Explore the vast range of titles available.

Research has focused predominantly on how teachers affect students' achievement on standardized tests despite evidence that a broad range of attitudes and behaviors are equally important to their long-term success. We find that upper-elementary teachers have large effects on self-reported measures of students 'self-efficacy in math, and happiness and behavior in class. Students' attitudes and behaviors are predicted by teaching practices most proximal to these measures, including teachers' emotional support and classroom organization. However, teachers who are effective at improving test scores often are not equally effective at improving students'attitudes and behaviors. These findings lend empirical evidence to well-established theory on the multidimensional nature of teaching and the need to identify strategies for improving the full range of teachers 'skills.

We estimate male-female test score gaps in math and English language arts (ELA) for nearly 10,000 U.S. school districts using state accountability data from third- through eighth-grade students in the 2008-2009 through 2015-2016 school years. We find that the average U.S. school district has no gender achievement gap in math, but there is a gap of roughly 0.23 standard deviations in ELA that favors girls. Both math and ELA gaps vary among school districts; some districts have more male-favoring gaps and some more female-favoring gaps. Math gaps tend to favor males more in socioeconomically advantaged school districts and in districts with larger gender disparities in adult income, education, and occupations; however, we do not find strong associations in ELA.

This study explores digital and paper reading processes and outcomes for 371 fifth to eighth graders completing a reading task similar to standardized testing. Results showed students highlighted and annotated more when reading the paper versus digital text. Also, reading on paper versus digitally was slightly supportive of reading comprehension for the longer section of text. For behaviors, digital highlighting and looking back at the paper text were supportive of reading comprehension, whereas paper highlighting was negatively related, likely because paper highlighting tended to occur often outside of important areas of the text. Paper and digital annotating, online dictionary use, and digital look-back did not link to comprehension, when controlling for other covariates. Links to theory, research, and practice are discussed.

There is a general consensus that writing is a challenging task for students with learning disabilities (LD). To identify more precisely the extent and depth of the challenges that these students experience with writing, the authors conducted a meta-analysis comparing the writing performance of students with LD to their typically achieving peers. From 53 studies that yielded 138 effect sizes, the authors calculated average weighted effect sizes, showing that students with LD obtained lower scores than their peers on the following writing outcomes: writing quality (–1.06); organization (–1.04); vocabulary (–0.89); sentence fluency (–0.81); conventions of spelling, grammar, and handwriting (–1.14); genre elements (–0.82); output (–0.87); and motivation (–0.42). Implications for research and practice are provided based on these findings.

Infrequent national testing in history and civics, limited state results hamper progress Chester Finn, president emeritus of the Thomas B. Fordham Institute and a frequent Education Next contributor, likes to recount a story firom his time working as a senior official at the U.S. Department of Education under education secretary William Bennett. The approach \"foregrounds the major Suprème Court decisions that have shaped the everyday lives of students across the nation\"-decisions concerning student speech, corporal punishment, religious expression, and more. lts adoption, he argues, would frame students as \"active participants in shaping our constitutional order\" while also providing a jumping-off point to explore \"more-abstract concepts that undergird civic knowledge.\" Since Secretary Bennett opined on Chicago's national standing, our ability to compare student achievement in math and reading across states and school districts has been transformed.

The No Child Left Behind (NCLB) Act compelled states to design school accountability systems based on annual student assessments. The effect of this federal legislation on the distribution of student achievement is a highly controversial but centrally important question. This study presents evidence on whether NCLB has influenced student achievement based on an analysis of state-level panel data on student test scores from the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP). The impact of NCLB is identified using a comparative interrupted time series analysis that relies on comparisons of the test-score changes across states that already had school accountability policies in place prior to NCLB and those that did not. Our results indicate that NCLB generated statistically significant increases in the average math performance of fourth graders (effect size = 0.23 by 2007) as well as improvements at the lower and top percentiles. There is also evidence of improvements in eighth-grade math achievement, particularly among traditionally low-achieving groups and at the lower percentiles. However, we find no evidence that NCLB increased fourth-grade reading achievement.

Children learning English as an additional language (EAL) often experience lower academic attainment than monolingual peers. In this study, teachers provided ratings of English language proficiency and social, emotional, and behavioral functioning for 782 children with EAL and 6,485 monolingual children in reception year (ages 4-5). Academic attainment was assessed in reception and Year 2 (ages 6-7). Relative to monolingual peers with comparable English language proficiency, children with EAL displayed fewer social, emotional, and behavioral difficulties in reception, were equally likely to meet curriculum targets in reception, and were more likely to meet targets in Year 2. Academic attainment and social, emotional, and behavioral functioning in children with EAL are associated with English language proficiency at school entry.

Using National Assessment of Educational Progress data from 2003 to 2015, this brief describes changes in the reading and mathematics performance of multilingual students—defined as students who report a primary home language or languages other than English. Although all students' scores improved, multilingual students' scores improved two to three times more than monolingual students' scores in both subjects in Grades 4 and 8. There was little evidence that these trends were explained by cohort changes in racial/ethnic, socioeconomic, or regional composition. These promising trends are obscured when researchers and policymakers focus only on scores for students currently classified as English learners.

Linking score scales across different tests is considered speculative and fraught, even at the aggregate level. We introduce and illustrate validation methods for aggregate linkages, using the challenge of linking U.S. school district average test scores across states as a motivating example. We show that aggregate linkages can be validated both directly and indirectly under certain conditions such as when the scores for at least some target units (districts) are available on a common test (e.g., the National Assessment of Educational Progress). We introduce precision-adjusted random effects models to estimate linking error, for populations and for subpopulations, for averages and for progress over time. These models allow us to distinguish linking error from sampling variability and illustrate how linking error plays a larger role in aggregates with smaller sample sizes. Assuming that target districts generalize to the full population of districts, we can show that standard errors for district means are generally less than .2 standard deviation units, leading to reliabilities above .7 for roughly 90 % of districts. We also show how sources of imprecision and linking error contribute to both within- and between-state district comparisons within versus between states. This approach is applicable whenever the essential counterfactual question—\"what would means/variance/progress for the aggregate units be, had students taken the other test?\"—can be answered directly for at least some of the units.

Federal legislation and policy increasingly seek to address minority overrepresentation in special education due to concerns that U.S. schools are misidentifying children as disabled based on their race or ethnicity. Yet whether and to what extent this is occurring is currently in dispute. We estimated racial disparities in disability identification using very large (e.g., Ns = 183,570, 165,540, and 48,560) student-level, nationally representative data sets and multivariate logistic regression including school fixed effects models along with tabulations of percentage with a disability among racial or ethnic groups across academic achievement deciles. Among children who were otherwise similar in their academic achievement, poverty exposure, gender, and English language learner status, racial or ethnic minority children were consistently less likely than White children to be identified as having disabilities. Minority children's disability underidentification was evident (a) in elementary, middle, and high school; (b) across racially diverse groups and specific disability conditions; and (c) throughout the achievement distribution. Contrary to federal regulatory and policy efforts, minority children have been less likely than otherwise similarly achieving White children to receive special education services in the United States since at least 2003.