Center for Evaluation & Education Policy

Permanent link for this collection

Browse

Recent Submissions

Now showing 1 - 20 of 39
  • Item
    Implementing Indiana’s New Dual Language Immersion Programs: Educator Perspectives
    (Center for Evaluation & Education Policy, 2018-03) Chesnut, C.; Dimitrieska, V.
    A new CEEP publication, "Implementing Indiana's New Dual Language Immersion Programs: Educator Perspectives," finds that Indiana should provide targeted and ongoing professional development, guidance on curriculum and support from teacher-preparation programs to help schools implement dual language immersion programs, known as DLI. Authors Colleen Chesnut, CEEP research associate, and Vesna Dimitrieska, director of global education initiatives for IU's Center for P-16 Research and Collaboration and the School of Global and International Studies, conducted interviews and focus groups with educators from six school districts that were implementing or planning for DLI programs. The conversations focused on benefits and challenges of the approach, in which students learn in both English and a ""partner language"" such as Spanish or Mandarin. Findings include: Teachers and administrators working in DLI programs have a broad understanding of their benefits but are eager to learn more. Challenges include recruiting highly qualified staff, finding time to plan lessons and acquiring learning materials, especially in the partner language. Educators are looking to state officials and policymakers for more structured support in the areas of standards and accountability. Certain types of professional development, such as visits to established DLI program, were seen as especially helpful in launching new programs.
  • Item
    New Jersey Charter School Fiscal Analysis
    (Center for Evaluation & Education Policy, 2017-11) Yel, N.; Sugimoto, T.; Ruddy, A. M.
    Using school aid data, as well as publicly available data from the New Jersey Department of Education (NJDOE) and U.S. Department of Education, CEEP conducted a study analyzing the fiscal impact of New Jersey’s charter schools on traditional public schools. The analysis, which looked at the amount of funds transferred to charter schools as well as potential expenditure savings, focused on the following questions: How much have districts paid to charter schools, and how have charter school enrollments affected revenues? What are the potential expenditure reductions of traditional public school districts as a result of charter school enrollments? What are the estimated net fiscal impacts of charter schools on traditional public school districts (overall and per pupil)? Supported by data from the 2014/15 school year, CEEP’s visualization focuses on the amount transferred to charter schools by each traditional school district. The full report considers potential expenditure savings and the net impact on traditional districts; details on methods are also included. CEEP’s study was commissioned by the New Jersey Education Association.
  • Item
    New Jersey Charter School Analysis
    (Center for Evaluation & Education Policy, 2017-11) Sugimoto, T.; Yel, N.; Ruddy, A. M.
    Using publicly available data from the New Jersey Department of Education and U.S. Department of Education, CEEP conducted a study comparing enrollment, grade promotion and disciplinary rates, and student achievement between traditional public schools and charter schools. Primary research questions were as follows: To what extent do charter schools enroll “a cross section of the community’s school-age population, including racial and academic factors?” To what extent (if any) are there differences in disciplinary, expulsion, and promotion rates between New Jersey charter schools and demographically similar, traditional public schools. To what extent (if any) are there differences in student achievement between New Jersey charter schools and demographically similar, traditional public schools? Supported by data from the 2015/16 school year, CEEP’s visualization focuses on differences in charter school and traditional public school enrollment. The full report considers differences in disciplinary, expulsion, promotion rates, and achievement, as well as full details on methods. CEEP’s study was commissioned by the New Jersey Education Association.
  • Item
    Examining the Cross-Roads School Segregation in Indiana
    (Center for Evaluation & Education Policy, 2017-05) Moon, J. S.; Krull, L.
    In partnership with the Civil Rights Project at UCLA, CEEP's research on demographic shifts shows that Indiana schools on average remain largely segregated by race, ethnicity, and family income. The analysis and accompanying data visualization, unveiled on the 63rd anniversary of the Supreme Court's Brown v. Board of Education decision, demonstrate that the lack of integration (or racial and socioeconomic diversity) in Indiana schools largely reflects residential segregation.
  • Item
    Analysis of Indiana Senate Bill 534 and House Bill 1591
    (Center for Evaluation & Education Policy, 2017-02) Stewart, M. S.
    In conjunction with our ongoing research on school choice initiatives in Indiana and other states, CEEP examines the Indiana Senate Bill 534, which would establish a parent-managed scholarship account program available to students meeting at least one of three special education categories, and House Bill 1591, which would establish a similar account program available to all students legally residing in Indiana. HB 1591 includes provisions unrelated to this account program; the following analysis only includes the relevant provisions.
  • Item
    A Comparison of State-Funded Pre-K Programs: Lessons for Indiana
    (Center for Evaluation & Education Policy, 2017-02) Chesnut, C.; Mosier, G.; Sugimoto, T.; Ruddy, A. M.
    Prepared for the Indiana State Board of Education, CEEP researchers compared data on 10 states that have implemented pilot pre-K programs and then expanded these programs beyond the pilot phase. CEEP's report and data visualization found that states with the highest total amounts of state funding allocated to pre-K serve the most students. "Several states use lottery funding in addition to, or in lieu of, general revenue funds to support their pre-K programs. In most of the states, levels of funding and student enrollments have increased over time," said Colleen Chesnut, CEEP research associate and lead author on the study. “Based on our findings, we recommend that Indiana policymakers increase the level of funding for state-funded pre-K programs, and that funding options, in addition to the general revenue fund, be considered.” The study's authors further recommend not only an expansion of Indiana’s state-funded pre-K programs, but also continued attention to the quality of these programs.
  • Item
    Equity Analyses of the 2015-2017 Indiana School Funding Formula
    (Center for Evaluation & Education Policy, 2016-12) Sugimoto, T.
    A new report from CEEP will help guide Indiana legislators as they develop a two-year budget that includes funding for public schools. Lead authored by Thomas Sugimoto, CEEP's report reviews changes to Indiana school finances and enrollment in the study and also examines funding equity between school corporations. The report, prepared for the Indiana State Board of Education, noted four key findings: Enrollment is projected to decline modestly in the state's public schools in 2017, compared to 2009, with larger declines in traditional public schools than in charter schools. The state's public school corporations experienced substantial changes in state funding between 2009 and 2017. State funding for school operations is projected to increase through July 2017; however, the increases, when adjusted for inflation, are not sufficient to fully restore funding to pre-2009 levels. The current funding-formula policy improved equity throughout the study period. Projections indicate that high levels of equity will be achieved in 2017. Equity in funding looks at whether school corporations serving similar types of students (in terms of student income) receive similar funding. Sugimoto says he was surprised by how much changes in state enrollment and funding varied across the state, and these average changes don’t provide a complete picture of the experiences for many school corporations.
  • Item
    Performance on International Assessments and Learning Time: A Snapshot of How the U.S. Compares to Other Education Systems on an International Scale
    (Center for Evaluation & Education Policy, 2016-11) Saxena, P.; Sell, L.
    Drawing from two international measures, Trends in International Mathematics and Science Studies (TIMSS) and Program for International Student Assessment (PISA), a new CEEP policy brief provides a snapshot comparison of the United States to other education systems. Specifically, this brief addresses how the U.S. compares to other countries in overall performance on international assessments and highlights the discrepancies between the U.S. and other education systems in the use of learning time. Key findings indicate that: (1) education systems that performed well on TIMSS 2011 assessments were also likely to perform well on the PISA 2012 math and science assessments, and (2) the link between learning time and academic performance remains unclear at the education system-level. In order to better address the relationship between learning time and academic performance, the authors recommend further research at the state, school, and student levels.
  • Item
    Understanding How School Vouchers Are Funded: Summary of Funding for Wisconsin’s Three Parental Choice Programs
    (Center for Evaluation & Education Policy, 2016-10) Stewart, M. S.; Moon, J. S.
    This profile provides detailed local context for Wisconsin as part of Follow the Money: A Detailed Analysis of the Funding Mechanisms of Voucher Programs in Six Cases (Arizona, the District of Columbia, Indiana, Louisiana, Ohio, and Wisconsin). This three-part report includes a cross-case review, data visualizations of enrollment and funding patterns, and detailed profiles of each individual case, including the following profile.
  • Item
    Understanding How School Vouchers Are Funded: Summary of Funding for the Louisiana Scholarship Program
    (Center for Evaluation & Education Policy, 2016-10) Stewart, M. S.; Moon, J. S.
    This profile provides detailed local context for Louisiana as part of Follow the Money: A Detailed Analysis of the Funding Mechanisms of Voucher Programs in Six Cases (Arizona, the District of Columbia, Indiana, Louisiana, Ohio, and Wisconsin). This three-part report includes a cross-case review, data visualizations of enrollment and funding patterns, and detailed profiles of each individual case, including the following profile.
  • Item
    Understanding How School Vouchers Are Funded: Summary of Funding for the Indiana Choice Scholarship Program
    (Center for Evaluation & Education Policy, 2016-10) Moon, J. S.; Stewart, M. S.
    This profile provides detailed local context for Indiana as part of Follow the Money: A Detailed Analysis of the Funding Mechanisms of Voucher Programs in Six Cases (Arizona, the District of Columbia, Indiana, Louisiana, Ohio, and Wisconsin). This three-part report includes a cross-case review, data visualizations of enrollment and funding patterns, and detailed profiles of each individual case, including the following profile.
  • Item
    Understanding How School Vouchers Are Funded: Summary of Funding for the District of Columbia’s Opportunity Scholarship Program
    (Center for Evaluation & Education Policy, 2016-10) Moon, J. S.; Stewart, M. S.
    This profile provides detailed local context for the District of Columbia as part of Follow the Money: A Detailed Analysis of the Funding Mechanisms of Voucher Programs in Six Cases (Arizona, the District of Columbia, Indiana, Louisiana, Ohio, and Wisconsin). This three-part report includes a cross-case review, data visualizations of enrollment and funding patterns, and detailed profiles of each individual case, including the following profile.
  • Item
    Understanding How School Vouchers Are Funded: Summary of Funding for Ohio’s Cleveland Scholarship and EdChoice Programs
    (Center for Evaluation & Education Policy, 2016-10) Stewart, M. S.; Moon, J. S.
    This profile provides detailed local context for Ohio as part of Follow the Money: A Detailed Analysis of the Funding Mechanisms of Voucher Programs in Six Cases (Arizona, the District of Columbia, Indiana, Louisiana, Ohio, and Wisconsin). This three-part report includes a cross-case review, data visualizations of enrollment and funding patterns, and detailed profiles of each individual case, including the following profile.
  • Item
    Understanding How School Vouchers Are Funded: Summary of Funding for Arizona’s Empowerment Scholarship Accounts
    (Center for Evaluation & Education Policy, 2016-10) Stewart, M. S.; Moon, J. S.
    This profile provides detailed local context for Arizona as part of Follow the Money: A Detailed Analysis of the Funding Mechanisms of Voucher Programs in Six Cases (Arizona, the District of Columbia, Indiana, Louisiana, Ohio, and Wisconsin). This three-part report includes a cross-case review, data visualizations of enrollment and funding patterns, and detailed profiles of each individual case, including the following profile.
  • Item
    Follow the Money: A Comprehensive Review of the Funding Mechanisms of Voucher Programs in Six Cases
    (Center for Evaluation & Education Policy, 2016-10) Stewart, M. S.; Moon, J. S.
    A new CEEP publication compares the funding mechanisms of voucher programs in Arizona, Indiana, Louisiana, Ohio, Wisconsin, and the District of Columbia and the interaction of these mechanisms with overarching school funding formulas. This cross-case review is part of a larger report, including detailed profiles of each individual case and data visualizations. The publication, “Follow the Money: A Comprehensive Review of the Funding Mechanisms of Voucher Programs in Six Cases,” examines the impact of policies on voucher funding, contrasts eligibility criteria, and considers the impact of these criteria on state spending and district revenues. The review is co-authored by CEEP Research Associate Molly S. Stewart and Graduate Research Assistant Jodi S. Moon. Key findings regarding the impact of voucher programs on public education finance fall into three primary categories: Savings and/or losses at the state and local levels; The impact of enrollment and student count, including categorical funding and weights based on student characteristics; and Fiscal accountability policies. These three categories in the data demonstrate how finance policies interact with each other to create fiscal impacts that are significantly more complex than the savings calculations employed by most other research on voucher finance.
  • Item
    University Faculty Perceptions of Teacher Evaluation Law in Indiana
    (Center for Evaluation & Education Policy, 2015-11) Chesnut, C.; Stewart, M. S.; Sera, A.
    According to a new CEEP issue brief, in response to 2011 revisions in state teacher evaluation law, university faculty members training future Indiana school leaders have changed what and how they teach. Communication about the curriculum changes has been inconsistent, however. Faculty remain concerned that principals won’t have the necessary time to effectively perform more detailed teacher evaluations as required by law. The issue brief, "University Faculty Perceptions of Teacher Evaluation Law in Indiana," was authored by CEEP research associates Drs. Colleen Chesnut and Molly Stewart and graduate student Anna Sera.
  • Item
    Transgender students and access to facilities
    (Center for Evaluation & Education Policy, 2015-10) Eckes, S. E.; Chesnut, C. E.
    CEEP faculty associate Suzanne Eckes and Dr. Chesnut co-authored "Transgender students and access to facilities." The paper was published in the West’s Education Law Reporter at 321 Ed. Law Rep. 1, on October 22, 2015.
  • Item
    Mapping the Growth of Statewide Voucher Programs in the United States
    (Center for Evaluation & Education Policy, 2015-03) Cierniak, K.; Stewart, M. S.; Ruddy, A. M.
    A new brief, "Mapping the Growth of Statewide Voucher Programs in the United States," comparing statewide voucher programs finds all are growing as never before in the last five years. The brief examines four statewide voucher systems for students in general education programs (open to all students): Wisconsin, Ohio, Louisiana, and Indiana. The brief is authored by Katherine Cierniak, CEEP graduate research assistant, Dr. Molly Stewart, CEEP research associate, and Dr. Anne-Maree Ruddy, director for education policy and senior research associate at CEEP.
  • Item
    The Indiana Choice Scholarship Program: Legal Challenges, Program Expansion, and Participation
    (Center for Evaluation & Education Policy, 2015-02) Cierniak, K.; Billick, R.; Ruddy, A. M.
    The newest CEEP policy brief provides an overview of the Indiana Choice Scholarship (ICS) program, and describes the Indiana Supreme Court’s Meredith v. Pence 2013 decision, which upheld the constitutionality of the law. Changes to public law and eligibility requirements that impacted the implementation of ICS are detailed. Additionally, data on the ICS program’s first three years of implementation are presented. Finally, the implications of the changes in ICS are explored. This brief is the first of two CEEP Policy Briefs examining the recent growth of statewide voucher programs in the United States.
  • Item
    National and International Assessments: How Do Indiana Students Compare?
    (Center for Evaluation & Education Policy, 2014-01) Kloosterman, P.; Ruddy, A. M.
    CEEP representatives Peter Kloosterman, Ph.D., and Anne-Maree Ruddy, Ph.D., were invited to participate in this year’s Leadership Seminar sponsored by the Indiana School Boards Association. The January 17 event in Indianapolis was attended by approximately 150 school board members from around the state. Drs. Ruddy and Kloosterman presented, “National and International Assessments: How Do Indiana Students Compare?” They began the session by pointing out that none of the national or international assessment tools most often cited by policymakers and reporters are designed to rank countries or states. Dr. Kloosterman is a Professor of Mathematics Education and the Martha Lea and Bill Armstrong Professor for Teacher Education at Indiana University. He also directs the “What Mathematics Do Students Know?” project at CEEP, a secondary analysis of mathematics data from the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP). The project is funded by the National Science Foundation. Dr. Ruddy first came to CEEP in 2006. She is a Senior Research Associate and manages several large-scale regional, national and international evaluation and research projects. Her research background and interests are in policy analysis, development and implementation.