School Finance Toolkit: How to Create a Community Guide to Your School District's Budget

If your community-based organization would like to launch a school finance initiative in your community, you can use this toolkit as a starting point. The toolkit walks through the major steps organizations have gone through in their own initiatives, offering advice and examples of tools you can adapt for your own use. The toolkit explores the major challenges organizations have faced in this work, and how they have addressed those challenges. And the toolkit points you toward other resources that can help you find and analyze information about school finance. This toolkit is not itself a primer on school finance. Except in passing, it does not explain how school funding works in school districts. You will have to obtain this kind of background information from other resources (some listed in this toolkit) and as you go along.The toolkit contains five major sections:Get Started. This section helps you set a mission for your school finance initiative, organize your people to get the job done, and find the resources to get the job done.Engage the Public. This section discusses strategies for engaging the public up-front, finding out what citizens want to know about school finance -- and why.Crunch the Numbers. This section addresses the nitty-gritty work of creating a community guide to the school budget, offering helpful tips on finding, analyzing, and presenting information effectively.Put the Numbers to Work. This section talks about ways you can use the information you have gathered as a catalyst for community-wide discussions of school finance and its impact on school quality.Resources. This section contains a variety of tools used by community-based organizations in their school finance initiatives, everything from town meeting agendas to focus group questions to budget analysis spreadsheets. This section also contains references to many sources of data about school finance, many of them just a mouse-click or toll-free call away

Achieving Foundation Accountability and Transparency: Lessons From the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation’s \u3ci\u3eScorecard\u3c/i\u3e

· The purpose of this article is to help foundations in their accountability and transparency efforts by sharing lessons from one foundation’s journey to develop a scorecard. · A commitment to funding and sharing the results from rigorous evaluations set the tone for Robert Wood Johnson Foundation (RWJF) accountability. · The Scorecard is a powerful tool for RWJF to set goals, track organizational effectiveness, and motivate responses to shortcomings. · Foundations can tailor their scorecard to include what best serves their needs. · With its Scorecard, RWJF found that comparative and quantitative measures are the most powerful forces to motivate change. · Setting targets motivates staff to focus their efforts on certain areas and make improvements

The Best Answers? Think Twice: Online Detection of Commercial Campaigns in the CQA Forums

In an emerging trend, more and more Internet users search for information from Community Question and Answer (CQA) websites, as interactive communication in such websites provides users with a rare feeling of trust. More often than not, end users look for instant help when they browse the CQA websites for the best answers. Hence, it is imperative that they should be warned of any potential commercial campaigns hidden behind the answers. However, existing research focuses more on the quality of answers and does not meet the above need. In this paper, we develop a system that automatically analyzes the hidden patterns of commercial spam and raises alarms instantaneously to end users whenever a potential commercial campaign is detected. Our detection method integrates semantic analysis and posters' track records and utilizes the special features of CQA websites largely different from those in other types of forums such as microblogs or news reports. Our system is adaptive and accommodates new evidence uncovered by the detection algorithms over time. Validated with real-world trace data from a popular Chinese CQA website over a period of three months, our system shows great potential towards adaptive online detection of CQA spams.Comment: 9 pages, 10 figure

Theorizing and Generalizing About Risk Assessment and Regulation Through Comparative Nested Analysis of Representative Cases

This article provides a framework and offers strategies for theorizing and generalizing about risk assessment and regulation developed in the context of an on-going comparative study of regulatory behavior. Construction of a universe of nearly 3,000 risks and study of a random sample of 100 of these risks allowed us to estimate relative U.S. and European regulatory precaution over a thirty-five-year period. Comparative nested analysis of cases selected from this universe of ecological, health, safety, and other risks or its eighteen categories or ninety-two subcategories of risk sources or causes will allow theory-testing and -building and many further descriptive and causal comparative generalizations

Answer Reliability on Q&A Sites

Similar to other Web 2.0 platforms, user-created content on question answering (Q&A) sites raises concerns about information quality. However, it is possible that some of these sites provide accurate information while others do not. This paper evaluates and compares answer reliability on four Q&A sites. Content analysis of 1,522 transactions from Yahoo! Answers, Wiki Answers, Askville, and the Wikipedia Reference Desk, reveals significant differences in answer quality among these sites. The most popular Q&A site (that attracts the largest numbers of users, questions, and answers) provides the least accurate, complete, and verifiable information

Investigating the Quality Aspects of Crowd-Sourced Developer Forum: A Case Study of Stack Overflow

Technical question and answer (Q&A) websites have changed how developers seek information on the web and become more popular due to the shortcomings in official documentation and alternative knowledge sharing resources. Stack Overflow (SO) is one of the largest and most popular online Q&A websites for developers where they can share knowledge by answering questions and learn new skills by asking questions. Unfortunately, a large number of questions (up to 29%) are not answered at all, which might hurt the quality or purpose of this community-oriented knowledge base. In this thesis, we first attempt to detect the potentially unanswered questions during their submission using machine learning models. We compare unanswered and answered questions quantitatively and qualitatively. The quantitative analysis suggests that topics discussed in the question, the experience of the question submitter, and readability of question texts could often determine whether a question would be answered or not. Our qualitative study also reveals why the questions remain unanswered that could guide novice users to improve their questions. During analyzing the questions of SO, we see that many of them remain unanswered and unresolved because they contain such code segments that could potentially have programming issues (e.g., error, unexpected behavior); unfortunately, the issues could always not be reproduced by other users. This irreproducibility of issues might prevent questions of SO from getting answers or appropriate answers. In our second study, we thus conduct an exploratory study on the reproducibility of the issues discussed in questions and the correlation between issue reproducibility status (of questions) and corresponding answer meta-data such as the presence of an accepted answer. According to our analysis, a question with reproducible issues has at least three times higher chance of receiving an accepted answer than the question with irreproducible issues. However, users can improve the quality of questions and answers by editing. Unfortunately, such edits may be rejected (i.e., rollback) due to undesired modifications and ambiguities. We thus offer a comprehensive overview of reasons and ambiguities in the SO rollback edits. We identify 14 reasons for rollback edits and eight ambiguities that are often present in those edits. We also develop algorithms to detect ambiguities automatically. During the above studies, we find that about half of the questions that received working solutions have negative scores. About 18\% of the accepted answers also do not score the maximum votes. Furthermore, many users are complaining against the downvotes that are cast to their questions and answers. All these findings cast serious doubts on the reliability of the evaluation mechanism employed at SO. We thus concentrate on the assessment mechanism of SO to ensure a non-biased, reliable quality assessment mechanism of SO. This study compares the subjective assessment of questions with their objective assessment using 2.5 million questions and ten text analysis metrics. We also develop machine learning models to classify the promoted and discouraged questions and predict them during their submission time. We believe that the findings from our studies and proposed techniques have the potential to (1) help the users to ask better questions with appropriate code examples, and (2) improve the editing and assessment mechanism of SO to promote better content quality

Collaborative Epistemic Discourse in Classroom Information Seeking Tasks

We discuss the relationship between information seeking, and epistemic beliefs – beliefs about the source, structure, complexity, and stability of knowledge – in the context of collaborative information seeking discourses. We further suggest that both information seeking, and epistemic cognition research agendas have suffered from a lack of attention to how information seeking as a collaborative activity is mediated by talk between partners – an area we seek to address in this paper. A small-scale observational study using sociocultural discourse analysis was conducted with eight eleven year old pupils who carried out search engine tasks in small groups. Qualitative and quantitative analysis were performed on their discussions using sociocultural discourse analytic techniques. Extracts of the dialogue are reported, informed by concordance analysis and quantitative coding of dialogue duration. We find that 1) discourse which could be characterised as ‘epistemic’ is identifiable in student talk, 2) that it is possible to identify talk which is more or less productive, and 3) that epistemic talk is associated with positive learning outcomes

Functional Skills Support Programme: Developing functional skills in modern foreign languages

This booklet is part of "... a series of 11 booklets which helps schools to implement functional skills across the curriculum. The booklets illustrate how functional skills can be applied and developed in different subjects and contexts, supporting achievement at Key Stage 3 and Key Stage 4. Each booklet contains an introduction to functional skills for subject teachers, three practical planning examples with links to related websites and resources, a process for planning and a list of additional resources to support the teaching and learning of functional skills." - The National Strategies website

Proceedings of QG2010: The Third Workshop on Question Generation

These are the peer-reviewed proceedings of "QG2010, The Third Workshop on Question Generation". The workshop included a special track for "QGSTEC2010: The First Question Generation Shared Task and Evaluation Challenge". QG2010 was held as part of The Tenth International Conference on Intelligent Tutoring Systems (ITS2010)