Your search found 111806 results.

Descriptors:
Foreign Countries; Comparative Education; Public Sector; Higher Education; Stakeholders; Government Role; Commercialization; Role of Education; Educational History; Private Colleges; Equal Education; Public Policy; Educational Policy; Policy Analysis; Policy Formation; Educational Change; International Education; Politics of Education; Government School Relationship; Governance; Institutional Autonomy

Abstract:
The relationship between the state and higher education institutions has always been a complex one. The "state" itself in this context is a heterogeneous mix of elite people--bureaucrats, politicians, committees of co-opted academics and business leader--and it increasingly faces pressures from diverse stakeholders, including students (themselves an increasingly diverse community), staff, families, employers and businesses (local, regional and multinational). This volume explores the rapidly evolving relationship between the state and higher education in Europe and in East Asia through a combination of empirical studies, secondary analyses and personal observations from many of the leading scholars in the field of comparative education studies. A scenario emerges where the state seeks to encourage stakeholder influence, while, at the same time, acts to moderate such influence in order to ensure that wider objectives are satisfied; markets are controlled, elements of demand and supply are manipulated and funding is targeted to meet particular policy priorities through a model that is described as "controlled stakeholder steering" which offers a new explanation of the relationship between the state and higher education, certainly in the countries addressed in this book. Contents include: (1) The State and Higher Education Institutions: new pressures, new relationships and new tensions (John Taylor); (2) The Changing Roles of the State and the Market in Japanese, Korean and British Higher Education: lessons for continental Europe? (Roger Goodman); (3) Universities, the State and Geography: perspectives from the United Kingdom and Japan (Fumi Kitagawa); (4) State-Academy Relations in the United Kingdom, 1960-2010 (Ivor Crewe); (5) United Kingdom Higher Education and the Binary Dilemma: whatever happened to public sector higher education? (David Watson); (6) What Japan Tells us about the State and the Future of Higher Education in France (Christian Galan); (7) German Higher Education and the State: a critical appraisal in the light of post-Bologna reforms (Hubert Ertl); (8) Reforming Italian Universities: dynamic conservatism and policy change, 1989-2010 (Paola Mattei); (9) Japanese Higher Education and the State in Transition (Motohisa Kaneko); (10) The State and Private Higher Education in Japan: the end of egalitarian policy? (Aya Yoshida); (11) The State's Role and Quasi-Market in Higher Education: Japan's trilemma (Takehiko Kariya); (12) The (Un)changing Relationship between the State and Higher Education in South Korea: some surprising continuities (Terri Kim); and (13) Afterword (Ronald Dore). Note:The following two links are not-applicable for text-based browsers or screen-reading software. Show Hide Full Abstract

Related Items: Show Related Items

Full-Text Availability Options:

More Info:
Help | Tutorial Help Finding Full Text |  More Info:
Help Find in a Library |  Publisher's website

Descriptors:
Evidence; Educational Administration; Foreign Countries; Accountability; Institutional Autonomy; Educational Policy; Educational Practices; Fundamental Concepts; Politics of Education; Governance; Educational Change; Educational Strategies; Position Papers; Conference Papers; Educational History; Intellectual History

Abstract:
In 1975, the fourth Annual Conference of the British Educational Administration Society (BEAS, now BELMAS) had as its theme "Autonomy and Accountability in Educational Administration". In their concluding comments, the editors of the published Proceedings wrote: "Our concern has been with accountability and autonomy, not as alternatives, but as significant and meaningful concepts which need to be better understood in relation to each other, having regard to specific organisational settings." This is the same connection that the then newly installed coalition government made 35 years later in their 2010 schools White Paper, a major policy document. The emphasis on this theme had persisted and indeed grown sharply during the intervening period. This trajectory is outlined in the article but its main purpose is to analyse the forces underlying what has become a preoccupation in English schools policy, making some reference to international evidence and practice. It is argued that the last six words of the quotation above from the 1975 editors' conclusion, "having regard to specific organisational settings", were particularly significant and are highly relevant to an explanation of the staying power of these concepts. (Contains 4 notes.) Note:The following two links are not-applicable for text-based browsers or screen-reading software. Show Hide Full Abstract

Related Items: Show Related Items

Full-Text Availability Options:

More Info:
Help | Tutorial Help Finding Full Text |  More Info:
Help Find in a Library |  Publisher's website

Descriptors:
Educational Change; Government School Relationship; Centralization; Politics of Education; Institutional Autonomy; Power Structure; Administrative Policy; Administrative Principles; Educational Administration; Educational Policy; Policy Analysis; Political Attitudes; School Restructuring; Change Strategies

Abstract:
Following his previous article in this journal on the centralisation of power in English education post the 1988 Education Reform Act ("The Era of Centralisation", "FORUM", 50[2], pp. 255-261), the author considers the apparent turn to school autonomy central to the Conservative Educational Revolution. He argues that the power shift to the centre is accelerated by the Revolution, which is destroying democratically elected local authority provision and enhancing the power of the Secretary of State to arbitrary levels. The rhetoric of the all powerful head teacher in control of the school is contradicted by centrally determined priorities, notably EBac, and the power of the media to represent the school to its community by performance tables. This continues the attempt to manipulate schools which New Labour attempted by its Diploma programme, but in the context of a narrow 1950s grammar school curriculum. The autonomy given to schools is essentially operational, notably over admissions and curriculum, but is constrained by league tables and government control of finance and service delivery contracts. (Contains 12 notes.) Note:The following two links are not-applicable for text-based browsers or screen-reading software. Show Hide Full Abstract

Related Items: Show Related Items

Full-Text Availability Options:

More Info:
Help | Tutorial Help Finding Full Text |  More Info:
Help Find in a Library |  Publisher's website

Descriptors:
Postsecondary Education; High Schools; Community Colleges; Politics of Education; Access to Education; College Admission; Undocumented Immigrants; Tuition; Educational Legislation; Educational Policy; State Legislation; State Policy; In State Students; Paying for College; Public Colleges; Case Studies; Qualitative Research; Program Implementation; Community Organizations; College Role; Barriers

Abstract:
In 2002, New York became the fourth state to offer in-state tuition to certain undocumented immigrants enrolling in its public postsecondary education institutions. Although enacted several years ago, the implementation of this legislation has never been examined. This qualitative single case study with embedded units explored how New York's in-state tuition legislation has been implemented for undocumented students. This investigation examined the implementation of in-state tuition for undocumented students from the perspective of state-level officials and local-level officials and actors. It explored the day-to-day implementation of this policy at seven high schools and two community colleges in New York City. This study found that state-level officials were absent in issues having to do with this policy's implementation, leaving it instead to the City University of New York (CUNY) and State University of New York (SUNY) systems. Furthermore, it will describe the relative absence of the New York City Department of Education in putting this policy into action. Instead. CUNY, and to some extent community-based organizations (CBO's), have assisted high schools with executing this policy. Concurrently, high school staff have gathered a fair amount of knowledge in and established several implementation measures focused on undocumented students' college access. High school institutional demographics, as this study will outline, have not had a significant affect on how this policy has been implemented. At the community college level, this study will highlight the integral role that CUNY Central officials have had in carrying out this policy. Furthermore, it will be detailed that some variability exists among CUNY institutions on how this policy is being put into effect. Lastly, community college student demographics do not appear to have a significant impact on institutional implementation. While several efforts exist to assist undocumented students with their college enrollment, they do not eliminate all the barriers, many of which will be outlined in this investigation, which this population must overcome. This study may inform policymakers, high school and college personnel, and the advocacy community about issues surrounding the implementation of a postsecondary education benefit for undocumented students, with the goal of expanding access to college for this population. [The dissertation citations contained here are published with the permission of ProQuest LLC. Further reproduction is prohibited without permission. Copies of dissertations may be obtained by Telephone (800) 1-800-521-0600. Web page: http://www.proquest.com/en-US/products/dissertations/individuals.shtml.] Note:The following two links are not-applicable for text-based browsers or screen-reading software. Show Hide Full Abstract

Related Items: Show Related Items

Full-Text Availability Options:

More Info:
Help | Tutorial Help Finding Full Text |  More Info:
Help Find in a Library |  Publisher's website

Descriptors:
Educational Change; Nongovernmental Organizations; Educational Policy; Public Policy; Educational Legislation; State Legislation; Program Implementation; School Culture; Leadership; Interviews; Public Officials; Academic Achievement; Teacher Evaluation; Collective Bargaining; Charter Schools; School Turnaround; Politics of Education; State Agencies; School Districts; Educational Improvement; Accountability; Students

Abstract:
In 2011, Indiana's legislature reshaped the state's education policy landscape with a package of laws that enabled local leaders to make swift and potentially sweeping changes to district and school operations. The Hoosier State's reforms, dubbed by supporters as the "Putting Students First" agenda, provide a valuable case study of the crucial launch period that all reform agendas encounter. Although it is too early to judge the ultimate effects of these policy changes, in this paper the authors begin considering what challenges the reform package will confront as it moves deeper into implementation. They offer neither naive praise nor uninformed criticism of Indiana's efforts, nor do they judge whether legislators passed the right mix of reforms. Instead, they consider carefully how implementation has begun and likely will continue to unfold so that Indiana's officials, citizens, and observers elsewhere can begin learning lessons from the state's work. Indiana's experience so far shows that state-level leadership is invaluable for articulating, supporting, and advancing an education reform agenda but that eventual results depend on several things: local leaders and teachers using reforms to carefully, creatively, and properly reshape critical tasks and school cultures to improve students' experiences; state and local officials effectively leveraging resources from nongovernmental organizations to support that reshaping; and implementers inside and outside government having a clear understanding of the opportunities and consequences that will follow from their actions. Unless state and local implementers seize opportunities present in the law, efforts such as "Putting Students First" likely will prompt new rounds of compliance-oriented behavior, wasted money, bureaucratic busyness, frustrated teachers, and few or no substantive gains. After summarizing the essential elements of "Putting Students First," the authors offer several lessons about implementation based on the state, with broader observations and actionable suggestions about implementing ambitious multidimensional education reforms. Their discussion relies on interviews with Indiana state officials and others conducted during the spring of 2012, official state documents and data, and other publications. Data Sources and Research Methods are appended. (Contains 1 figure, 1 table, and 47 notes.) Note:The following two links are not-applicable for text-based browsers or screen-reading software. Show Hide Full Abstract

Related Items: Show Related Items

Full-Text Availability Options:

More Info:
Help | Tutorial Help Finding Full Text |  Publisher's website

Descriptors:
Accountability; School Districts; State Action; State Legislation; State Regulation; Policy Analysis; State Policy; State Government; Case Studies; Educational History; Intellectual History; Politics of Education; School Administration; School Accounting; Audits (Verification)

Abstract:
Michigan's Local Government and School District Accountability Act of 2011 empowers the governor to appoint emergency managers (EMs) in financially-troubled school districts. EMs assume all powers of the superintendent and school board. They can reshape academic programs, nullify labor contracts, and open and close schools. This paper analyzes the law's political origins and early implementation. Relative to prevailing accountability mechanisms applicable to all school districts, in what respects are EM districts are more accountable, and in what respects are they less accountable? Our analysis reveals that although the law concentrates control over school operations, it weakens most standard dimensions of district accountability. (Contains 15 footnotes. Work for this article was supported in part by the Education Policy Center at Michigan State University.) Note:The following two links are not-applicable for text-based browsers or screen-reading software. Show Hide Full Abstract

Related Items: Show Related Items

Full-Text Availability Options:

 ERIC Full Text (621K)

Descriptors:
Teacher Education; Curriculum Development; Schools of Education; Teaching (Occupation); Educational Change; Foreign Countries; Educational Policy; Accountability; Economic Climate; Teacher Salaries; Teaching Conditions; Global Approach; Political Influences; Politics of Education; Economic Factors; Cultural Influences; Context Effect; Faculty Development; Institutional Autonomy; Professional Autonomy; Partnerships in Education; Values

Abstract:
Background: Teacher education in Scotland has developed its own trajectory for many years and this distinctiveness appears to have increased since the creation of the Scottish Parliament in 1999. Teachers' pay and conditions were addressed in 2001 by the agreement "A teaching profession for the 21st century." This agreement led to a number of innovations in teacher education and development. More recently, there has been a report of the Review of Teacher Education in Scotland by Graham Donaldson and a committee is currently reviewing teachers' pay and conditions. Purpose: This article examines the extent to which the development of teacher education in Scotland has been affected by the global financial crisis and its impact on the provision of public services. Three policy contexts are explored in turn, those of politics and economics, education and teacher education, so that the analysis moves from the wider societal perspective towards the specifics of teacher education. Sources of evidence: The article draws on a close analysis of relevant policy documents, including those produced by the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development, the Scottish Government and the General Teaching Council for Scotland. Additionally reference is made where appropriate to a wide range of published research and to reports such as the Review of Teacher Education in Scotland. Main argument: The ways in which teacher education policy in Scotland is developing is a result of the interaction between history, culture and politics played out at a national level under the wider influence of UK, European and global affairs, both economic and political. There are real tensions in the current conjunction of policies and trends, which create major challenges for all those involved. The promotion of career-long professional learning and enhanced school autonomy proceed alongside the review of teachers' professional conditions (McCormac Review), high levels of intermittent employment among new teachers, fluctuations in student numbers and staffing in university Schools of Education, and contracting resource to support school-level curriculum development and continuing professional development. The social partnership achieved between employers and practitioners is under increasing strain; and relations of partnership between universities and schools are subject to increasing critical scrutiny. Teaching in a time of crisis creates new challenges, and the need for innovative approaches to enduring challenges, in the short and longer term. Conclusions: The longstanding commitment to explicit values in Scottish culture and education is all the more important in a context where pressures for accountability and efficiency are greater than ever. (Contains 2 notes.) Note:The following two links are not-applicable for text-based browsers or screen-reading software. Show Hide Full Abstract

Related Items: Show Related Items

Full-Text Availability Options:

More Info:
Help | Tutorial Help Finding Full Text |  More Info:
Help Find in a Library |  Publisher's website

Descriptors:
Educational Policy; Policy Formation; English (Second Language); Second Language Learning; State Policy; Case Studies; Policy Analysis; English Language Learners; Immersion Programs; Second Language Instruction; Neoliberalism; Political Attitudes; Politics of Education; Goodness of Fit; Evaluation Methods; Scheduling; State Legislation

Abstract:
This historical case study focuses on policy making at the state level by analyzing the development of a new policy for English language learners (ELLs) in Arizona. "New institutionalism" is used as a framework, with political culture and educational regimes acting as environmental factors affecting state policy choices. Key events occurred between 1992, when "Flores v. State of Arizona" challenged the funding of instruction for ELLs, and 2006, when the legislature adopted a law creating an English Language Learners Task Force that was to develop a 4-hour-per-day structured English immersion (SEI) program for ELLs. Analysis indicates that the new policy is consistent with the state's traditionalistic political culture and emerging neoliberal political regime and with the mythical role of an immigrant's learning of English as a mark of becoming an American. Policy leaders used and altered the state's political institutions to advance their objectives. The study concludes with a four-prong test for assessing the fit of proposed policies with the current political context of the state. (Contains 3 tables and 3 notes.) Note:The following two links are not-applicable for text-based browsers or screen-reading software. Show Hide Full Abstract

Related Items: Show Related Items

Full-Text Availability Options:

More Info:
Help | Tutorial Help Finding Full Text |  More Info:
Help Find in a Library |  Publisher's website

Descriptors:
Accountability; Instructional Leadership; Private Colleges; Leadership Training; Public Colleges; Educational Innovation; Course Descriptions; Educational Change; Instructional Design; State Policy; State Legislation; Case Studies; Organizational Change

Abstract:
This article examines the redesign of two educational leadership programs at different institutions: a medium-sized public university and a small private university. Both were committed to principals of ethical leadership. Each program faced a state mandate to redesign. In one case, state policy focused on detailed accountability measures based on syllabi alignment to standards and a complex paper trail of documentation required for final approval. In the other case, accountability focused on a final portfolio, and programs were encouraged to be innovative. Policy differences combined with situational context to create two different approaches to the redesign work. (Contains 2 tables.) Note:The following two links are not-applicable for text-based browsers or screen-reading software. Show Hide Full Abstract

Related Items: Show Related Items

Full-Text Availability Options:

More Info:
Help | Tutorial Help Finding Full Text |  More Info:
Help Find in a Library |  Publisher's website

Descriptors:
Institutional Autonomy; Educational Finance; Human Resources; State Regulation; Statewide Planning; Graduation Rate; State Action; Governance; Higher Education; State Government; Budgeting; State Aid; Public Policy; Educational Policy; Educational Legislation; State Legislation; Program Proposals; Tuition; Community Colleges; Educational Administration; Trustees; Accountability; Financial Support; Academic Achievement; Colleges

Abstract:
This report represents the latest State Governance Action Report (SGAR) covering current or just recently completed legislative sessions. Among the most important issues being considered are management autonomy, such as relaxed rules for purchasing, procurement, and human resources, and greater fiscal autonomy measures such as carry-over budgeting and greater tuition-setting authority. The 2011 legislative cycle and the 2012 fiscal year have prompted increased state action around several issues, but most prominent are the inter-related themes of: (1) Managing state budgets, instituting performance-based funding, and implementing state-planning imperatives; (2) Restructuring governance and statewide coordination; (3) Decreasing state regulation and increasing institutional autonomy; and (4) Advancing student success by increasing the number of college degree and certificate holders, improving graduation rates, and workforce preparation. As state funding continues to decline as a percentage of institutional revenues, statewide governance and coordinating structures are under increased pressure to leverage performance improvements (of which college degree completion remains primary) and advance overall responsiveness to state economic and social needs. Note:The following two links are not-applicable for text-based browsers or screen-reading software. Show Hide Full Abstract

Related Items: Show Related Items

Full-Text Availability Options:

More Info:
Help | Tutorial Help Finding Full Text |  Publisher's website