Your search found 2661 results.

Descriptors:
Mental Health; Diseases; African Americans; Mental Disorders; Human Services; Public Policy; Role; Whites; Racial Differences; Access to Health Care; Health Services; Delivery Systems; Federal Legislation; International Organizations; Surveys; Agency Role

Abstract:
Since publication of the U.S. Surgeon General's report "Mental Health: Culture, Race and Ethnicity--A Supplement to Mental Health: A Report of the Surgeon General" (U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, 2001), several federal initiatives signal a sustained focus on addressing African American-White American disparities in mental health treatment access and quality and open the way to unprecedented disparity reduction. These initiatives include institutional commitments to (a) research by the National Center for Minority Health and Health Disparities; (b) disparities monitoring by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality; (c) new epidemiologic and service delivery information on African American populations from the National Survey of American Life sponsored by the National Institute of Mental Health; as well as (d) opportunities inherent in the World Health Organization's interest in disease burden for making it possible to view African Americans' likely greater disease burden from mental illness as a legitimate source of concern. The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act affords unprecedented opportunities for increasing African Americans' treatment access and quality of care nationwide. By familiarizing themselves with these initiatives, and taking advantage of possibilities they offer, those committed to reducing African American-White American disparities in mental illness, and treatment access and quality, can make inroads toward improving African Americans' mental health and facilitating their successful functioning in all spheres of community living. 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:
Foreign Countries; Postsecondary Education; Educational History; Public Agencies; Organizations (Groups); Educational Policy; Agency Role; Institutional Role; Higher Education; Government Role; Vocational Education; Professional Associations; Advocacy; Canada Natives; Faculty Organizations; Student Organizations; Educational Administration; College Faculty; College Students; College Administration

Abstract:
This report describes agencies (established by government) and organizations (established by others) that dealt exclusively with postsecondary education in British Columbia, Canada and which had at least one professional employee and/or were separate legal entities. Of the fifty groups described since 1960, about two dozen existed in 2012. The current groups tend to have special interest or self interest mandates, whereas system-level bodies providing educational and other leadership were more common in previous decades. Although the information is presented thematically rather than chronologically, four eras are evident: (1) launch of a comprehensive postsecondary system (to 1973); (2) helping the young system to mature (to 1987); (3) supports in particular areas (to 1997); and (4) transition into the next generation postsecondary system. Agencies are categorized as either decision-making or facilitative. Categories for organizations include institutional advocacy, students, employers and employees, and information and infrastructure. The report is descriptive rather than interpretative, but quotes in sidebars convey the character and context of the various bodies and a few concluding thoughts are provided. A list of acronyms is appended. (Contains 3 footnotes.) [For Volume 5, see ED532003.] 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 (1720K) |  More Info:
Help Find in a Library

Descriptors:
State Departments of Education; School Turnaround; Agency Role; Educational Change; Federal State Relationship; Federal Legislation; Educational Legislation; Federal Programs; Organizational Change; Models; Performance; Educational Administration; Leadership; Change Strategies

Abstract:
This project examines how eight state education agencies engaged the charge of improving their lowest-performing schools. The states examined are among the most active and intentional in this regard. In many ways, they are at the leading edge of what could eventually become 50 different experiments in performance management. By focusing on states at the forefront of the turnaround effort, the authors hope to identify promising paths that SEAs can follow as they shift the focus of their departments away from ensuring compliance and toward managing for improved performance. This report begins by briefly discussing prior research on the role of state agencies in supporting struggling schools. It then identifies the logic of school reform that guides their processes. Importantly, all of the states examined here start from nearly the same point, a federally defined set of steps by which they are bound, and they share certain elements of change. For example, they all used data to guide their work, restructured their organizations, and embraced the principles of transparency and clarity in communicating their intentions. They established a sense of urgency to build momentum for reform, leveraged the threat of federal requirements, and relied upon strong leadership, though in differing manners and to differing degrees. Finally, the report examines the overall strategic visions that guide SEAs' efforts to improve schools. These visions represent the greatest variation in terms of how SEAs approach school improvement. Undergirding these strategies are very different theories of action and expectations about the role of local education agencies (LEAs). It is too early to identify one strategic approach that is best in all situations. Each was implemented only recently and is embedded in a particular set of circumstances. Interestingly, they all share a common implicit assumption that enough administrative, teaching, and school leadership talent--either in terms of individuals or organizations--can be developed or recruited to support the reform effort. While the overall prognosis is uncertain as to the best transformation path, it is clear that any approach relies on recruiting enough talent to drive the effort. New Jersey Department of Education Organizational Charts 2010 and 2011 are appended. (Contains 2 figures, 2 tables and 36 footnotes.) 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 (1187K)

Descriptors:
Self Evaluation (Groups); Technical Institutes; Governance; Program Effectiveness; Community Colleges; Administrative Organization; Organizational Effectiveness; Case Studies; Improvement Programs; Coordination; Statewide Planning; Governing Boards; Educational Policy; Educational Finance; Public Agencies; Agency Role; Systems Approach; Strategic Planning; Politics of Education; Educational Environment; Policy Formation; Adult Education; Institutional Mission; Economic Factors; Questionnaires; Program Descriptions

Abstract:
The challenge of producing the systemic changes that are needed to boost educational attainment and economic competitiveness across the country falls heavily on entities that coordinate public postsecondary institutions. Coordination of postsecondary education, whether of a single system of institutions or across an entire state, requires strategic leadership that draws on formal and informal authority to influence the priorities and activities of locally governed colleges and universities with strong traditions of autonomy. Many states are actively moving to improve postsecondary coordination--including the redesign of formal governance structures. This project was undertaken to help states improve the coordination function. It consists of a case study to tell the story of one coordinating board and a self-assessment tool that draws on the case study findings and aims to help other states better understand their own challenges and opportunities with respect to postsecondary coordination. Appended are: (1) SBCTC Notable Policy Innovations--Descriptions and References; and (2) Community College Size, Governance, and Funding in Ten States. (Contains 4 figures and 6 footnotes.) [For "Self Assessment: Increasing the Effectiveness of Postsecondary Coordination. A Companion to "On Balance: Lessons in Effective Coordination from the Washington State Board for Community and Technical Colleges--An Organizational Perspective"", see ED534112.] 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 (479K)

Descriptors:
Evaluation Utilization; Institutional Evaluation; Evaluation Methods; Stakeholders; Educational Planning; Self Evaluation (Groups); Technical Institutes; Governance; Community Colleges; Administrative Organization; Organizational Effectiveness; Case Studies; Improvement Programs; Coordination; Statewide Planning; Governing Boards; Educational Policy; Educational Finance; Public Agencies; Systems Approach; Strategic Planning; Politics of Education; Educational Environment; Policy Formation; Institutional Mission; Economic Factors; Questionnaires; Agency Role

Abstract:
Public organizations charged with coordinating higher education institutions face a complex set of tasks. Whether coordinating institutions within one sector or across sectors, such organizations play vital roles in promoting a state's capacity for policy leadership to meet the growing need for an educated citizenry. National experts have emphasized that effective policy capacity requires coordinating entities that can articulate mission and goals, devise strategies for meeting them, and use resources, including relationships with state leaders, to influence policy. The authors' case study subject, the Washington State Board for Community and Technical Colleges, was selected because of its track record of focusing a diverse constituency on a valuable public mission and using its resources strategically to facilitate large-scale policy changes aimed at making progress toward the mission. Its effectiveness rests in large part on its continual attention to relationships in order to mediate and balance the needs of various state and local parties. For states interested in improving existing coordinating organizations or designing new ones, the authors suggest that an assessment of the current context can illuminate possibilities for improvement. Multiple factors interact to create forward momentum and can be leveraged in myriad ways. Thus, the self assessment questions are designed so states can more clearly understand the factors at play in their own situations and more strategically evaluate short-term and long-term opportunities. The self-assessment questions fall into three categories: the state political and economic context, the design of the coordinating body itself, and the organization and leadership strategies used by the coordinating body. These factors are generalized from the Washington experience. They do not reflect an exhaustive review of the research or experiences of other states. [For the main report, "On Balance: Lessons in Effective Coordination from the Washington State Board for Community and Technical Colleges--An Organizational Perspective," see ED534114.] 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 (171K)

Descriptors:
At Risk Students; Health Promotion; Sex Education; Health Education; Participatory Research; Youth Agencies; Foreign Countries; Research Methodology; Young Adults; Workshops; Sexually Transmitted Diseases; Disadvantaged Youth; Trust (Psychology); Safety; Agency Role; Sexuality; Educational Experience

Abstract:
Young people in Australia are at greatest risk of contracting sexually transmitted infections, and priority actions are necessary for this population group. This study of marginalised and at-risk young people in out-of-school environments was conducted in Western Australia with the aim of obtaining young people's perceptions about their experience of sexual health education and preferred means of gaining sexual health knowledge and skills. A participatory research methodology was implemented through a series of workshops with 88 young people recruited through community youth agencies. The results of the study support what is already known about sexual health promotion for young people and the importance of a holistic approach to promoting positive relationships and sexual health. However, the findings emphasise that this should include the need for demonstrated trust, confidence and safe environments, and the complementary role of community youth agencies and peer-based programmes which may play an important role in reaching young people who may disengage with, or not be reached by school-based sexual health education. (Contains 2 tables, 1 figure, and 1 note.) 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:
Ideology; Governance; Educational Change; Foreign Countries; Neoliberalism; Educational History; Accountability; Public Policy; Empowerment; Public Agencies; Agency Role; Government Role; School Districts; Boards of Education

Abstract:
This paper explores the relationship between neoliberal ideology and the discourse and practice of education governance reform in Ontario over the last two decades. It focuses on changes in education governance introduced by successive Ontario governments: the NDP government from 1990 to 1995, the Progressive Conservative government from 1995 to 2003, and the Liberal government from 2003 until the present. The analytical approach deploys the three models of education governance identified by Bedard and Lawton (2000)--policy interdependence, administrative agency and policy tutelage--to describe differences in the policy content of the neoliberal governance reform projects undertaken by each government. The paper uses the work and recommendations of three government-appointed bodies--the Royal Commission on Learning (RCOL), the Education Improvement Commission (EIC) and the Governance Review Committee (GRC)--to capture critical shifts and tensions in governance reform strategies. Three interrelated points are offered to further the understanding of education governance dynamics in neoliberal paradigms in Ontario: first, the influence of political ideologies on approaches to governance and accountability; second, the mediating role played by government-appointed bodies; and third, the incrementalism of neoliberal reforms in education governance policy. (Contains 2 footnotes.) 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 (258K) |  More Info:
Help Find in a Library

Descriptors:
Research Universities; Incentives; Motivation; Interviews; Professional Development; College Faculty; Higher Education; Agency Role; Academic Advising; Teacher Effectiveness; Colleges; Rewards; Transcripts (Written Records)

Abstract:
This study is set in an era and a context in which extrinsic forms of motivation and reward are offered by higher education institutions as a means to enhance teaching, and in which teaching is effectively undervalued in relation to research. The study focuses on the role of agency in professional development and demonstrates the relevance of Margaret Archer's description of the interplay between structure and agency for understanding how academics enhance their teaching in research-intensive universities. Ten semi-structured interviews were conducted by a team of academic development advisors in order to obtain accounts of teaching academics of their becoming good teachers, in their own words. An analysis of the transcripts of the interviews with the lecturers demonstrates how dimensions such as biography, current contextual influences, individuals' dispositions and steps taken to enhance teaching interact in a spiralling manner to generate a sense of self-fulfilment and agency. Intrinsic, rather than extrinsic motivation, is shown to be significant in propelling individuals towards action. The article concludes with an assessment of the implications of the interplay between structure and agency, the need for an enabling environment with a key role for intrinsic motivation for professional development strategies, in research-intensive universities. 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:
Elementary Secondary Education; Federal Programs; Federal Aid; State Government; School Districts; Federal Legislation; Role; Federal Regulation; Accountability; Barriers; Time; Compliance (Legal); Difficulty Level; Data Collection; Information Dissemination; Agency Role; Educational Indicators; Lunch Programs; Stakeholders; Cost Effectiveness; Special Education; Individualized Education Programs

Abstract:
States and school districts receive funding through ESEA, IDEA, and national school meals programs. Some requirements for these programs are intended to help ensure program integrity and transparency, among other purposes, but questions have been raised about whether some federal requirements place an undue burden on states and school districts. GAO was asked to (1) describe federal requirements identified as the most burdensome by selected states and school districts and other stakeholders, (2) describe information states and school districts collect on the cost of complying with those requirements, and (3) assess federal efforts to reduce or eliminate burdensome requirements. We defined burdensome requirements as those that are viewed as complicated or duplicative, among other things. We interviewed officials in 3 states and 12 districts and obtained information on the costs to comply with selected requirements. While the results from these interviews are not generalizable, they provide insights into complying with federal requirements. We interviewed external education stakeholders and officials in the Departments of Education and Agriculture and the Office of Management and Budget. GAO recommends that the Secretary of Education take additional steps to address potentially duplicative reporting requirements, such as working with stakeholders to address their concerns, and develop legislative proposals to reduce unnecessarily burdensome statutory requirements. Education generally agreed with our recommendations. Appended are: (1) Description and Source of Requirements Identified as Burdensome by the State and School District Officials We Interviewed; (2) Comments from the U.S. Department of Education; and (3) GAO Contact and Staff Acknowledgments. (Contains 2 tables, 2 figures and 40 footnotes.) 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 (2183K)

Descriptors:
Prior Learning; Quality Control; Stakeholders; Foreign Countries; Workshops; Best Practices; Quality Assurance; Educational Development; Educational Policy; Qualifications; Agency Role; Certification; Institutional Evaluation; Case Studies; Recognition (Achievement); Accreditation (Institutions); Academic Standards; Outcome Measures; Communities of Practice; Knowledge Management

Abstract:
The theme of qualifications frameworks and their relation to quality assurance is gaining urgency in the European scene as more and more countries are completing their national qualifications frameworks and quality assurance agencies need to take important decisions on how to implement them. Some of the key features of the qualifications frameworks are the specification of learning outcomes, processes for assessing learners' attainment of the expected outcomes, their relation to the ECTS, identification of transfer and progression routes, and recognition of prior learning. ENQA wanted to respond to the need of agencies to address the issue by providing a forum for exchange of experience and methods in implementation of qualifications frameworks and for a discussion on what these changes mean for the work of the agencies. The workshop from which this publication is an outcome of took place in Dublin on 9-10 February 2012. The workshop picked up and took forward work that ENQA had done in this area in the past years, and in particular since a workshop in 2007 on qualifications frameworks and workshop in 2010 on learning outcomes. This current publication presents seven articles covering themes such as the state of development of qualifications frameworks, the role of agencies in the self-certification process, and the meaning of qualifications frameworks in external quality assurance. In addition, an article presenting the view of the labour market sector on qualifications frameworks provides depth to the range of views provided. Also recognition of prior learning, assessment of learning outcomes, and qualifications frameworks and learning outcomes in programme oriented quality assurance are addressed by this publication. Articles included in this paper are: (1) Qualifications Frameworks in the European Higher Education Area: The State of Development and Perspectives for the Future (Carita Blomqvist); (2) The Role of Quality Assurance Agencies in the Self-Certification of Compatibility of NQFS with the QF-EHEA (Bryan Maguire); (3) Role and Meaning of Qualifications Frameworks in External Quality Assurance (Karin Jarplid Linde); (4) Quality Assurance and Qualifications Frameworks: A Stakeholder View (Tony Donohoe); (5) Qualifications Frameworks and Learning Outcomes in Programme Oriented Quality Assurance--A Brief Story of Denmark, and a Few International Comments (David Metz); (6) Recognition of Prior Learning and the Role of Quality Assurance Agencies. Accreditation of Prior Learning in France as a Case Study (Teresa Sanchez Chaparro); and (7) Assessment of Learning Outcomes: The Case of ANECA (Rafael Llavor). ENQA Workshop--Quality Assurance and Qualifications Frameworks: Exchanging good practice is appended. Individual articles contain references. (Contains 26 footnotes.) 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 (334K) |  More Info:
Help Find in a Library