AEFP 42nd Annual Conference Program

Concurrent sessions

Select a concurrent session

Concurrent Session I - Thursday, March 16, 2017 - 8:30am to 10:00am

1.01 - For-Profit Colleges

Room: Thurgood Marshall West, Mezzanine Level

Chair: Robert Toutkoushian, University of Georgia

Lily Fesler, Stanford University. Instruction in Virtual Classrooms: How faculty affect student performance in online college classes. Eric Bettinger, Stanford University, Lindsay Fox, Mathematica Policy Research, Susanna Loeb, Stanford University, Eric Taylor, Harvard University. (Paper panel)

Joselynn Hawkins Fountain, George Washington University. The Effects of the Gainful Employment Regulatory Uncertainty on Enrollment at For-profit Colleges. (Paper panel)

Su Jin Jez, California State University - Sacramento. Improving Oversight of For-profit Institutions by Understanding Student Choice. (Paper panel)

1.02 - Teacher Quality

Room: Thurgood Marshall North, Mezzanine Level

Chair: James Wyckoff, University of Virginia

Li Feng, Texas State University and the Brookings Institution. School District Staffing Policies and Student Achievement Gaps: Oaxaca decomposition. Mike Hansen, The Brookings Institution. (Paper panel)

Dan Goldhaber, American Institutes for Research. Has It Always Been This Way? Tracing the evolution of teacher quality gaps in U.S. public schools. Vanessa Quince, University of Washington, Roddy Theobald, American Institutes for Research. (Paper panel)

Elizabeth I. Rivera Rodas, Montclair State University. Loopholes, Teacher Quality, Housing Prices and Segregation. (Paper panel)

Jane Rochmes, Stanford University. Educators As "Equity Warriors". Emily K. Penner, University of California - Irvine, Susanna Loeb, Stanford University. (Paper panel)

1.03 - Special Education Financing

Room: Thurgood Marshall East, Mezzanine Level

Chair: Patrick Murphy, Public Policy Institute of California

Discussants: Robin Lake, Center for Reinventing Public Education, Laura Hill, Public Policy Institute of California, Steven Frank, Education Resource Strategies, Amy Owen, Tennessee Department of Education

(Policy talk)

Students with disabilities are supported by special education programs at school districts across the country. The programs are paid for by a mix of federal, state, and local funding. Federal funding was intended to cover 40 percent of spending for students with special needs when the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, or IDEA, was signed into law in 1974, though it has never come close to doing so. Since students with special needs are entitled to a free and appropriate public education under the law, state and local spending is essential to providing special education services. Special education programs are also intended to serve students in the least restrictive environment, allowing students to receive as much instruction as possible in a general education classroom setting. This panel will discuss the variation in the way states and localities pay for special education and discusses potential consequence these approaches.

The federal formula distributes dollars to states based on numbers of total enrolled students (and a 15% weight for students in poverty) rather than based on the number of special education students. This census-based funding formula is intended to avoid creating fiscal incentives to identify students as having special needs.

Many state funding formulas operate differently, and with potentially different fiscal incentives for identification and service. Some states fund districts based on numbers of enrolled students (similar to the federal formula). Others fund districts based on numbers of students with special needs. Some states add weights to their formulas, either for risk factors (for census based) or for types of disability (for special education student counts). Special education student counts can have a cap, a floor, or neither, depending on the state. Some state formulas reimburse school districts for costs of providing services to students with special needs (either partially or in full). And finally some states do something entirely different, such as providing vouchers for individual students with special education needs. In addition, states vary in whether funding for special education is treated as categorical or is integrated with general education funding.

The four panelist each have in-depth knowledge of four unique funding options, represented by California, Georgia, Tennessee, and New Orleans and can discuss ways in which the funding formulas present challenges and opportunities for efficiently serving students with special needs in the most integrated way possible.

1.04 - Gender Gaps in Access and Success

Room: Thurgood Marshall South, Mezzanine Level

Chair: Tim Sass, Georgia State University

A. Abigail Payne, University of Melbourne. High School Choices and the Gender Gap in STEM. David Card, University of California. (Paper panel)

Dave E. Marcotte, American University. Sexual Violence, Title IX and Women’s College Enrollment. Jane E. Palmer, American University. (Paper panel)

Daniel Puskin, American University. Math Identification and Gender Gaps in STEM Pursuit. (Paper panel)

Kelly Rosinger, University of Virginia. The Effect of Test-optional Admissions Policies on the College Gender Gap . Dylan Conger, George Washington University. (Paper panel)

1.05 - Macro Effects and Government Spending

Room: Harding, Mezzanine Level

Chair: Scott Imberman, Michigan State University

Andrew Foote, U.S. Census Bureau. The Education Production Response to Local Labor Market Downturns. Michel Grosz, University of California. (Paper panel)

Simona Hannon, Federal Reserve Board. Education Expenditure Multipliers. Damjan Pfajfar, Federal Reserve Board, Maarten de Ridder, Cambridge University. (Paper panel)

Rajashri Chakrabarti, Federal Reserve Bank of New York. Getting Ahead by Spending More? State and local community responses to state merit aid programs. Nicole Gorton, Federal Reserve Bank of New York, Joydeep Roy, Columbia University & IBO. (Paper panel)

Russell Weinstein, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute. Local Labor Markets and Human Capital Investments. (Paper panel)

1.06 - Language and English Learners

Room: Coolidge, Mezzanine Level

Chair: Umut Ozek, American Institutes for Research

Jennifer Timmer, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. Improving Math and Reading Outcomes for English Learners: A quasi-experimental study of language services. (Paper panel)

Angela Johnson, Stanford University. Causal Impact of Summer Credit Recovery on High School English Learner Outcomes. (Paper panel)

Jennifer L. Steele, American University. Dual-language Immersion at Scale: An analysis of program costs and mechanisms. Robert O. Slater, American Councils for International Education, Gema Zamarro, University of Arkansas, Trey Miller, RAND Corporation, Jennifer Li, RAND Corporation. (Paper panel)

1.07 - Enrolling and Serving Different Types of Students in Charter Schools

Room: Hoover, Mezzanine Level

Chair: Jane Arnold Lincove, University of Maryland - Baltimore County

Dick Carpenter, University of Colorado Colorado Springs. Does Attending a Charter School Reduce the Likelihood of Being Placed into Special Education? Evidence from Denver, Colorado. Marcus A. Winters, Boston University, Grant Clayton, University of Colorado Colorado Springs. (Paper panel)

Adam Kho, Vanderbilt University. School Choice in North Carolina: Is selective enrollment at play?. Andrew McEachin, RAND. (Paper panel)

Ron Zimmer, University of Kentucky. Comprehensive Examination of the Performance Levels of Students Served by Charter Schools . Adam Kho, Vanderbilt University. (Paper panel)

1.08 - What We Can Learn from New Data on Social-Emotional Skills and Climate

Room: Tyler, Mezzanine Level

Chair: Martin Orland, Consultant

Martin R. West, Harvard University. Measuring and Charting the Development of Student Social-emotional Learning: Evidence from the first large-scale panel survey of students . Heather J. Hough, Stanford University, Susanna Loeb, Stanford University, Robert H. Meyer, Education Analytics, Andrew Rice, Education Analytics. (Paper panel)

Ethan Scherer, Harvard University. A Teacher’s Perspective on Students’ Socio-emotional Skills: Can teacher assessments improve our understanding of student socio-emotional skills? . Martin West, Harvard University, Aaron W. Dow, Harvard University. (Paper panel)

Andrew Rice, Education Analytics. Measuring School Effects on Social-emotional Learning: Evidence from the first large-scale panel survey of students . Heather J. Hough, Policy Analysis for California Education, Susanna Loeb, Stanford University, Robert H. Meyer, Education Analytics and University of Wisconsin-Madison, Martin R. West, Harvard University. (Paper panel)

Heather Hough, Stanford University. The Softer Side: What surveys of students’ social-emotional skills and school climate reveal about educational performance. Demetra Kalogrides, Stanford University, Susanna Loeb, Stanford University. (Paper panel)

1.09 - Supply and Demand in Postsecondary Schooling

Room: Wilson A, Mezzanine Level

Chair: Kevin Stange, University of Michigan

James Dean Ward, University of Southern California. Characteristics of Closure: Understanding the contraction of the for-profit college market. (Paper panel)

Jill Johnes, University of Huddersfield. Predicting Financial Sustainability in a Competitive Higher Education Marketplace. Andrew McConnel, University of Huddersfield. (Paper panel)

Maria Marta Ferreyra, The World Bank. Increasing Higher Education Coverage: Student sorting and supply expansion in Colombia. Juan Esteban Carranza, Central Bank of Colombia. (Paper panel)

Tommaso Agasisti, Politecnico di Milano School of Management. Research, Knowledge Transfer and Innovation: The effect of Italian universities’ efficiency on the local economic growth. Cristian Barra, Politecnico di Milano School of Management, Roberto Zotti, Politecnico di Milano School of Management. (Paper panel)

1.10 - Curriculum and Student Outcomes

Room: Wilson B, Mezzanine Level

Chair: Brian Gill, Mathematica Policy Research

Kim Jansen, Michigan State University. Teacher Evaluation and Common Core Mathematical Practices Standards: Which relates to student achievement?. Nicole Jess, Michigan State University, William Sullivan, Michigan State University. (Paper panel)

Matthew Naven, University of California - Davis. School Quality in California Under Common Core Standards. Scott Carrell, University of California - Davis, Michal Kurlaender, University of California - Davis, Paco Martorell, University of California - Davis. (Paper panel)

Hovanes Gasparian, University of Southern California. Elementary Mathematics Textbook Adoptions in California. (Paper panel)

Shauna Campbell, University of Southern California. Factors Associated with the Selection of Curricular Materials at the District Level. Morgan Polikoff, University of Southern California. (Paper panel)

1.11 - Teacher Training and Observation

Room: Wilson C, Mezzanine Level

Chair: Matthew Kraft, Brown University

Michael Garet, American Institutes for Research. Focusing on Mathematical Knowledge: The impact of content-intensive teacher professional development . Jessica Heppen, American Institutes for Research, Kirk Walters, American Institutes for Research, Toni Smith, American Institutes for Research, Mengli Song, American Institutes for Research, Rachel Garrett, American Institutes for Research. (Paper panel)

Dale Ballou, Vanderbilt University. Increasing the Number of Principal-conducted Observations: Effects on teacher perception and performance. Seth B Hunter, Vanderbilt University. (Paper panel)

Ryan Eisner, American Institutes for Research. Examining the Impact of Denver Teacher Residency on Teacher Retention, Teacher Effectiveness, and Student Achievement. Eleanor Fulbeck, American Institutes for Research, Martyna Citkowicz, American Institutes for Research, Bo Zhu, American Institutes for Research, David Manzeske, American Institutes for Research. (Paper panel)

Ben Backes, American Institutes for Research. Can UTeach? Assessing the relative effectiveness of STEM teachers. Dan Goldhaber, American Institutes for Research, Whitney Cade, American Institutes for Research, Melissa Dodson, American Institutes for Research, Kate Sullivan, American Institutes for Research. (Paper panel)

1.12 - International Perspectives on Teacher Training and Compensation

Room: Madison B, Mezzanine Level

Chair: Meryle Weinstein, New York University

Prashant Loyalka, Stanford University. Unpacking Teacher Professional Development: Evidence from a randomized evaluation of China’s national teacher training program. Guirong Li, Henan University, Chengfang Liu, Peking University, Anna Popova, Stanford University, Henry Shi, Stanford University. (Paper panel)

Luis Omar Herrera, The World Bank. Premium or Penalty? Labor market returns to novice public sector teachers. Juan E. Saavedra, University of Southern California, Dario Maldonado, Universidad de los Andes, Lucrecia Santibañez, Claremont Graduate University. (Paper panel)

Yu Zhang, Institute of Education Tsinghua University. Impact of Individual Teachers on Student National College Entrance Exam (NCEE) Performance: Empirical evidence from Jinan, China. Xuehan Zhou, Institute of Education Tsinghua University, You You, Peking University. (Paper panel)