Your search found 3624 results.

Descriptors:
Grants; Time Management; Eligibility; Research Proposals; Grantsmanship; Graduate Students; College Faculty

Abstract:
Running a grant program for the first time can feel overwhelming. The work is time-consuming, requires attention to many details, and is accompanied by pressure from applicants who are desperate for money and prompt decisions. This article presents a list of all of the factors educators have to consider. From establishing a timeline and drafting the call for proposals to announcing the results, the author describes what needs to be accomplished. 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:
Identification; Evidence; Autism; Response to Intervention; Programming; Fidelity; Family Involvement; Pervasive Developmental Disorders; Eligibility; Learning Disabilities; Emotional Disturbances; Behavior Disorders; Asperger Syndrome; Mental Retardation; Special Education

Abstract:
The Response to Intervention (RTI) framework, a preventive model of universal screening, tiered interventions, and ongoing progress monitoring, poses an interesting consideration for identification and service delivery for children with autism spectrum disorders (ASD). Upon examination of the existing literature, paucity exists regarding how RTI might guide identification and service delivery for students with ASD; however, the authors consider core tenets of RTI and how they are relevant for students with ASD given what is known about this unique population. Due to the importance of early identification and interventions for individuals with ASD, the RTI framework could be problematic if used to delay education eligibility. Thus, two routes of identification are outlined by the authors, one of which expedites evaluation based on pervasive symptomatology, while the other route uses a form of universal screening to assist in moving toward evaluation for those suspected of ASD. The use of tiered interventions for prevention or service delivery could cause potential complications given the need for early identification and individualized intensive programming. However, there is a clear match for several instructional RTI components and ASD, specifically for evidence-based interventions that are implemented with fidelity and monitored frequently, and other aspects such as family involvement, which could improve programming for students with ASD. (Contains 1 table and 1 figure.) 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:
Student Financial Aid; Federal Government; Higher Education; Incentives; Eligibility; Educational Change; Tax Credits; Tuition; Student Loan Programs; Credentials; Grants; Low Income Groups; Outreach Programs

Abstract:
The federal financial aid system is no longer up to today's demands. Built in a different era, its haphazard evolution over the decades has made it inefficient, poorly targeted, and overly complicated. With the need for higher education never greater and college growing increasingly unaffordable, students deserve a streamlined aid system that is more understandable, effective, and fair. Policymakers can achieve such reforms at no additional cost to taxpayers--by rebalancing existing resources and better aligning incentives for students and institutions of higher education. Ultimately, those reforms will increase access to high-quality credentials and boost student success in higher education and the workforce. In "Rebalancing Resources and Incentives in Federal Student Aid," the authors offer more than 30 specific policy recommendations that are designed to create such a system. Nothing is off-limits. They recommend specific changes to federal grants, loans, tax benefits, college outreach programs and federal regulations to provide more direct aid to the lowest-income students, while strengthening accountability for institutions of higher education to ensure that more students are able to earn affordable, high-quality credentials. Taken together, the package of proposals in their report is "budget-neutral" over the 10-year period from federal fiscal years 2013-2022. Pell Grant Funding Sources are appended. (Contains 1 figure, 3 tables, and 120 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:

 ERIC Full Text (1095K)

Descriptors:
Dual Enrollment; High School Students; Postsecondary Education; High Schools; Public Colleges; Private Colleges; Two Year Colleges; School Size; Courses; Enrollment Trends; Enrollment Rate; Eligibility; College Credits; College Faculty; Secondary School Teachers; Teacher Qualifications; Tuition; At Risk Students; Distance Education; College Admission; Admission Criteria; Curriculum; Academic Degrees; Pupil Personnel Services; National Surveys

Abstract:
This report provides descriptive national data on the prevalence and characteristics of dual enrollment programs at postsecondary institutions in the United States. For this survey, dual enrollment refers to high school students earning college credits for courses taken through a postsecondary institution. The National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) previously collected data on dual enrollment and dual credit for the 2002-03 academic year from postsecondary institutions and high schools (Kleiner and Lewis 2005; Waits, Setzer, and Lewis 2005). To gather current data on dual enrollment and dual credit, NCES fielded an updated survey of postsecondary institutions on dual enrollment and a complementary survey of high schools on dual credit. The study presented in this report collected information for the 2010-11 academic year from postsecondary institutions on the enrollment of high school students in college-level courses within and outside of dual enrollment programs, and dual enrollment program characteristics. NCES, part of the Institute of Education Sciences, conducted this survey in fall 2011 using the Postsecondary Education Quick Information System (PEQIS). PEQIS is a survey system designed to collect small amounts of issue-oriented data from a nationally representative sample of institutions with minimal burden on respondents and within a relatively short period of time. Because the purpose of this report is to introduce new NCES data from this survey through the presentation of tables containing descriptive information, only selected findings are presented. These findings have been chosen to demonstrate the range of information available from the PEQIS dual enrollment study rather than to discuss all of the data collected; they are not meant to emphasize any particular issue. The findings are based on self-reported data from postsecondary institutions. Appended are: (1) Standard Error Tables; (2) Technical Notes; and (3) Questionnaire. (Contains 31 tables and 13 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 (1065K)

Descriptors:
Student Financial Aid; State Colleges; College Programs; Tuition; Admission Criteria; Out of State Students; Place of Residence; Residence Requirements; Financial Policy; Student Exchange Programs; Eligibility; Information Sources; Access to Education; State Policy; Undergraduate Study

Abstract:
WUE is the Western Undergraduate Exchange, a program coordinated by the Western Interstate Commission for Higher Education (WICHE). Through WUE, students in Western states may enroll in participating two-year and four-year public college programs at a reduced tuition level: up to 150 percent of the institution's regular resident tuition. In all cases, WUE tuition is considerably less than nonresident tuition. Virtually all undergraduate fields are available to WUE students at one or more of the participating colleges and universities. Some institutions have opened their entire curriculum on a space-available or first-come, first-served basis. Others offer only designated programs at the discounted WUE rate. For the academic year 2013-2014, the 25th year of WUE's operation, resident students from the following states may participate, if they meet eligibility requirements: (1) Alaska; (2) Idaho; (3) Oregon; (4) Arizona; (5) Montana; (6) South Dakota; (7) California; (8) Nevada; (9) Utah; (10) Colorado; (11) New Mexico; (12) Washington; (13) Hawaii; (14) North Dakota; and (15) Wyoming. 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 (572K)

Descriptors:
School Choice; Personal Narratives; Private Schools; Tax Credits; Guides; Comprehensive Guidance; Educational Vouchers; Scholarships; Funding Formulas; Eligibility; Student Participation; Participant Characteristics; Student Characteristics; State Programs; State Surveys; Educational Practices; Information Sources

Abstract:
"The ABCs of School Choice" is the most comprehensive guide to every private school choice program in America, showcasing the voucher, tax-credit scholarship, education savings accounts, and individual tax credit/deduction programs currently operating in 21 states and Washington, D.C. "The ABCs of School Choice" provides policymakers, advocates, researchers, and reporters data on each program's funding levels, eligibility rates, and participation numbers. The 2013 edition also features personal stories of the students, parents, and schools that benefit from school choice along with "Friedman Feedback" on ways states can expand each program to eventually fund all children, a vision first established by the late Milton Friedman. [For the 2012 edition of this report, see ED528821.] 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 (5451K)

Descriptors:
Federal Programs; Homeless People; Change Strategies; Program Implementation; Technical Assistance; Welfare Services; Eligibility; Compliance (Legal); Federal Regulation

Abstract:
The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) recently announced the release of its 2010 Notice of Funding Availability for the Homeless Assistance Programs that it administers. As a result of the passage of the HEARTH Act, there are four new requirements for HUD-funded homeless service programs related to education. These requirements, and suggestions for implementing them, are described in this NAEHCY document. 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:
College Bound Students; Student College Relationship; College Applicants; Eligibility; College Choice; Admission Criteria; Competitive Selection; Selective Admission; Qualifications; Rural Areas; Low Income; Socioeconomic Background; High School Seniors; First Generation College Students

Abstract:
This paper quantifies the extent of student-college "academic undermatch," which occurs when a student's academic credentials permit them access to a college or university that is more selective than the postsecondary alternative they actually choose. Using a nationally representative dataset, we find that 41 percent of students undermatch in their postsecondary choice. We also find that academic undermatch affects students with a range of academic credentials, but is more common among those students from low socioeconomic status families, who live in rural areas, and whose parents have no college degree. Finally, we show that between the 1992 and 2004 high school senior cohorts, academic undermatch has decreased by nearly 20 percent. The decrease is partially due to students being more likely to apply to a matched college. (Contains 8 tables and 3 figures.) 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; Evaluation Criteria; Cultural Influences; Work Ethic; Welfare Services; Employment Patterns; Welfare Recipients; Eligibility; Disabilities; Political Attitudes; Social Indicators; Sociometric Techniques; Economic Factors; Sociocultural Patterns; Socioeconomic Influences; National Surveys; Statistical Analysis; Predictor Variables

Abstract:
Research has shown that several criteria underlie people's opinions about the welfare deservingness of benefit recipients. However, it remains unknown which factors are associated with the emphasis that people place on such criteria. Using a 2006 Dutch national survey on the welfare deservingness of disability pension recipients, we study the influence of structural and cultural factors on people's emphasis on three deservingness criteria: control, need, and reciprocity. OLS regression analyses show that people's emphasis on specific deservingness criteria is strengthened by structural factors that indicate the possibility of resource competition such as the following: age, lower levels of education, unemployment, and lower income. However, actual personal experience with receiving welfare benefits weakens criteria emphasis. Cultural factors such as the espousal of views from the political right and the possession of a strong work ethic are associated with a heightened emphasis on deservingness criteria. 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:
Learning Disabilities; Eligibility; Special Education; Laws; Court Litigation; Policy Analysis; Case Studies; Case Records; Electronic Libraries; Related Services (Special Education); Content Analysis; Federal Legislation; Hearings; Accessibility (for Disabled)

Abstract:
Specific learning disability (SLD), although moderately declining in recent years, continues to be the largest of the eligibility classifications under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA; NCES, 2012). The recognition of response to intervention (RTI) in the 2004 amendments of the IDEA as an approach for identifying students with SLD has generated successive changes in the 2006 IDEA regulations and in subsequent state laws (e.g., Zirkel & Thomas, 2010a, 2010b). RTI has also been a continuing subject of contention (e.g., Hale et al. 2010) and confusion (e.g., Zirkel, 2011b, 2012c). Corresponding to these developments, what has been the recent trend in litigation? Prior to the effective date of the 2006 regulations, a monograph provided a systematic analysis of the 25 years of prior case law--both at the hearing/review officer and court levels--concerning SLD eligibility (Zirkel, 2006). The major findings included that (a) the total amounted to approximately 90 pertinent cases from 1980 to 2006, with about four fifths at the hearing/review officer level; (b) the frequency of the decisions rose gradually during this period to an annual average of approximately seven during the last 6 years, with the majority arising in California (n = 20), Pennsylvania (n = 15), and New York (n = 11); and (c) school districts, typically defending the position that the child was not eligible as SLD, won approximately 80% of the cases, with the most frequent decisional factors being severe discrepancy (n = 68) or the need for special education (n = 31). An update limited to the subsequent 3.5-year period (Zirkel, 2010) found 18 decisions concerning SLD eligibility. The findings were preliminary based on the limited period. The proportion of court decisions doubled to approximately two fifths of the cases. Continuing the previous trend, California accounted for more of the decisions than any other state (n = 7), with Pennsylvania remaining in second place (n = 3). The outcome trend increased even more in favor of districts; the parents prevailed in establishing the child's eligibility in only one of the 18 cases. The primary decisional factors were severe discrepancy and, to only a slightly less frequent extent, the need for special education. Conversely, RTI was conspicuous in its absence, surfacing in just two decisions and then in only a negligible role. The purpose of this analysis is to extend the previous, preliminary update to cover a fuller, 6-year period and, thus, provide a more accurate picture of the recent trends in relation to the prior 25-year analysis. The specific questions include: (1) Have the upward slope and California and hearing/review officer predominance in frequency of decisions continued?; (2) Has the trend of district-friendly outcomes changed?; and (3) Has RTI become a major decisional factor in these cases? (Contains 1 table.) 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