) accountability and reporting; (5) graduation requirements; (6) statewide assessments; (7) assessment requirements for students with disabilities; (8) transfer of credit guidelines; (9) diploma/completion options; (10) course code directory; and (11) adult education instructor certification requirements. [For the 2015-2016 version of this paper, see ED579159.]

This technical assistance paper provides guidance to individuals with test administration responsibilities in adult education programs. These policies apply to the approved assessments that programs may use to report educational gains in compliance with the National Reporting System (NRS) requirements. The NRS is the accountability system for the federally funded adult education program, mandated by the Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act (WIOA). NRS identifies twelve Educational Functioning Levels (EFLs) in its accountability measures. Four EFLs are in Adult Basic Education (ABE), two in Adult Secondary Education (ASE), and six in English for Speakers of Other Languages (ESOL). The descriptors of each EFL are entry-level descriptors and illustrate student performance expectations at the particular level. The Florida assessment policy guidelines include the selection and use of appropriate student assessment and procedures for the following: (1) accurate student placement into appropriate program and instructional level; (2) diagnostic information to guide instruction; (3) pre- and post-testing to monitor progress toward goals; and (4) verification of level and program completion. These policy guidelines also include staff training and test security requirements for all staff who administer the standardized assessments and use the results from these assessments.

School principals have complex jobs. To better understand the work lives of principals, this study uses observational time-use data for all high school principals in Miami-Dade County Public Schools. This paper examines the relationship between the time principals spent on different types of activities and school outcomes including student achievement, teacher and parent assessments of the school, and teacher satisfaction. The authors find that time spent on Organization Management activities is associated with positive school outcomes, such as student test score gains and positive teacher and parent assessments of the instructional climate, whereas Day-to-Day Instruction activities are marginally or not at all related to improvements in student performance and often have a negative relationship with teacher and parent assessments. This paper suggests that a single-minded focus on principals as instructional leaders operationalized through direct contact with teachers may be detrimental if it forsakes the important role of principals as organizational leaders. Percent of Principal Time Spent on Individual Tasks is appended. (Contains 6 footnotes, 3 figures and 5 tables.) [This paper was supported by the Stanford University K-12 Initiative.]

What does it cost to provide a bachelor's-level education? This question arises with increasing frequency and urgency as pressure mounts on policymakers and education leaders to increase the education attainment level in the United States, to "Double the Numbers" in some cases. At the same time, the two traditional sources of financing--state appropriations and private tuition payments--show signs of being stretched to their limits. Yet determining the cost of a degree is not a simple question to answer in a system that has made enrollments--i.e., the credit hour, the FTE--the primary unit of accounting, rather than the completed degree. Even with credit hours, only a minority of state systems, such as Florida, Illinois and Minnesota, routinely analyze instructional costs at a level of detail beyond institution and instructional level totals. While there has been considerable effort invested in analyzing college costs, no consensus or common language has emerged to describe how the cost of a degree should be measured. Consensus around a single method may be neither possible nor desirable, given the range of different policy contexts in which the question comes up. A common language, however, could help keep discussions of the issue more focused than they often are. This paper suggests the beginnings of that language by briefly outlining five approaches to degree costs: (1) Catalog cost; (2) Transcript cost; (3) Full cost attribution; (4) Regression-based cost estimates; and (5) Student's cost of a degree. Appended are: (1) Detailed tables; and (2) SPSS scripts and output for stepwise regression analysis. (Contains 23 tables and 22 footnotes.) [Funding for this paper was provided by Making Opportunity Affordable, an initiative of Lumina Foundation for Education.]

Redistributing highly effective teachers from low- to high-need schools is an education policy tool that is at the center of several major current policy initiatives. The underlying assumption is that teacher productivity is portable across different schools settings. Using elementary and secondary school data from North Carolina and Florida, this paper investigates the validity of this assumption. Among teachers who switched between schools with substantially different poverty levels or academic performance levels, we find no change in those teachers' measured effectiveness before and after a school change. This pattern holds regardless of the direction of the school change. We also find that high-performing teachers' value-added dropped and low-performing teachers' value-added gained in the post-move years, primarily as a result of regression to the within-teacher mean and unrelated to school setting changes. Despite such shrinkages, high-performing teachers in the pre-move years still outperformed low-performing teachers after moving to schools with different settings. (Contains 2 figures, 17 tables, and 11 footnotes.)

In this paper we consider the challenges involved in evaluating teacher preparation programs when controlling for school contextual bias. Including school fixed effects in the achievement models used to estimate preparation program effects controls for school environment by relying on differences among student outcomes within the same schools to identify the program effects. However, identification of preparation program effects using school fixed effects requires teachers from different programs to teach in the same school. Even if program effects are identified, the precision of the estimated effects will depend on the degree to which graduates from different programs overlap across schools. In addition, if the connections between preparation programs result from the overlap of atypical graduates or from graduates teaching in atypical school environments, use of school effects could produce bias. Using statewide data from Florida, we show that teachers tend to teach in schools near the programs in which they received their training, but there is still sufficient overlap across schools to identify preparation program effects. We show that the ranking of preparation programs varies significantly depending on whether or not school environment is taken into account via school fixed effects. We find that schools and teachers that are integral to connecting preparation programs are atypical, with disproportionately high percentages of Hispanic teachers and students compared to the state averages. Finally, we find significant variance inflation in the estimated program effects when controlling for school fixed effects, and that the size of the variance inflation factor depends crucially on the length of the window used to compare graduates teaching in the same schools. (Contains 9 tables, 4 figures and 12 footnotes.)

This report describes how an innovative curriculum promoted the civic development of high school students along with parents by stimulating news media attention and discussion in families. Evidence is based on a three-year evaluation of Kids Voting USA, an interactive, election-based curriculum. Political communication in the home increased the probability of voting for students when they reached voting age during the 2004 election. Thus, the interplay of influences from school and family magnified curriculum effects in the short term and sustained them in the long term. This bridging of the classroom with the living room suggests how Kids Voting offers a model for reforming civic education in the United States. Data are derived from a series of natural field experiments, beginning with interviews of 491 student-parent pairs in 2002. The authors evaluate the curriculum as it was taught in the fall of that year in El Paso County, Colorado, with Colorado Springs as the largest city; Maricopa, County, Arizona, which includes the Phoenix region; and Broward/Palm Beach counties, Florida, the epicenter for the ballot-recount saga of 2000. Students who were juniors or seniors in 2002 were interviewed in the fall/winter of 2002, 2003, and 2004. They were all of voting age by the fall of 2004, allowing the authors to determine whether participation in the curriculum in 2002 affected turnout in the presidential election two years later. The authors also interviewed one parent from each family each year. The voting records in the four counties were examined to provide a definitive assessment of whether the curriculum increased the likelihood of voting. Finally, the panel survey data was supplemented with qualitative insights obtained from focus group interviews. An appendix provides: (1) Electoral Contexts; (2) Data Collection Procedures; (3) Item Wording & Coding for All Measures; and (4) three supplemental tables. (Contains 7 tables and 7 figures.) [This Working Paper was produced by CIRCLE (The Center for Information and Research on Civic Learning and Engagement). For CIRCLE Working Paper 48, see ED494024.]

While the importance of effective principals is undisputed, few studies have addressed what specific skills principals need to promote school success. This study draws on unique data combining survey responses from principals, assistant principals, teachers and parents with rich administrative data to identify which principal skills matter most for school outcomes. Factor analysis of a 42-item task inventory distinguishes five skill categories, yet only one of them, the principals' organization management skills, consistently predicts student achievement growth and other success measures. Analysis of evaluations of principals by assistant principals confirms this central result. Our analysis argues for a broad view of instructional leadership that includes general organizational management skills as a key complement to the work of supporting curriculum and instruction. Two appendices are included: (1) Factor Loadings Matrix for Principal Effectiveness Factors; and (2) Factor Loadings Matrix for Assistant Principal Effectiveness Factors. (Contains 3 figures, 5 tables and 6 footnotes.) [This paper was supported by the Stanford University K-12 Initiative.]

In this study the authors use longitudinal data from one large school district--Miami-Dade County Public Schools, to investigate the distribution of principals across schools. The authors find schools serving many low-income, non-white, and low-achieving students have principals with less experience, less education, and who attended less selective colleges. This distribution of principals is partially driven by the initial match of first-time principals to schools at the beginning of their careers and is exacerbated by systematic attrition and transfer away from these schools. Supplementing these data with surveys of principals, the authors find principals' stated preferences for school characteristics mirror observed distribution and transfer patterns. Principals prefer to work in easier to serve schools with favorable working conditions which also tend to be schools with fewer poor, minority and/or low-achieving students. Full Models from Discrete-Time Hazard of Leaving Principal Position is appended. (Contains 10 tables and 12 footnotes.) [This paper was supported by the Stanford University K-12 Initiative.]

These two technical assistance papers are designed to provide further clarification to Florida school districts regarding the evaluation procedures and determination of eligibility for children with disabilities in transition from the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), Part C, Infants and Toddlers Early Intervention Program to the IDEA, Part B, Prekindergarten Program for Children with Disabilities and on the transportation of students with disabilities. The first paper, revised in June 2000, specifically addresses eligibility, evaluation requirements, and parental consent for the transition to preschool programs. The second technical assistance paper, published in July 2001, is designed to provide guidance as districts continue to provide specialized transportation for students with disabilities and claim the weighted transportation funding. It outlines the following criteria for specialized transportation services: (1) medical equipment required; (2) medical condition that requires a special transportation environment; (3) aide or monitor required due to disability and specific needs of student; (4) shortened day required due to disability and specific needs of student; or (5) assigned school is located in an out-of-district school system. Answers to questions on the role of the transportation representative at individualized education program development meetings, funding, and shortened school days are provided. (CR)

This technical assistance paper is intended to provide updated guidance for Florida educators of students with disabilities concerning changes in identification, free appropriate public education (FAPE), placement, or dismissal from special education. Following an introductory section presenting the background, purpose, and relevant terms, the paper is in a question-and-answer format. Questions address topics such as: requirements before changing a student's disability category; when prereferral activities are and are not required; what constitutes a change in FAPE or placement; graduation as a change in FAPE; the individualized education program and graduation; required procedures for adding a related service if a student is currently receiving special education services; procedures for discontinuing a related service for such a student; requirements for determining that a student no longer needs special education services; formal evaluation requirements prior to dismissing a student from special education; determination of dismissal criteria; standards for dismissal from special education; readmission into the special education program; and continued provision of accommodations to a student dismissed from special education. (DB)

Dual enrollment (DE), an arrangement by which high school students take college courses, is becoming increasingly popular as a means of improving high school education. However, there is very little rigorous evidence on its impact on student outcomes. A particular concern in evaluating its effects is the selection bias that arises because more able students are more likely to take DE courses. In this study, I employ a quasi-experimental method to gauge the causal effects of DE on student outcomes. I conduct two regression discontinuity analyses that exploit a statutory mandate in the state of Florida requiring high school students to have a minimum academic standing in order to participate in DE. The first analysis evaluates the effects of DE using GPA as the eligibility criterion. The second analysis evaluates the effects of a particularly challenging and popular DE course, college algebra, using an eligibility criterion that is specific to that course. While the standard regression-discontinuity methods are appropriate for the first analysis, the participation criterion for college algebra is used not only for DE students but also for college students. I therefore employ an extension of the regression-discontinuity method that accounts for sequential treatments. Using data on students from two high school cohorts (2000-01 and 2001-02) in selected Florida districts who were tracked through the summer of 2007, I find no evidence that simply taking a DE course improved marginal students' rates of high school graduation, college enrollment, or college degree attainment. However, for students on the margin of participation in algebra, I find that taking such a challenging DE course had large and significant effects on college enrollment and graduation rates. Appended are: (1) Estimated Discontinuity in Dual Enrollment (Any Course) in 12th Grade by Community College; and (2) Estimated Discontinuity in Participation in Dual Enrollment Algebra by College. (Contains 9 tables, 10 figures and 38 footnotes.)

This paper is intended to clarify for Florida school districts the nature of psychological services as a related service under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act and Florida law. Following a brief section on the legal meaning of "related services" and "special education services" the paper offers eight questions and answers: (1) What is the definition of psychological services?; (2) Who provides psychological services?; (3) How are psychological services delivered?; (4) Are psychological services limited to testing activities?; (5) How do we decide which psychological services to provide to students with disabilities?; (6) What are examples of each of these types of psychological services?; (7) When are psychological services required for students with disabilities?; and (8) Are psychological services available to students who do not have disabilities? (DB)

This paper provides guidelines (based on the 1997 Amendments of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act) to Florida educators concerning reevaluation procedures for students with disabilities. The first section defines reevaluation as the process of determining the following: whether a student continues to have a disability; present levels of performance and educational needs of the student; whether the student continues to need special education and related services; and whether any additions or modifications to special education and related services are needed. Most of the paper consists of 27 questions and answers that address: (1) reevaluation review (such as who conducts it, what should be considered, parental input, and frequency of reevaluation); (2) parental consent (necessity of written consent and exceptions to the parental consent requirement); (3) reevaluation and other assessments (relationship to functional behavioral assessments, relationship to routine vision and communication screenings, reevaluation of kindergarten children and graduating students); (4) reevaluation timelines (limits and components of the 3-year reevaluation requirement); and (5) information for parents (providing parents with the reevaluation report). (DB)

These two technical assistance papers are designed to provide further clarification to Florida school districts regarding the completion of matrices for students with disabilities and on the documentation of the amount of services a student receives on an Individualized Education Program (IEP). The "Matrix of Services" is used to document the individualized special education and related services that a student with disabilities is receiving as documented on the student's IEP, educational plan, or family support plan. This paper, published in January 2000, was developed in response to district concerns that the revised "Matrix of Services Handbook" has resulted in lower matrix ratings even for those students receiving intensive services. The questions and answers provided in the paper are designed to clarify some of the areas that were identified as problematic during meetings with special education administrators. It specifically addresses: the level of documentation required for students with a matrix rating of 251; documentation needed to check a service on the matrix; requirements for functional behavioral assessments; requirements for speech therapy; requirements for organizational strategies; and consultation services. The second technical assistance paper, published in August 2001, provides answers to frequently asked questions on the documentation of the amount of special education and related services on the IEP. (CR)

This report examines the results of the field test for the base year of the High School Longitudinal Study of 2009 (HSLS:09). The general purposes of the field test were, in anticipation of the base-year full-scale effort, to test instruments, forms, and procedures; to experiment with different approaches to questionnaire content and survey methodology; and to evaluate the overall study design. The HSLS:09 field test faced a number of challenges. In varying degrees, these challenges will require further strategies and efforts be applied in the main study. Specific recommendations are summarized in this report, challenge by challenge. Appendices include: (1) HSLS:09 Sampling Plan for Main Study and Field Test; (2) HSLS:09 Field Test Codebook; (3) HSLS:09 Assessment Pilot Report; (4) HSLS:09 Technical Review Panel Participants and Meeting Minutes; (5) HSLS:09 Field Test Letters, Permission Forms, and Scripts; (6) HSLS:09 Mathematics Assessment Specifications:Final Working Version; (7) HSLS:09 Field Test Classical Item Statistics; (8) HSLS:09 Field Test Item Parameter Estimates; (9) HSLS:09 Student Instrument Scale Reliability Analyses; and (10) Questionnaires. (Contains 42 tables, 10 figures and 9 footnotes.)

Voucher options like tuition tax credit-funded scholarship programs have become increasingly popular in recent years. One argument for such school choice policies is that public schools will improve the quality of education they offer when faced with competition for their students. This study examines the effects of private school competition on public school students' test scores in the wake of Florida's Corporate Tax Credit Scholarship program (now the Florida Tax Credit Scholarship Program) which offered scholarships to eligible low-income students to attend private schools. The authors examine whether students in public schools that were exposed to a more competitive private school landscape saw greater improvements in their students' test scores after the introduction of the scholarship program, than did students in schools that faced less competition. The degree of competition is characterized by several geo-coded variables that capture students' ease of access to private schools, and the variety of nearby private school options available to students. Findings show greater degrees of competition are associated with greater improvements in students' test scores following the introduction of the program. The findings are not an artifact of pre-policy trends; the degree of competition from nearby private schools matters only after the announcement of the new program, which makes nearby private competitors more affordable for eligible students. Also, schools that we would expect to be most sensitive to competitive pressure see larger improvements in their test scores as a result of increased competition. The findings suggest that means-tested voucher and scholarship programs may be an effective way of improving educational outcomes for low-income students. (Contains 8 tables, 14 figures and 18 footnotes.)

The gold standard in making causal inference on program effects is a randomized trial. Most randomization designs in education randomize classrooms or schools rather than individual students. Such "clustered randomization" designs have one principal drawback: They tend to have limited statistical power or precision. This study aims to provide empirical information needed to design adequately powered studies that randomize schools using data from Florida and North Carolina. The authors assess how different covariates contribute to improving the statistical power of a randomization design and examine differences between math and reading tests; differences between test types (curriculum-referenced tests versus norm-referenced tests); and differences between elementary school and secondary school, to see if the test subject, test type, or grade level makes a large difference in the crucial design parameters. Finally they assess bias in 2-level models that ignore the clustering of students in classrooms. (Contains 5 figures, 46 tables and 2 footnotes.)

We examine earnings records for more than 90,000 classroom teachers employed by Florida public schools between the 2001-02 and 2006-07 school years, roughly 20,000 of whom left the classroom during that time. A majority of those leaving the classroom remained employed by public school districts. Among teachers in grades 4-8 leaving for other industries, a 1 standard deviation increase in estimated value-added to student math and reading achievement is associated with 6-9 percent higher earnings outside of teaching. The relationship between effectiveness and earnings is stronger in other industries than it is for the same groups of teachers while in the classroom, suggesting that current compensation systems do not fully account for the higher opportunity wages of effective teachers. Tables are appended. (Contains 5 figures, 8 tables and 32 footnotes.)

Class-size reduction (CSR) mandates presuppose that resources provided to reduce class size will have a larger impact on student outcomes than resources that districts can spend as they see fit. I estimate the impact of Florida's statewide CSR policy by comparing the deviations from prior achievement trends in districts that were required to reduce class size to deviations from prior trends in districts that received equivalent resources but were not required to reduce class size. I use the same comparative interrupted time series design to compare schools that were differentially affected by the policy (in terms of whether they had to reduce class size) but that did not receive equal additional resources. The results from both the district- and school-level analyses indicate that mandated CSR in Florida had little, if any, effect on cognitive and non-cognitive outcomes. Thirteen tables are appended: (1) Effect of Required CSR at District Level on District Characteristics; (2) Effect of Required CSR at School Level on School Characteristics; (3) District-Level Models with Additional Years of Pre-Treatment Data (Effects in Student-Level Standard Deviations); (4) District-Level Estimates that Condition on Prior-Year Controls (Effects in Student-Level Standard Deviations); (5) District-Level Analysis Robustness Checks (Effects in Student-Level Standard Deviations); (6) Effects of District-Level CSR on FCAT Scores (Student-Level Standard Deviations), Standard Difference-in-Differences Specification; (7) Effects of District-Level CSR on Stanford Achievement Test (SAT) Scores (Student-Level Standard Deviations); (8) Achievement Effects of District-level CSR by Subgroup (Student-Level Standard Deviations); (9) Effects of District-Level CSR on Non-Cognitive Outcomes; (10) School-Level Estimates that Condition on Prior-Year Controls (Effects in Student-Level Standard Deviations); (11) Effects of School-Level CSR on FCAT Scores (Student-Level Standard Deviations), Standard Difference-in-Differences Specification; (12) Achievement Effects of School-Level CSR by Subgroup (Student-Level Standard Deviations); and (13) Effects of School-Level CSR on Non-Cognitive Outcomes. (Contains 3 figures, 21 tables and 32 footnotes.)

This paper provides assistance to Florida school districts regarding the development of their extended school year (ESY) policies and procedures for students with disabilities as required under the Individuals with Disabilities Education (IDEA) Act and Florida statutes. Following a brief section providing background information, 27 questions and answers are grouped into the following categories: (1) general (e.g., eligibility for ESY services, district responsibility for students placed in private schools, determination of a need for ESY services, and related services during an ESY period); (2) service delivery models (e.g., the "least restrictive environment" requirement of IDEA and varieties of delivery models); (3) ESY and summer school (e.g., relationship of ESY and summer school and special protections for students with disabilities attending summer school); (4) individualized education program (IEP) or family support plan (FSP) requirements (timing of consideration of ESY services, description of ESY services on the IEP or FSP, and reports to parents); and (5) funding (how ESY services are funded, no cost to parents for educational services, and parent assessment for "recreational" components). An appendix provides an analysis of legal issues including general principles established by the Office of Special Education Programs, key points developed in case law, and application in five Florida cases. (DB)

In this study we consider the efficacy of a relatively new and widely accepted certification system for teachers established by the National Board for Professional Teaching Standards (NBPTS). To address the limitations in past research on the subject, we utilize a unique database covering the universe of teachers and students in Florida for a four-year span to determine the relationship between NBPTS certification and the impact of teachers on student test scores from both low-stakes and high-stakes exams. Contrary to some previous studies, we find evidence that NBPTS certification provides a positive signal of a teacher's contribution to student achievement only in a few isolated cases. Our results do reinforce evidence from previous research that the process of becoming NBPTS certified does not increase teacher productivity. While there is some evidence that NBPTS-certified teachers who are paid to act as mentors enhance the productivity of their colleagues, the effectiveness of non-NBPTS certified teachers does not increase with increases in the total number of NBPTS-certified teachers in the same school. (Contains 22 tables and 30 footnotes.)

This paper addresses issues related to Medicaid-reimbursable nursing services covered under the Florida Medicaid Certified School Match Program and the federal Medicare Catastrophic Coverage Act in coordination with the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act. Following a brief section providing background information, 23 questions and answers are grouped into the following categories: (1) general (e.g., what nursing services are included and excluded under the program, student eligibility, and medication administration); (2) providers (e.g., who can provide Medicaid-reimbursable services, required supervision of licensed practical nurses and school health aides); and (3) service and documentation requirements (e.g., Medicaid requirements in the student's record, the diagnosis statement, referencing the need for a Medicaid-reimbursable nursing service on the individualized education plan, and logging of service documentation). Also included are a list of area Medicaid school contacts, the documentation of nursing services form, and the documentation of medication administration form. (DB)

In 2004, the Lumina Foundation for Education approved a generous grant to support validation research to explore and document the validity of the Community College Student Report (CCSR), add to the higher education field's understanding of student engagement, and help to identify research or institutional practices that require further attention. The study was conducted in three strands that linked Community College Survey of Student Engagement ("CCSSE") respondents with external data sources: (1) data from the Florida Department of Education; (2) data from the Achieving the Dream project; and (3) student record databases maintained at community colleges that have participated in the "CCSSE" survey and are either Hispanic-Serving Institutions or members of the Hispanic Association of Colleges and Universities (HACU). All participating students had participated in the 2002, 2003, or 2004 administrations of the Community College Student Report, "CCSSE's" survey instrument. The pattern of results obtained from the Florida study broadly confirms positive relationships between the construct of student engagement as measured by "CCSSE" and community college outcomes. This Achieving the Dream study yielded mixed results. The most promising results were for academic achievement (cumulative GPA) and persistence (credit completion ratios and fall-to-fall retention). Less promising were the results when predicting course completions across developmental math, writing and reading, as well as college-level algebra and English. In the HSS study, the student engagement scales were predictors of both "CCSSE" self-reported outcomes and transcript-derived student outcomes. Overall, two student engagement scales--Academic Challenge and Support for Learners--were the most consistent predictors of student outcomes. Overall, results clearly demonstrate that in assessing the validity of the "CCSSE", the choice of student outcomes variables is very important. The analyses accounted for larger proportions of variance in cumulative GPA, total credit hours completed, and average credit hours than in first to second term persistence, first to third term persistence, and number of terms enrolled. Further, depending on the student outcome of interest, some "CCSSE" self-reported outcomes seemed to be good proxies for transcript-derived outcomes, specifically cumulative GPA and total credit hours earned. Overall, many of the "CCSSE" variables, as well as corresponding derived scales and factors, demonstrated solid relationships with both self-reported and transcript-derived student outcomes. The results of these studies point to the following overall conclusions: (1) There is strong support for the validity of the use of the CCSR as a measure of institutional processes and student behaviors that impact student outcomes; (2) The studies confirm a long tradition of research findings linking engagement to positive academic outcomes; (3) There is strong consistency in the relationship between engagement factors and outcome measures across the three studies; however, some outcomes have stronger relationships to engagement than others; and (4) The Support for Learners benchmark was consistently correlated with measures of persistence. Appended are: (1) Florida Community College System Validation Study Results; (2) Achieving the Dream Validation Study Results; (3) HSS Consortium Institutions Validation Study Results; (4) "CCSSE" Constructs; (5) Study Variables; and (6) Participating Institutions. (Contains 71 tables, 8 figures and 4 footnotes.) [For related report, "Student Engagement and Student Outcomes: Key Findings from "CCSSE" Validation Research," see ED529076.]

Mediation in special education is a process intended to assist parents, schools, and agencies in resolving disagreements regarding the special education program of a student with disabilities. A trained mediator works with the parties to guide them toward a mutually satisfactory solution that meets the best interests of the student. This occurs at a nonadversarial session which is more structured than a parent-school conference, but less formal than a due process hearing. This technical assistance paper contains an overview of special education mediation in Florida, an explanation of the process, a description of each party's role in the process, a comparison of mediation and due process hearings, answers to commonly asked questions about mediation, and copies of forms used in the process. The appendix contains the following forms: a request for mediation, mediation agreement, mediator evaluation of the mediation session, and participant evaluation of the mediation session. (JDD)

Florida students being considered for special programs for visually impaired students must be assessed to determine the appropriate mode of reading. The assessment occurs as part of an initial evaluation for eligibility and is usually part of the functional vision observation. The determined mode of reading is to be addressed on the Individual Education Plan (IEP) and reviewed annually as part of the IEP process. This technical assistance paper defines terms related to the concept of reading mode and notes three major factors to be considered in determining the mode of reading: child characteristics; mechanical factors; and social factors. Questions to be considered in these three areas are then outlined, such as whether the medical prognosis of the eye condition is progressive in nature; whether the student experiences unusual fatigue in reading or writing assignments; and whether the chosen medium meets the needs of the student in terms of portability, availability, and cost. Seven resources useful in student evaluation are listed, along with 12 references for further reading. (JDD)

Technical assistance is provided concerning documentation of functional vision loss for Florida students with visual impairments. The functional vision observation should obtain enough information for determination of special service eligibility. The observation is designed to supplement information on the medical eye examination, and is conducted by a teacher of visually impaired students or an appropriately trained diagnostician. Components of a functional vision observation include medical eye examination information, developmental and functional visual response information, and notation of classroom modifications required. The paper contains a four-page functional vision observation form, and 13 bibliographical references with annotations. (JDD)

Negotiable instruments--various kinds of paper--are treated in this brief course outline with the objectives of teaching the student to: (1) understand and relate monetary legislation to his personal affairs, (2) understand four types of negotiable instruments, (3) demonstrate an understanding of transferring negotiable instruments in a practical application, (4) identify four types of endorsements on negotiable instruments, (5) complete three types of instruments from given information, (6) demonstrate knowledge of maker and endorser responsibilities in a case problem. Course objectives, learning activities, evaluative instruments, student and teacher resources are included. More than one-half of the pamphlet is devoted to test appendixes and keys. (NH)

The purpose of this technical assistance paper is to provide a description of the procedures used to determine school grades for the 2014 school year. Florida's current school accountability system originated with state legislation passed in 1999 (the "A+ Plan") and has been revised periodically to reflect increased standards and expectations for student performance. Florida is the first state to track annual student learning gains based on the state's academic standards. This paper contains two sections: the Overview (Section I) and the Process for Calculating School Grades (Section II). These sections describe a series of procedures for determining a school's final grade and are intended for knowledgeable audiences who are interested in the details of determining the school grades. A more general and concise description of the school grading system is found on the school grading "guide sheet" (see Appendix A). A summary guide sheet can also be accessed online at the applicable link at the bottom of the Florida School Grades website (http://schoolgrades.fldoe.org/). The following are appended: (1) Guide Sheet to Grading Florida Public Schools; (2) Data Sources (Additional Information); (3) Calculation of Common Scale Scores for EOC Assessment Learning Gains; (4) Applying Graduation Rate Points in High School Grades; (5) Test Dates (First Dates of Testing for FCAT 2.0 Reading, Math, and Science); and (6) Access Points Courses for Adjusting High School Acceleration Participation. [This document was prepared by staff in the Bureau of Accountability Reporting; Division of Accountability, Research, and Measurement.]

The purpose of this technical assistance paper is to provide a description of the procedures used to determine school improvement ratings for alternative schools and ESE centers for the most recently completed school year. School improvement ratings are part of Florida's school accountability system, which originated with the Florida Legislature's passage of Assistance Plus (A+) legislation in 1999. Florida is one of the few states that can track student demographic information from year to year and is the first to track annual student learning gains based on the state's academic standards. School improvement ratings are calculated as defined in Florida Administrative Code Rule 6A-1.099822, under the authority of sections 1008.341 and 1008.345, Florida Statutes. Based on statutory criteria, alternative schools and ESE centers are identified by the Florida Department of Education with input from Florida's school districts. Once these schools are identified for the reporting year, the administration of each school is provided the opportunity to choose, for an annual accountability evaluation, either a regular school grade (using criteria applicable to traditional schools receiving school grades) or a school improvement rating (using criteria described in Rule 6A-1.099822) for the applicable reporting year. If the administration of an alternative school does not choose either option, the school will by default be assigned a school improvement rating. Schools that elect a school improvement rating in lieu of a school grade will have the rating based on a comparison of current-year and prior-year learning gains for eligible students in reading and mathematics. This paper contains two sections: I. Overview, and II. Process for Calculating School Improvement Ratings. These sections describe procedures for determining a school's final rating and are intended for audiences who are interested in the details of determining school improvement ratings for alternative schools and ESE centers. [This document was prepared by the Bureau of Accountability Reporting; Division of Accountability, Research, and Measurement.]

One of a series of Education Resource Strategies (ERS) publications and tools, this paper explores important ways to organize and invest in Professional Growth & Support that strengthen teaching capacity and effectiveness at the system level. It draws on research, ERS experience with urban school systems nationwide, and detailed analyses of Professional Growth & Support spending in Washington, DC; Duval County Public Schools, Florida; and the charter management network, Achievement First (AF). The authors present a new vision in which strategic school systems integrate a core set of instructional improvement activities that strengthen and reinforce one another. They also introduce principles common to strategic Professional Growth & Support systems, describe these practices in the three systems, and identify the biggest levers and challenges to implementing productive strategies. In this paper, the authors hope to both challenge and support educational leaders to create a more strategic, integrated approach to building teaching effectiveness. To do this, they identify six steps school system leaders can take to implement this vision cost-effectively. With each step, they describe the strategy, share insights from spending and practice data across school systems, highlight challenges, and provide some tips for taking action. Appended are: (1) Eight Principles of a Strategic Professional Growth & Support System; (2) School System Background; (3) The Components of Professional Growth & Support; (4) AF's Essentials of Effective Instruction (Basis for Observation Rubric); (5) AF's Annual Professional Growth & Support Schedule; and (6) AF's Career Stages and Compensation.

After two decades of major education reforms without seeing major gains for low-income students, state leadership is coming to the conclusion that there is something inherently wrong with America's K-12 system. States have called into question the time-based system built around the Carnegie unit and are now rapidly advancing an alternative. By establishing proficiency-based diplomas, credit flexibility, or seat-time waivers, 36 states are moving toward competency education. In some cases comprehensive policy is being implemented, in others investments in pilots are used to engage districts, and in all of them innovation space is being created by lifting time-based policies. It is firmly in the hands of state leadership to redesign policies for a student-centered system, rather than a time-based system. This paper offers an opportunity for state leadership to reflect upon their efforts and share their insights into re-engineering the policy and practices of our K-12 systems that were built over hundreds of years. "Necessary for Success" introduces the concept of competency education, explains why the traditional time-based system is holding back our children and our nation, and discusses the important initial steps taken by states in introducing competency education. Interviews with state leadership about their strategies, lessons learned, and the emerging policy infrastructure that is needed for full alignment with competency education are included. The paper contains recommendations for creating a culture of competency within state education agencies.