Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Angela Jerabek

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep‎. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:48, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Angela Jerabek

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Poorly written promotional article about an academic not shown to meet WP:NACADEMIC or WP:ANYBIO. The page's sole purpose appears to be to promote an educational model with little peer-reviewed research to back up its efficacy.Blanes tree (talk) 12:40, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators, Women, and United States of America. Shellwood (talk) 12:46, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Angela Jerabek just won the James Bryant Conant award, given to one American educator annually in recognition of their contributions to American education. Previous awardees include Thurgood Marshall, Fred Rogers, Claiborne Pell, and Miriam Wright Edelman.

The American Institutes for Research reviewed the BARR model for three years, across three separate studies funded by the U.S. Department of Education, and found it to improve educational outcomes across numerous measurements. AIR's scale-up study, for example, was an independent review of 21,500 students in 69 schools. Most educational models cannot withstand this level of scrutiny. Among their findings:

"The BARR approach had substantial and statistically significant impacts on the proportion of students who passed all their core courses."

"BARR significantly reduced chronic absenteeism."

"The BARR approach improved teachers’ collaboration with their peers, their data use, and a range of other teacher outcomes."

Here is the report. Here is the actual PDF report.

This model was also the only educational model to move through all three stages of federal government review in the I3 program. This article from the widely respected industry publication The Hechinger Report (a publication of the non-profit Hechinger Institute on Education and the Media) outlines the general failure of the 170 educational grantees to meet the program criteria. The one exception: BARR. It names the BARR model as the "poster child" for what the grant was intended to fund.

The above reading of this article is factually uninformed about how educational models are reviewed and how important the BARR model is nationally at this time. Gtatum (talk) 14:08, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

KEEP Gtatum (talk) 14:34, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Minnesota-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 20:11, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep. I am uncertain about the Conant award. But the NPR piece included in a bunch of refbombing at the bottom [1] appears to be a start towards WP:SIGCOV for a GNG case. I also see a MinnPost article [2] that looks like reasonable coverage. I agree that the article is in somewhat poor shape, although I don't think it's so bad as for WP:TNT. Russ Woodroofe (talk) 14:37, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:36, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect: to the BARR model (which does not have an article). This NPR [3] and sources 16, 17 talk about it, more than about this person. Oaktree b (talk) 01:14, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: The subject is notable for her impact on education, and her work has broad and independent coverage. She got the James Bryant Conant Award, a special honor for educators. She designed the BARR model, which the AIR has hailed as successful. This shows her impact on education through successful federal programs and gives hope for future reform in that field. This award and the impact of her work meet WP:ANYBIO and WP:NACADEMIC. --AstridMitch (talk) 01:21, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. The page is poorly organized, but that just means it needs editing. The award in question is given by the Education Commision of the States, a nonprofit established in 1965 by John W. Gardner and Terry Sanford. This award was established in 1977. It's pretty significant. See here: https://www.ecs.org/wp-content/uploads/Awards-History.pdf. Qflib (talk) 14:09, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I did some editing. Still needs work but at least now it's organized. Qflib (talk) 14:21, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I think that The article should stay. it meets WP notability guidelines, the sources are reliable and her influence and achievements are Worthy of Wikipedia documentation. Yakov-kobi (talk) 09:02, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.