Education and Literacy;Employment and Labor;Poverty
This guide is based on lessons from the Community College Bridges to Opportunity Initiative. Funded by the Ford Foundation, Bridges was a multi-year effort designed to bring about changes in state policy that improve education and employment outcomes for educationally and economically disadvantaged adults.The guide is intended for governors, legislators, and state agency officials who are concerned about the competitiveness of their state's workforce. It will be especially useful to leaders in states with few well-educated workers to replace retiring Baby Boomers or in those with large low-skill immigrant populations. The guide is also intended for business and labor leaders. In many parts of the country, there is a strong need for skilled labor to fill "middle skill" positions, which require postsecondary training but not necessarily a bachelor's degree. Employers and labor groups in every industry want to see incumbent workers in their industries stay up-to-date with new technology and business practices. Groups that advocate on behalf of low-income people will also find the guide useful. Those who are interested in reducing barriers for underprepared adults to pursue and succeed in collegiate work through two-year college credentials and on to a bachelor's degree will find helpful tips and tools in this publication. And, finally, the guide is designed as a resource for college presidents, trustees, and other education leaders who are seeking ways to better serve their communities.
August 1970
Geographic Focus: North America / United States (Southern) / Kentucky;North America / United States (Southern) / Louisiana;North America / United States (Southwestern) / New Mexico;North America / United States (Midwestern) / Ohio;North America / United States (Western) / Colorado;North America / United States (Northwestern) / Washington
Education and Literacy;Parenting and Families
A growing number of cities now provide a range of public school options for families to choose from. Choosing a school can be one of the most stressful decisions parents make on behalf of their child. Getting access to the right public school will determine their child's future success. How are parents faring in cities where choice is widely available? This report answers this question by examining how parents' experiences with school choice vary across eight "high-choice" cities: Baltimore, Cleveland, Denver, Detroit, Indianapolis, New Orleans, Philadelphia, and Washington, D.C. Our findings suggest parents are taking advantage of the chance to choose a non-neighborhood-based public school option for their child, but there's more work to be done to ensure choice works for all families.
August 1970
Geographic Focus: North America-United States (Western)-Colorado-Denver County-Denver;North America-United States (Southern)-Maryland-Baltimore;North America-United States (Southern)-Louisiana-Orleans Parish-New Orleans;North America-United States (Southern)-District of Columbia-Washington;North America-United States (Northeastern)-Pennsylvania-Philadelphia County-Philadelphia;North America-United States (Midwestern)-Ohio-Cuyahoga County-Cleveland;North America-United States (Midwestern)-Michigan-Wayne County-Detroit;North America-United States (Midwestern)-Indiana-Marion County-Indianapolis
Education and Literacy, Parenting and Families
Families in many portfolio districts can choose from a variety of charter and district schools for their children. But to make these choices, parents often must fill out multiple application forms and navigate schools that may have different requirements, deadlines, and selection preferences such as sibling attendance or proximity to the school. Once parents complete the applications and schools make offers, some families receive multiple offers and often hold on to them until the last minute, while other families receive few or no offers, remaining on waitlists well into the fall. Not only is this process difficult for families, it favors families with the time and knowledge to navigate its inherent complexities.
In order to make applying to a choice school less complicated, some cities are building common enrollment systems that streamline enrollment across all types of schools. These cities are adopting a transparent matching process that systematically assigns students to schools based on both school and student preferences. Families are asked to rank the schools they prefer for their child (regardless of whether the school is operated by the district or is a charter school) in a single application process. Families then receive a match that takes into account their preferences and the priorities and admission standards set by the schools in the city.
Proponents of common enrollment believe that it is more equitable for families and schools and can lead to a more predictable and less tumultuous matching process overall. Common enrollment systems can also benefit cities and districts by eliminating the need to authenticate results from multiple charter lotteries, and by providing data on school demand throughout the city that might inform strategic decisions about managing the school supply. Even so, some detractors worry that centralized enrollment systems will erode the autonomy of schools and require administrative capacity that is rarely found in existing oversight agencies (typically school districts). Common enrollment also doesn't directly address the fact that most cities don't have enough high-quality seats to serve all of their students.
August 1970
Geographic Focus: North America-United States (Western)-Colorado-Denver County-Denver, North America-United States (Southern)-Louisiana-Orleans Parish-New Orleans
Profiles the goals, activities, implementation, and challenges of the twelve states that won Race to the Top federal funds to improve teacher quality and preparation program accountability; analyzes their strategies; and makes policy recommendations.
August 1970
Geographic Focus: North America-United States (Northeastern)-Delaware, North America-United States (Southern)-Florida, North America-United States (Southern)-Georgia, North America-United States (Southern)-Maryland, North America-United States (Northeastern)-Massachusetts, North America-United States (Northeastern)-New York, North America-United States (Southern)-North Carolina, North America-United States (Midwestern)-Ohio, North America-United States (Northeastern)-Rhode Island, North America-United States (Southern)-Tennessee, North America-United States (Western)-Hawaii, North America-United States (Southwestern)-New Mexico-Bernalillo County-Albuquerque, North America-United States (Southern)-Georgia-Fulton County-Atlanta, North America-United States (Southern)-Maryland-Baltimore, North America-United States (Northeastern)-Massachusetts-Suffolk County-Boston, North America-United States (Northeastern)-Connecticut-Fairfield County-Bridgeport, North America-United States (Midwestern)-Illinois-Cook County-Chicago, North America-United States (Midwestern)-Ohio-Hamilton County-Cincinnati, North America-United States (Midwestern)-Ohio-Cuyahoga County-Cleveland, North America-United States (Southwestern)-Texas-Dallas County-Dallas, North America-United States (Western)-Colorado-Denver County-Denver, North America-United States (Midwestern)-Michigan-Wayne County-Detroit, North America-United States (Southwestern)-Texas-Harris County-Houston, North America-United States (Midwestern)-Indiana-Marion County-Indianapolis, North America-United States (Southern)-Florida-Duval County-Jacksonville, North America-United States (Midwestern)-Missouri-Jackson County-Kansas City, North America-United States (Midwestern)-Nebraska-Lancaster County-Lincoln, North America-United States (Northeastern)-New York-Long Island, North America-United States (Western)-California-Los Angeles County-Los Angeles, North America-United States (Southern)-Kentucky-Louisville Jefferson County Metro Government-Louisville, North America-United States (Southern)-Georgia-Bibb County-Macon, North America-United States (Southern)-Tennessee-Shelby County-Memphis, North America-United States (Midwestern)-Minnesota-Hennepin County-Minneapolis, North America-United States (Southern)-Tennessee-Davidson County-Nashville, North America-United States (Southern)-Louisiana-Orleans Parish-New Orleans, North America-United States (Northeastern)-New York-New York County-New York City, North America-United States (Western)-Nebraska-Douglas County-Omaha, North America-United States (Western)-California-Santa Clara County-Palo Alto, North America-United States (Western)-California-Los Angeles County-Pasadena, North America-United States (Northeastern)-Pennsylvania-Philadelphia County-Philadelphia, North America-United States (Northeastern)-Pennsylvania-Allegheny County-Pittsburgh, North America-United States (Northwestern)-Oregon-Multnomah County-Portland, North America-United States (Northeastern)-Rhode Island-Providence County-Providence, North America-United States (Western)-California-Sacramento County-Sacramento, North America-United States (Western)-California-San Diego County-San Diego, North America-United States (Western)-California-San Francisco County-San Francisco, North America-United States (Western)-California-Santa Clara County-San Jose, North America-United States (Midwestern)-Minnesota-Ramsey County-St. Paul, North America-United States (Northeastern)-New Jersey-Mercer County-Trenton, North America-United States (Southwestern)-Arizona-Pima County-Tucson, North America-United States (Western)-Washington-King County-Seattle, North America-United States (Southern)-District of Columbia-Washington
Education and Literacy, Government Reform
Outlines early findings about the the revamped School Improvement Grant program's impact on states and three approaches to evaluating district and school grant applications, including the use of external reviewers and cutoff scores. Makes recommendations.
August 1970
Geographic Focus: North America-United States (Midwestern)-Illinois, North America-United States (Southern)-Louisiana, North America-United States (Northeastern)-Vermont
Is it time for Ohio to take bolder steps toward turning around its most troubled schools and districts? If so, what might the alternatives look like? Options for rebooting these troubled schools have come in the form of mayoral control, state takeovers, market competition through charter schools and other choice programs, as well as millions of federal dollars spent on "school turnaround", yet it seems that it might be time to try something new in Ohio. In looking for alternatives to simply doing more of the same, Ohio policymakers are looking to the experiences of other states. Among the boldest and most interesting of these is Louisiana's Recovery School District (RSD), which is accomplishing both significant gains in student achievement and consequential impacts on district-level standards. In this recent report by the Thomas B. Fordham Institute author Nelson Smith asks if and how the RSD concept might be a model for Ohio.
August 1970
Geographic Focus: North America-United States (Midwestern)-Ohio, North America-United States (Southern)-Louisiana
Education and Literacy;Poverty;Welfare and Public Assistance
This report describes the impacts of a performance-based scholarship program with a counseling component on academic success and persistence among low-income parents. Students who participated in the program, which was operated at two New Orleans-area colleges as part of MDRC's multisite Opening Doors demonstration, were more likely to stay in school, get higher grades, and earn more credits.
August 1970
Geographic Focus: North America / United States (Southern) / Louisiana;North America / United States (Gulf Coast Region);North America / United States (Southern) / Louisiana / Orleans Parish / New Orleans
Education and Literacy;Poverty;Welfare and Public Assistance
This report describes the impacts of a performance-based scholarship program with a counseling component on academic success and persistence among low-income parents. Students who participated in the program, which was operated at two New Orleans-area colleges as part of MDRC's multisite Opening Doors demonstration, were more likely to stay in school, get higher grades, and earn more credits.
August 1970
Geographic Focus: North America / United States (Southern) / Louisiana;North America / United States (Gulf Coast Region);North America / United States (Southern) / Louisiana / Orleans Parish / New Orleans
