Many residents of New York City speak more than one language; a number of them speak and understand non-English languages more fluently than English. This dataset, derived from the Census Bureau's American Community Survey (ACS), includes information on over 1.7 million limited English proficient (LEP) residents and a subset of that population called limited English proficient citizens of voting age (CVALEP) at the Community District level. There are 59 community districts throughout NYC, with each district being represented by a Community Board.

New York City Department of Education 2015 - 2016 Demographic Data - Pre -Kindergarten. Data on students with disabilities, English language learners and student poverty status are as of February 2nd 2016.

"Enrollment counts are based on the October 31 Audited Register for the 2017-18 to 2019-20 school years. To account for the delay in the start of the school year, enrollment counts are based on the November 13 Audited Register for 2020-21 and the November 12 Audited Register for 2021-22. * Please note that October 31 (and November 12-13) enrollment is not audited for charter schools or Pre-K Early Education Centers (NYCEECs). Charter schools are required to submit enrollment as of BEDS Day, the first Wednesday in October, to the New York State Department of Education." Enrollment counts in the Demographic Snapshot will likely exceed operational enrollment counts due to the fact that long-term absence (LTA) students are excluded for funding purposes. Data on students with disabilities, English Language Learners, students' povery status, and students' Economic Need Value are as of the June 30 for each school year except in 2021-22. Data on SWDs, ELLs, Poverty, and ENI in the 2021-22 school year are as of March 7, 2022. 3-K and Pre-K enrollment totals include students in both full-day and half-day programs. Four-year-old students enrolled in Family Childcare Centers are categorized as 3K students for the purposes of this report. All schools listed are as of the 2021-22 school year. Schools closed before 2021-22 are not included in the school level tab but are included in the data for citywide, borough, and district. Programs and Pre-K NYC Early Education Centers (NYCEECs) are not included on the school-level tab. Due to missing demographic information in rare cases at the time of the enrollment snapshot, demographic categories do not always add up to citywide totals. Students with disabilities are defined as any child receiving an Individualized Education Program (IEP) as of the end of the school year (or March 7 for 2021-22). NYC DOE "Poverty" counts are based on the number of students with families who have qualified for free or reduced price lunch, or are eligible for Human Resources Administration (HRA) benefits. In previous years, the poverty indicator also included students enrolled in a Universal Meal School (USM), where all students automatically qualified, with the exception of middle schools, D75 schools and Pre-K centers. In 2017-18, all students in NYC schools became eligible for free lunch. In order to better reflect free and reduced price lunch status, the poverty indicator does not include student USM status, and retroactively applies this rule to previous years. "The school’s Economic Need Index is the average of its students’ Economic Need Values. The Economic Need Index (ENI) estimates the percentage of students facing economic hardship. The 2014-15 school year is the first year we provide ENI estimates. The metric is calculated as follows: * The student’s Economic Need Value is 1.0 if: o The student is eligible for public assistance from the NYC Human Resources Administration (HRA); o The student lived in temporary housing in the past four years; or o The student is in high school, has a home language other than English, and entered the NYC DOE for the first time within the last four years. * Otherwise, the student’s Economic Need Value is based on the percentage of families (with school-age children) in the student’s census tract whose income is below the poverty level, as estimated by the American Community Survey 5-Year estimate (2020 ACS estimates were used in calculations for 2021-22 ENI). The student’s Economic Need Value equals this percentage divided by 100. Due to differences in the timing of when student demographic, address and census data were pulled, ENI values may vary, slightly, from the ENI values reported in the School Quality Reports. In previous years, student census tract data was based on students’ addresses at the time of ENI calculation. Beginning in 2018-19, census tract data is based on students’ addresses as of the Audited Register date of the g

Enrollment counts are based on the October 31 Audited Register for 2019 for Pre-K data which includes students in 3-K, K-8 and 9-12 grades. 2019-20 is the first year this report includes side-by-side comparisons of the racial and ethnic demographics of schools and special programs with the racial and ethnic demographics of all students in their respective attendance zones and districts. As such, the 2019-20 report does not include information on whether schools and special programs are becoming more or less similar to their zones and districts. English Language Arts and Math state assessment results for students in grades 3 through 8 are not available for inclusion in this report, as the spring 2020 exams did not take place.

Report on Demographic Data in New York City Public Schools, 2020-21Enrollment counts are based on the November 13 Audited Register for 2020. Categories with total enrollment values of zero were omitted. Pre-K data includes students in 3-K. Data on students with disabilities, English language learners, and student poverty status are as of March 19, 2021. Due to missing demographic information in rare cases and suppression rules, demographic categories do not always add up to total enrollment and/or citywide totals. NYC DOE "Eligible for free or reduced-price lunch” counts are based on the number of students with families who have qualified for free or reduced-price lunch or are eligible for Human Resources Administration (HRA) benefits. English Language Arts and Math state assessment results for students in grade 9 are not available for inclusion in this report, as the spring 2020 exams did not take place. Spring 2021 ELA and Math test results are not included in this report for K-8 students in 2020-21. Due to the COVID-19 pandemic’s complete transformation of New York City’s school system during the 2020-21 school year, and in accordance with New York State guidance, the 2021 ELA and Math assessments were optional for students to take. As a result, 21.6% of students in grades 3-8 took the English assessment in 2021 and 20.5% of students in grades 3-8 took the Math assessment. These participation rates are not representative of New York City students and schools and are not comparable to prior years, so results are not included in this report. Dual Language enrollment includes English Language Learners and non-English Language Learners. Dual Language data are based on data from STARS; as a result, school participation and student enrollment in Dual Language programs may differ from the data in this report. STARS course scheduling and grade management software applications provide a dynamic internal data system for school use; while standard course codes exist, data are not always consistent from school to school. This report does not include enrollment at District 75 & 79 programs. Students enrolled at Young Adult Borough Centers are represented in the 9-12 District data but not the 9-12 School data. “Prior Year” data included in Comparison tabs refers to data from 2019-20. “Year-to-Year Change” data included in Comparison tabs indicates whether the demographics of a school or special program have grown more or less similar to its district or attendance zone (or school, for special programs) since 2019-20. Year-to-year changes must have been at least 1 percentage point to qualify as “More Similar” or “Less Similar”; changes less than 1 percentage point are categorized as “No Change”. The admissions method tab contains information on the admissions methods used for elementary, middle, and high school programs during the Fall 2020 admissions process. Fall 2020 selection criteria are included for all programs with academic screens, including middle and high school programs. Selection criteria data is based on school-reported information. Fall 2020 Diversity in Admissions priorities is included for applicable middle and high school programs. Note that the data on each school’s demographics and performance includes all students of the given subgroup who were enrolled in the school on November 13, 2020. Some of these students may not have been admitted under the admissions method(s) shown, as some students may have enrolled in the school outside the centralized admissions process (via waitlist, over-the-counter, or transfer), and schools may have changed admissions methods over the past few years. Admissions methods are only reported for grades K-12. "3K and Pre-Kindergarten data are reported at the site level. See below for definitions of site types included in this report. Additionally, please note that this report excludes all students at District 75 sites, reflecting slightly lower enrollment than our total of 60,265 students

Summary File 3 contains sample data, which is the information compiled from the questions asked of a sample of all people and housing units in the United States. Population items include basic population totals as well as counts for the following characteristics: urban and rural, households and families, marital status, grandparents as caregivers, language and ability to speak English, ancestry, place of birth, citizenship status, year of entry, migration, place of work, journey to work (commuting), school enrollment and educational attainment, veteran status, disability, employment status, industry, occupation, class of worker, income, and poverty status. Housing items include basic housing totals and counts for urban and rural, number of rooms, number of bedrooms, year moved into unit, household size and occupants per room, units in structure, year structure built, heating fuel, telephone service, plumbing and kitchen facilities, vehicles available, value of home, and monthly rent and shelter costs. The Summary File 3 population tables are identified with a "P" prefix and the housing tables are identified with an "H," followed by a sequential number. The "P" and "H" tables are shown for the block group and higher level geography, while the "PCT" and "HCT" tables are shown for the census tract and higher level geography. There are 16 "P" tables, 15 "PCT" tables, and 20 "HCT" tables that bear an alphabetic suffix on the table number, indicating that they are repeated for nine major race and Hispanic or Latino groups. There are 484 population tables and 329 housing tables for a total of 813 unique tables.

This file contains demographic, social, economic, and housing information from the "100-percent" and unweighted sample counts from the 1980 census for locally defined neighborhoods. The Neighborhood Publication Area (NPA) is the total area within which neighborhoods were defined by each participant in the Neighborhood Statistics Program (NSP), which was developed by the Census Bureau. Population items include age, race, sex, marital status, Spanish origin, employment status, and language spoken at home. Housing items include occupancy/vacancy status, tenure, contract rent, value, condominium status, number of rooms, and plumbing facilities.

People for whom English is a second language, such as the deaf population, often have unequal access to health information and low health literacy. In the context of a wider study on risk of tick-borne illness in deaf communities, we explored barriers, opportunities, and nuances to accessible health information and communication among deaf people. Semi-structured qualitative individual and group interviews were conducted with 40 deaf people in upstate New York, to explore factors associated with health literacy and health information accessibility. Interviews were conducted in American Sign Language (ASL) by a deaf researcher fluent in ASL. Data analysis included the translation of ASL signs into English words, systematic coding, and generation of themes. A total of 21 interview events (mean time per interview = 41 minutes) were conducted. Two main themes and multiple sub-themes emerged from the data: 1) Layers of obstacles faced by deaf people confirms (or reinforces) exclusion; and 2) preventive information is unavailable or inaccessible to deaf people. Sub- themes identified in the results were perceptions of the deaf community and deaf culture, complex layers of obstacles faced by deaf individuals, the digital divide, the culture of communication, awareness of tick and tick-borne disease (TBD) diseases, importance of using certified deaf interpreters (CDI), health information dissemination strategies and collaborations with the education system, and physical/virtual community engagement. The data suggested several challenges to health literacy in the deaf population, including healthcare and education inequalities and negative perceptions of deaf people by both deaf and hearing people. Improving health literacy in the deaf population requires more interpreters who themselves are deaf (“certified deaf interpreters”), provision of health information in ASL, and a greater engagement with the deaf population by education and healthcare systems.

In 2023, California had the highest Hispanic population in the United States, with over 15.76 million people claiming Hispanic heritage. Texas, Florida, New York, and Illinois rounded out the top five states for Hispanic residents in that year. History of Hispanic people Hispanic people are those whose heritage stems from a former Spanish colony. The Spanish Empire colonized most of Central and Latin America in the 15th century, which began when Christopher Columbus arrived in the Americas in 1492. The Spanish Empire expanded its territory throughout Central America and South America, but the colonization of the United States did not include the Northeastern part of the United States. Despite the number of Hispanic people living in the United States having increased, the median income of Hispanic households has fluctuated slightly since 1990. Hispanic population in the United States Hispanic people are the second-largest ethnic group in the United States, making Spanish the second most common language spoken in the country. In 2021, about one-fifth of Hispanic households in the United States made between 50,000 to 74,999 U.S. dollars. The unemployment rate of Hispanic Americans has fluctuated significantly since 1990, but has been on the decline since 2010, with the exception of 2020 and 2021, due to the impact of the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic.

Summary File 3 contains sample data, which is the information compiled from the questions asked of a sample of all people and housing units in the United States. Population items include basic population totals as well as counts for the following characteristics: urban and rural, households and families, marital status, grandparents as caregivers, language and ability to speak English, ancestry, place of birth, citizenship status, year of entry, migration, place of work, journey to work (commuting), school enrollment and educational attainment, veteran status, disability, employment status, industry, occupation, class of worker, income, and poverty status. Housing items include basic housing totals and counts for urban and rural, number of rooms, number of bedrooms, year moved into unit, household size and occupants per room, units in structure, year structure built, heating fuel, telephone service, plumbing and kitchen facilities, vehicles available, value of home, and monthly rent and shelter costs. The Summary File 3 population tables are identified with a "P" prefix and the housing tables are identified with an "H," followed by a sequential number. The "P" and "H" tables are shown for the block group and higher level geography, while the "PCT" and "HCT" tables are shown for the census tract and higher level geography. There are 16 "P" tables, 15 "PCT" tables, and 20 "HCT" tables that bear an alphabetic suffix on the table number, indicating that they are repeated for nine major race and Hispanic or Latino groups. There are 484 population tables and 329 housing tables for a total of 813 unique tables. (Source: ICPSR, retrieved 06/15/2011)

Background, Methodology:

Local Law 102 enacted in 2015 requires the Department of Education of the New York City School District to submit to the Council an annual report concerning physical education for the prior school year.

This report provides information about average frequency and average total minutes per week of physical education as defined in Local Law 102 as reported through the 2015-2016 STARS database. It is important to note that schools self-report their scheduling information in STARS. The report also includes information regarding the number and ratio of certified physical education instructors and designated physical education instructional space.

This report consists of six tabs:

1. PE Instruction Borough-Level
2. PE Instruction District-Level
3. PE Instruction School-Level
4. Certified PE Teachers
5. PE Space

6. Supplemental Programs

7. PE Instruction Borough-Level

This tab includes the average frequency and average total minutes per week of physical education by borough, disaggregated by grade, race and ethnicity, gender, special education status and English language learner status. This report only includes students who were enrolled in the same school across all academic terms in the 2015-16 school year. Data on students with disabilities and English language learners are as of the end of the 2015-16 school year. Data on adaptive PE is based on individualized education programs (IEP) finalized on or before 05/31/2016.

1. PE Instruction District-Level

This tab includes the average frequency and average total minutes per week of physical education by district, disaggregated by grade, race and ethnicity, gender, special education status and English language learner status. This report only includes students who were enrolled in the same school across all academic terms in the 2015-16 school year. Data on students with disabilities and English language learners are as of the end of the 2015-16 school year. Data on adaptive PE is based on individualized education programs (IEP) finalized on or before 05/31/2016.

1. PE Instruction School-Level

This tab includes the average frequency and average total minutes per week of physical education by school, disaggregated by grade, race and ethnicity, gender, special education status and English language learner status. This report only includes students who were enrolled in the same school across all academic terms in the 2015-16 school year. Data on students with disabilities and English language learners are as of the end of the 2015-16 school year. Data on adaptive PE is based on individualized education programs (IEP) finalized on or before 05/31/2016.

1. Certified PE Teachers

This tab provides the number of designated full-time and part-time physical education certified instructors. Does not include elementary, early childhood and K-8 physical education teachers that provide physical education instruction under a common branches license. Also includes ratio of full time instructors teaching in a physical education license to students by school. Data reported is for the 2015-2016 school year as of 10/31/2015.

1. PE Space

This tab provides information on all designated indoor, outdoor and off-site spaces used by the school for physical education as reported through the Principal Annual Space Survey and the Outdoor Yard Report. It is important to note that information on each room category is self-reported by principals, and principals determine how each room is classified. Data captures if the PE space is co-located, used by another school or used for another purpose. Includes gyms, athletic fields, auxiliary exercise spaces, dance rooms, field houses, multipurpose spaces, outdoor yards, off-site locations, playrooms, swimming pools and weight rooms as designated PE Space.

1. Supplemental Programs

This tab provides information on the department's supplemental physical education program and a list of schools that use it.I. Includes all Move-to-Improve (MTI) supplemental programs for the 2015-2016 school year.

Link to NY State PE Regulations: http://www.p12.nysed.gov/ciai/pe/documents/title8part135.pdf

Any questions regarding this report should be directed to: Nnennaya Okezie, Executive Director NYC Department of Education, Office of Intergovernmental Affairs Phone: 212-374-4947"

Idiosyncrasies or limitations of the data to be aware of:

12,085 students (5.96% of the 10th-12th grade base student population in our analysis) were permitted a substitution by the department in the 2015-16 school year.

Additional Information: "Move-to-Improve (MTI)

The MTI K-5 physical activity program is designed to create and support an active learning environment in the classroom and school community. MTI activities blend academics and physical activity into educational lessons that support New York State PE Learning Standards and are integrated with Common Core Learning Standards.

The MTI program is free and includes benefits and incentives for students, teachers, principals, and schools. MTI activities are inclusive and designed to enhance academic learning during classroom instruction. A growing body of research suggests that student success depends on a combination of academic skills, healthy lifestyle, and physical and mental fitness. Specifically, in NYC, the correlation between fitness levels and academic achievement has been shown: http://www.nyc.gov/html/doh/downloads/pdf/survey/survey-2009fitnessgram.pdf

MTI All-Star school

Schools with a comprehensive PE program, led by a certified or designated PE teacher, have the opportunity to become an MTI All-Star school by training at least 85% of their eligible teachers in MTI.

New York State requires all elementary schools to provide at least 120 minutes of PE every week for all students. MTI All-Star schools can use MTI activities during classroom instructional time to supplement their existing PE program to meet this requirement.

MTI All-Star schools receive MTI implementation guidance and Citywide recognition of MTI best practices

All NYC district public schools with classroom teachers serving grades K-5 are eligible to participate in the MTI program.

For the 2016-2017 school year, elementary schools can participate in MTI in two ways:

1) MTI Train-the-Trainer

• Certified or designated PE teachers from district public elementary schools can attend an MTI Train-the-Trainer (TTT) session where they will learn to become MTI trainers for their school.

• TTT sessions are offered during school hours so PE teachers will need to be released to attend.

2) MTI Event

• K-5 classroom teachers (including cluster, PE, and special education) from district public schools can register for an open MTI workshop session offered citywide.

• Participating teachers receive UFT negotiated training rate (for after-school hours) and a certificate of completion (can count towards the 175 hours of professional development; contingent on principal’s approval)."

Of the 45 men who have held (or will hold) the title of President of the United States, 21 of them have, to some degree, spoken a foreign language (i.e. one that was not English). The most commonly spoken foreign languages were Latin and Greek, which were both spoken to some extent by at least ten presidents, while a further five had some knowledge of Latin only. The majority of those who studied these languages were required to do so in order to gain entry to educational institutions, although there are some reports that President John Adams had worked as a Greek and Latin teacher before taking office, while James A. Garfield was a professor of these subjects in Hiram College, Ohio. There are also more anecdotal claims that Garfield (who was ambidextrous) could write in both languages simultaneously with each hand. Martin Van Buren is notable as he was the first U.S. president born following U.S. independence; which may make it more surprising that he is the only U.S. president who did not speak English as a first language, instead growing up in a Dutch-speaking community in New York, while learning English in school.

Jefferson's boasts Three U.S. presidents, Thomas Jefferson, James Madison and John Quincy Adams, appear to have been fluent in at least three foreign languages, while Jefferson and Adams had some knowledge of a number of other languages. Jefferson famously boasted to Adams once that he had learned Spanish in just 19 days, by using a just a grammar book and a copy of Don Quixote, although Adams expressed doubts over the legitimacy of these claims. Jefferson was known, however, to study somewhat uncommon languages, and was known to translate documents into Old English, while books in Arabic, Irish Gaelic and Welsh were found in his personal library after his death.

Modern presidents Of the six currently-living U.S. presidents, President Trump and Biden are the only without some proficiency in a foreign language. President Carter is said to have had a fluent grasp of the Spanish language, and has continued to practice it in recent years (although he often downplays his own abilities when interviewed about it), while President George W. Bush has made some public addresses (partly) in Spanish. President Clinton studied German in university, is said to speak it fluently, and has even made public addresses in German while in Berlin. President Obama was said to have become fluent in Indonesian as a child, when living in the country between the ages of six and ten; this is one of the few non-European languages (along with Hebrew and Mandarin) to have been spoken by a U.S. president, although Obama has also downplayed his proficiency in the language while in office, sometimes claiming not to speak any foreign languages at all.

Summary File 4 (SF 4) from the United States 2000 Census contains the sample data, which is the information compiled from the questions asked of a sample of all people and housing units. Population items include basic population totals: urban and rural, households and families, marital status, grandparents as caregivers, language and ability to speak English, ancestry, place of birth, citizenship status, year of entry, migration, place of work, journey to work (commuting), school enrollment and educational attainment, veteran status, disability, employment status, industry, occupation, class of worker, income, and poverty status. Housing items include basic housing totals: urban and rural, number of rooms, number of bedrooms, year moved into unit, household size and occupants per room, units in structure, year structure built, heating fuel, telephone service, plumbing and kitchen facilities, vehicles available, value of home, monthly rent, and shelter costs. In Summary File 4, the sample data are presented in 213 population tables (matrices) and 110 housing tables, identified with "PCT" and "HCT" respectively. Each table is iterated for 336 population groups: the total population, 132 race groups, 78 American Indian and Alaska Native tribe categories (reflecting 39 individual tribes), 39 Hispanic or Latino groups, and 86 ancestry groups. The presentation of SF4 tables for any of the 336 population groups is subject to a population threshold. That is, if there are fewer than 100 people (100-percent count) in a specific population group in a specific geographic area, and there are fewer than 50 unweighted cases, their population and housing characteristics data are not available for that geographic area in SF4. For the ancestry iterations, only the 50 unweighted cases test can be performed. See Appendix H: Characteristic Iterations, for a complete list of characteristic iterations.

CCRB: Disposition of Offensive Language Allegations 2007

This table will no longer be updated after 5/30/2024 given the end of the 2023-2024 viral respiratory vaccine season. This table shows the cumulative number and percentage of CT residents who have received an updated COVID-19 vaccine during the 2023-2024 viral respiratory season by age group (current age). CDC recommends that people get at least one dose of this vaccine to protect against serious illness, whether or not they have had a COVID-19 vaccination before. Children and people with moderate to severe immunosuppression might be recommended more than one dose. For more information on COVID-19 vaccination recommendations, click here. • Data are reported weekly on Thursday and include doses administered to Saturday of the previous week (Sunday – Saturday). All data in this report are preliminary. Data from the previous week may be changed because of delays in reporting, deduplication, or correction of errors. • These analyses are based on data reported to CT WiZ which is the immunization information system for CT. CT providers are required by law to report all doses of vaccine administered. CT WiZ also receives records on CT residents vaccinated in other jurisdictions and by federal entities which share data with CT Wiz electronically. Electronic data exchange is being added jurisdiction-by-jurisdiction. Currently, this includes Rhode Island and New York City but not Massachusetts and New York State. Therefore, doses administered to CT residents in neighboring towns in Massachusetts and New York State will not be included. A full list of the jurisdiction with which CT has established electronic data exchange can be seen at the bottom of this page (https://portal.ct.gov/immunization/Knowledge-Base/Articles/Vaccine-Providers/CT-WiZ-for-Vaccine-Providers-and-Training/Query-and-Response-functionality-in-CT-WiZ?language=en_US) • Population size estimates used to calculate cumulative percentages are based on 2020 DPH provisional census estimates*. • People are included if they have an active jurisdictional status in CT WiZ at the time weekly data are pulled. This excludes people who live out of state, are deceased and a small percentage who have opted out of CT WiZ. DPH Provisional State and County Characteristics Estimates April 1, 2020. Hayes L, Abdellatif E, Jiang Y, Backus K (2022) Connecticut DPH Provisional April 1, 2020, State Population Estimates by 18 age groups, sex, and 6 combined race and ethnicity groups. Connecticut Department of Public Health, Health Statistics & Surveillance, SAR, Hartford, CT.

In 2023, there were over 51,000 interpreters and translators employed in the United States. The number of people working in these positions has been decreasing for several of the last years, as the number of those employed in interpreting and translating services in the United States is currently far from the number registered in 2012.

Language services industry in the United States

The language service industry includes activities aimed at facilitating communication across linguistic and cultural barriers. Activities falling under this category are broad and include translation, interpretation, localization, transcription, and subtitling. Despite some fluctuations, the industry revenue of these services in the United States is expected to grow in the coming years. This positive trend was also confirmed by the mean hourly wage paid out to translators and interpreters in the country, which has increased steadily since 2012. In 2023, Virginia was the state in the U.S. with the highest wages in interpreting and translating services, followed by the District of Columbia, and Vermont.

Leading language services providers

In 2023, English was by far the most spoken language worldwide, followed by Chinese and Hindi. It is therefore not surprising that eight of the ten global leading language service providers were located in English-speaking countries. TransPerfect, the world's largest privately held provider of translation services, led the ranking with annual revenue amounting to 1.2 billion U.S. dollars. The New York-based firm was founded in 1992, and it currently operates in 170 different languages, employing more than 5,000 certified linguists.

Background, Methodology:

Local Law 102 enacted in 2015 requires the Department of Education of the New York City School District to submit to the Council an annual report concerning physical education for the prior school year.

This report provides information about average frequency and average total minutes per week of physical education as defined in Local Law 102 as reported through the 2015-2016 STARS database. It is important to note that schools self-report their scheduling information in STARS. The report also includes information regarding the number and ratio of certified physical education instructors and designated physical education instructional space.

This report consists of six tabs:

1. PE Instruction Borough-Level
2. PE Instruction District-Level
3. PE Instruction School-Level
4. Certified PE Teachers
5. PE Space

6. Supplemental Programs

7. PE Instruction Borough-Level

This tab includes the average frequency and average total minutes per week of physical education by borough, disaggregated by grade, race and ethnicity, gender, special education status and English language learner status. This report only includes students who were enrolled in the same school across all academic terms in the 2015-16 school year. Data on students with disabilities and English language learners are as of the end of the 2015-16 school year. Data on adaptive PE is based on individualized education programs (IEP) finalized on or before 05/31/2016.

1. PE Instruction District-Level

This tab includes the average frequency and average total minutes per week of physical education by district, disaggregated by grade, race and ethnicity, gender, special education status and English language learner status. This report only includes students who were enrolled in the same school across all academic terms in the 2015-16 school year. Data on students with disabilities and English language learners are as of the end of the 2015-16 school year. Data on adaptive PE is based on individualized education programs (IEP) finalized on or before 05/31/2016.

1. PE Instruction School-Level

This tab includes the average frequency and average total minutes per week of physical education by school, disaggregated by grade, race and ethnicity, gender, special education status and English language learner status. This report only includes students who were enrolled in the same school across all academic terms in the 2015-16 school year. Data on students with disabilities and English language learners are as of the end of the 2015-16 school year. Data on adaptive PE is based on individualized education programs (IEP) finalized on or before 05/31/2016.

1. Certified PE Teachers

This tab provides the number of designated full-time and part-time physical education certified instructors. Does not include elementary, early childhood and K-8 physical education teachers that provide physical education instruction under a common branches license. Also includes ratio of full time instructors teaching in a physical education license to students by school. Data reported is for the 2015-2016 school year as of 10/31/2015.

1. PE Space

This tab provides information on all designated indoor, outdoor and off-site spaces used by the school for physical education as reported through the Principal Annual Space Survey and the Outdoor Yard Report. It is important to note that information on each room category is self-reported by principals, and principals determine how each room is classified. Data captures if the PE space is co-located, used by another school or used for another purpose. Includes gyms, athletic fields, auxiliary exercise spaces, dance rooms, field houses, multipurpose spaces, outdoor yards, off-site locations, playrooms, swimming pools and weight rooms as designated PE Space.

1. Supplemental Programs

This tab provides information on the department's supplemental physical education program and a list of schools that use it.I. Includes all Move-to-Improve (MTI) supplemental programs for the 2015-2016 school year.

Link to NY State PE Regulations: http://www.p12.nysed.gov/ciai/pe/documents/title8part135.pdf

Any questions regarding this report should be directed to: Nnennaya Okezie, Executive Director NYC Department of Education, Office of Intergovernmental Affairs Phone: 212-374-4947"

Idiosyncrasies or limitations of the data to be aware of:

12,085 students (5.96% of the 10th-12th grade base student population in our analysis) were permitted a substitution by the department in the 2015-16 school year.

Additional Information: "Move-to-Improve (MTI)

The MTI K-5 physical activity program is designed to create and support an active learning environment in the classroom and school community. MTI activities blend academics and physical activity into educational lessons that support New York State PE Learning Standards and are integrated with Common Core Learning Standards.

The MTI program is free and includes benefits and incentives for students, teachers, principals, and schools. MTI activities are inclusive and designed to enhance academic learning during classroom instruction. A growing body of research suggests that student success depends on a combination of academic skills, healthy lifestyle, and physical and mental fitness. Specifically, in NYC, the correlation between fitness levels and academic achievement has been shown: http://www.nyc.gov/html/doh/downloads/pdf/survey/survey-2009fitnessgram.pdf

MTI All-Star school

Schools with a comprehensive PE program, led by a certified or designated PE teacher, have the opportunity to become an MTI All-Star school by training at least 85% of their eligible teachers in MTI.

New York State requires all elementary schools to provide at least 120 minutes of PE every week for all students. MTI All-Star schools can use MTI activities during classroom instructional time to supplement their existing PE program to meet this requirement.

MTI All-Star schools receive MTI implementation guidance and Citywide recognition of MTI best practices

All NYC district public schools with classroom teachers serving grades K-5 are eligible to participate in the MTI program.

For the 2016-2017 school year, elementary schools can participate in MTI in two ways:

1) MTI Train-the-Trainer

• Certified or designated PE teachers from district public elementary schools can attend an MTI Train-the-Trainer (TTT) session where they will learn to become MTI trainers for their school.

• TTT sessions are offered during school hours so PE teachers will need to be released to attend.

2) MTI Event

• K-5 classroom teachers (including cluster, PE, and special education) from district public schools can register for an open MTI workshop session offered citywide.

• Participating teachers receive UFT negotiated training rate (for after-school hours) and a certificate of completion (can count towards the 175 hours of professional development; contingent on principal’s approval)."

In 2023, California was the state with the most interpreters and translators in the United States, with approximately 7,210 working within this profession. Following in the list were Texas, and then New York.

In 2023, the leading U.S.-based language service provider was TransPerfect. The New York-headquartered company accrued roughly 1.2 billion U.S. dollars in revenue. LanguageLine solutions were second in the rankings, with a revenue in the region of 963 million U.S. dollars.

Abstract

The Quality Preschool for Ghana Impact Evaluation 2016, Midline survey (QP4G-ML 2016) was approved by the Strategic Impact Evaluation Fund (SIEF) of the World Bank on August 2015 in the Great Accra Region of Ghana. The official project name is called "Testing and scaling-up supply- and demand-side interventions to improve kindergarten educational quality in Ghana”, known as “Quality Preschool for Ghana (QP4G)”.

The project seeks to increase the quality of preschool education during the two years of universal Kindergarten (KG) in Ghana through intervening in the supply-side (i.e., teacher in-service training) and the demand side (i.e., increasing parental awareness for developmentally appropriate quality early education).

The primary goal of the impact evaluation is to test the efficacy of a potentially scalable (8-day) in-service teacher training to improve the quality of KG teacher practices and interactions with children and to improve children’s development, school readiness and learning in both private and public preschools in the Greater Accra Region of Ghana. Additional goals of this evaluation are: to test the added value of combining a scalable (low-cost) parental awareness intervention with teacher in-service training; to compare implementation challenges in public and private schools; and to examine several important sources of potential heterogeneity of impact, primarily impacts in public vs. private schools.

The current submission is for the Midline Survey, conducted with 3 types of respondents across two phases – School survey and Caregiver [household] surveys. The school survey was conducted from May to July 2016 and consisted of collecting the following data: (a) direct assessments of children’s school readiness, (b) surveys of KG teachers, (c) direct observation of inventory of facilities within KG classrooms [environmental scan]; videotaping of KG classroom processes, teaching, and learning (not being submitted); as well as video coding of KG classroom video recordings using Teacher Instructional Practices and Processes Systems (instrument not being submitted). The caregiver survey was conducted via phone from August to September 2016 on primary caregivers of KG children. The caregiver survey sought information on caregivers’ background, poverty status, involvement or participation in school and home activities, and perception about ECD. Overall, the Midline Survey was conducted from May to September 2016 for all respondents.

Geographic coverage

Urban and Peri-Urban Districts, Greater Accra Region

Analysis unit

Units of analysis include individuals (KG teachers, children, caregivers), KG classrooms and preschools.

Universe

The survey universe is 6 poor districts in the Greater Accra Region. We sampled 240 schools, 108 public (Govt.) schools and 132 private schools. The population of interest is KG teachers and children in KG 1 and KG 2 classrooms in these schools, as well as the caregivers of sampled students.

Kind of data

Sample survey data [ssd]

Sampling procedure

This impact evaluation applies a cluster-randomized design. Eligible schools were randomly selected to participate in the study. The eligible population was schools with KG 1 and KG 2 classrooms (the two years of universal preprimary education) in six districts in the Greater Accra Region. In these six districts, we have sampled 240 schools; 108 public schools and 132 private schools in total.

The unit of randomization for this randomized control trial (RCT) is schools, whereby eligible schools (stratified by public and private sector schools) are randomly assigned to: (1) in-service teacher-training program only; (2) in-service teacher-training program plus parental awareness program; or (3) control (current standard operating) condition.

The sampling frame for this study was based on data in the Education Management Information System (EMIS) from the Ghana Education Service. This data was verified in a 'school listing exercise' conducted in May 2015.

Sample selection was done in four stages: The first stage involved purposive selection of six districts within the region based on two criteria: (a) most disadvantaged (using UNICEF's District League Table scores, out of sixteen total districts); and (b) close proximity to Accra Metropolitan for travel for the training of the KG teachers. The six selected municipals were La Nkwantanang-Madina Municipal, Ga Central Municipal, Ledzokuku-Krowor Municipal, Adentan Municipal, Ga South Municipal and Ga East Municipal.

The second stage involved the selection of public and private schools from each of the selected districts in the Accra region. We found 678 public and private schools (schools with kindergarten) in the EMIS database. Of these 361 schools were sampled randomly (stratified by district and school type) for the school listing exercise, done in May 2015. This was made up of 118 public schools and 243 private schools. The sampling method used for the school listing exercise was based on two approaches depending on the type of school. For the public schools, the full universe of public schools (i.e., 118) were included in the school listing exercise. However, private schools were randomly sampled using probability proportional to the size of the private schools in each district. Specifically, the private schools were sampled in each district proportionate to the total number of district private schools relative to the total number of private schools. In so doing, one school from the Ga South Municipal was removed and added to Ga Central so that all districts have a number of private schools divisible by three. This approach yielded 122 private schools. Additionally, 20 private schools were randomly selected from each of the districts (i.e., based on the remaining list of private schools in each district following from the first selection) to serve as replacement lists. The replacement list was necessary given the potential refusals from the private schools. There were no replacement lists for the public schools since all public schools would automatically qualify for participation.

The third stage involved selecting the final sample for the evaluation using the sampling frame obtained through the listing exercise. A total of 240 schools were randomly selected, distributed by district and sector. Schools were randomized into treatment groups after the first round of baseline data collection was completed.

The survey respondents were sampled using different sampling techniques: a. KG teachers: The research team sampled two KG teachers from each school; one from KG1 and KG2. KG teachers were sampled using purposive sampling method. In schools where there were more than two KG classes, the KG teachers from the "A" stream were selected. For the treatment schools, all KG teachers were invited to participate in the teacher training program. b. KG child-caregiver pair: The research team sampled KG children and their respective caregivers using simple random sampling method. Fifteen KG children-caregivers pair were sampled from each school. For schools with less than 15 KG children (8 from KG1, 7 from KG2 where possible), all KG children were included in the survey. KG children were selected from the same class as the selected KG teacher. The survey team used the class register to randomly select KG children who were present on the day of the school visit. Sampling was not stratified by gender or age. The caregivers of these selected child respondents were invited to participate in the survey. The research team sought informed consent from the school head teacher, caregivers, as well as child respondents.

Mode of data collection

Other [oth]

Research instrument

Data were collected at Midline Survey using structured questionnaires or forms.

Child Direct Assessment: The KG Child Assessment was conducted using the International Development and Early Learning Assessment (IDELA) tool designed by Save the Children. IDELA was adapted based on extensive pre-testing and piloting by different members of the evaluation team. The adapted version measured five indicators of ECD. The indicators were early numeracy skills, language/literacy skills and development, physical well-being and motor development, socio-emotional development, and approaches to learning. IDELA contained 28 items. In addition, one task was added – the Pencil Tap – to assess executive function skills. Apart from the English language, IDELA was translated and administered into three local languages, namely, Twi, Ga, and Ewe. These local language versions had gone through rigorous processes of translation and back translation. The IDELA tool has not been shared as Save the Children have proprietary rights over this.

KG Class Environmental Scan: The KG classroom observation involved taking inventories of the KG classrooms [environmental scan] and conducting video recordings of the classroom processes. The KG Class Environmental Scan tool was designed to take inventories of the facilities in the KG classrooms. The classroom video recordings have not been shared as they contain PIIs.

TIPPS: The video recordings taken during the classroom observations were coded using an early childhood education adapted version of Teacher Instructional Practices and Processes Systems (TIPPS). Seidman, Raza, Kim, and McCoy (2014) of New York University developed the TIPPS instrument. TIPPS observes nineteen key concepts of teacher practices and classroom processes that influence children’s cognitive and social-emotional development. The concept sheet was used to code the kindergarten classroom videos. The TIPPS tool has not been shared as