Your search found 12488 results.

Descriptors:
Public Agencies; Public Policy; Scientific Research; Periodicals; Access to Information; Federal Aid; Federal Government; Publishing Industry

Abstract:
The National Science Foundation (NSF), in carrying out the Obama administration's new push for greater public access to research published in scientific journals, will consider exclusivity periods shorter than the 12-month standard in the White House directive, as well as trade-offs involving data-sharing and considerations of publishers' financial sustainability. The administration's directive, announced on Friday after two years of deliberation, asks agencies that sponsor research to impose a 12-month upper limit on how long journals can hold subscription-only rights to articles describing research that was financed with federal funds. The National Institutes of Health (NIH) adopted such a requirement almost five years ago, and now all other federal agencies that spend at least $100-million a year on research and development are being given six months to draft a similar policy. The NIH announced this past November that it would soon begin enforcement by blocking the renewal of grant awards in cases where journal publications arising from the awards do not comply with its open-access rule. The NSF, the largest provider of federal money for basic scientific research after the NIH, will very likely follow the NIH in setting a 12-month period of exclusivity as its general rule. The White House science adviser, John P. Holdren, in announcing the new policy on Friday, described an expansion of public access to federally financed research as important to economic growth. Scientific research supported by the federal government spurs scientific breakthroughs and economic advances when research results are made available to innovators. Demands for open-access research have generated years of heated debate involving publishers, universities, researchers, and various advocacy groups. The NIH instituted its 12-month policy in April 2008, but only after strenuous objections from private publishing companies that fought back against an original proposal for six months. Congress has refused to pass a government-wide mandate, despite several years of attempts by some lawmakers. And only a year ago, the Obama administration appeared to have given up on the idea, after a year of studying the question. In the end, the plan outlined by Mr. Holdren does "a very good job of balancing interests" of libraries, universities, researchers, and publishers. Industry representatives appeared to agree. In a statement issued Friday, the Association of American Publishers said the new policy "outlines a reasonable, balanced resolution of issues around public access to research funded by federal agencies." 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:
Higher Education; Student Financial Aid; Accountability; Federal Aid; Costs; Educational Policy; Debt (Financial); Accreditation (Institutions); Futures (of Society); Performance Based Assessment; Presidents

Abstract:
For 40 years, federal money has sustained higher education while enabling its worst tendencies. That is about to change. The end may have come on February 12, 2013, when President Barack Obama delivered his State of the Union address. "Skyrocketing costs," the president said, "price way too many young people out of a higher education, or saddle them with unsustainable debt." In a policy document released after the speech, the president proposed the most sweeping change in federal aid since the great debates of the early 1970s. In addition to value-driven accountability measures for colleges, he called for "establishing a new, alternative system of accreditation that would provide pathways for higher-education models and colleges to receive federal student aid based on performance and results." Against a backdrop of a growing number of reports on reforming financial aid, in a handful of words, the president had proposed nothing less than a postinstitutional future of higher education--one in which "colleges," as defined by other colleges, as defined by higher education itself, would no longer have a monopoly over the receipt of public funds. 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; Access to Education; Higher Education; Student Financial Aid; African Americans; Federal Aid; Low Income; Race; Social Class; Costs

Abstract:
This article reviews the history of financial aid policy from the Higher Education Act of 1965 to its reauthorisation in 1992 and the subsequent ramifications upon African-American students. It considers issues of race and class with regard to college access. This work concludes with a look at contemporary aid, as well as offers race- and class-conscious financial aid by increasing college affordability to low-income students, as potential solutions to broadening educational access to Black Americans. 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:
School Choice; Rural Areas; Rural Education; Foreign Countries; Rural Schools; Educational Policy; Public Policy; Case Studies; Financial Support; Federal Aid; Marketing; Parent Attitudes

Abstract:
Market principles now dominate the education and social policies of many Anglophone countries, including Australia, but articulate differentially within specific contexts. Existing historical legacies, local economic and social conditions, and geographical settings interact with federal and state funding and transport policies to shape the nature of regional education markets and the choices families make in a rural school market in Australia. Through two school case studies, this article explores the effects of policy shifts on parental choice and student movement within a regional Victorian community. Informed by policy sociology, the article views the policy as a dynamic, often "ad hoc" process with contradictory effects. It indicates how an ensemble of federal and state funding and conveyancing policies enable some schools to develop marketing practices that reconstruct the local education market to their advantage through the introduction of transport and flexi-boarding policies. It demonstrates that education markets are not confined to urban settings and that while choice is not a new phenomenon in this rural area, federal and state funding and transport policies have reconfigured local markets and intensified the market work undertaken by schools and parents with, in this instance, unequal effects on the provision of schooling in a rural region. (Contains 78 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:

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

Descriptors:
Academic Achievement; Safety; Accountability; Program Effectiveness; After School Programs; Discipline; Student Behavior; Family Life; Parent Participation; Parent School Relationship; Program Evaluation; Correlation; Federal Aid; Risk

Abstract:
Afterschool programs have been operating for decades in communities across the country, and federal investment in afterschool has increased dramatically since the mid-1990s. However, even more investment in the field of afterschool, which includes before-school, afterschool and summer learning programs, is needed to keep up with the growing demand. Parents and voters overwhelmingly support afterschool and want to see more afterschool opportunities for children and increased funding for programs. As public demand and need for afterschool have grown, so too has the demand for accountability. This is particularly true for afterschool programs that utilize public dollars. After all, where tax dollars flow, so must accountability to taxpayers. Fortunately for afterschool advocates, a steady stream of afterschool evaluations are showing important gains for children, not only in terms of academic achievement but also in terms of safety, discipline, attendance and avoidance of risky behaviors. In addition, researchers have found that afterschool programs encourage increased parental involvement, an important building block for student success. This updated evaluations backgrounder focuses on the impact of afterschool programs on academic outcomes, student behavior and parental concerns about children's safety. The studies included in this backgrounder are just a few of the numerous evaluations of afterschool programs completed in recent years. In reviewing the studies included in this backgrounder, a few key themes emerged. The data and conclusions from these studies suggest that quality afterschool programs have a positive impact on a number of measures of student academic achievement, positively affecting behavior and discipline and helping relieve parents' worries about their children's safety. Specific research findings, organized by type of outcome, are detailed in this paper. 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 (264K)

Descriptors:
Student Loan Programs; Federal Aid; Debt (Financial); Undergraduate Students; Dropouts; Comparative Analysis; College Graduates; Longitudinal Studies; Incidence; Employment; Income; Public Colleges; Private Colleges; Two Year Colleges; Proprietary Schools

Abstract:
This Statistics in Brief focuses on students who do not complete a postsecondary credential and the substantial federal education debt they accrue. Specifically, the analysis compares the cumulative debt from Stafford and Perkins loan programs of students who did not complete a degree within 6 years of first enrolling ("noncompleters") with that of their counterparts who did complete ("completers"). Students still enrolled in postsecondary education after 6 years are not included because many of these students have not yet entered repayment or formally entered the labor force and lack sufficient income data for a key measure used in the analysis. These students constitute 15 percent of beginning postsecondary students in 2009 and 14 percent in 2001 (Berkner, He, and Cataldi 2002; Skomsvold, Radford, and Berkner 2011, table 2.0A). The study is based on data from the two most recent cohorts of first-time beginning postsecondary students surveyed by the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES): students who began postsecondary education in 1995-96 and those who began in 2003-04. Each cohort was followed for 6 years, with final data collection for each cohort occurring in 2001 and 2009, respectively. The sampled students were identified in the 1995-96 and 2003-04 National Postsecondary Student Aid Studies (NPSAS), respectively, and followed up in the corresponding Beginning Postsecondary Students (BPS) Longitudinal Studies (BPS:95/01 and BPS:04/09). (Contains 3 tables, 8 figures and 9 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 (1251K)

Descriptors:
Expenditures; School Districts; Public Schools; School Statistics; State Departments of Education; Income; Federal Aid; Educational Finance; School District Size; Charter Schools; Tables (Data); Elementary Secondary Education; Expenditure per Student; Enrollment; Instruction; Pupil Personnel Services

Abstract:
This report presents data from the School District Finance Survey (F-33) of the Common Core of Data (CCD) survey system for school year (SY) 2009-10, fiscal year 2010 (FY 10). The F-33 is a district-level financial survey that consists of data submitted annually to the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) and the Governments Division of the U.S. Census Bureau (Census Bureau) by state education agencies (SEAs) in the 50 states and the District of Columbia. The purpose of this report is to introduce new data through the presentation of tables containing descriptive information; therefore, the selected findings chosen for this report demonstrate the range of information available when using the F-33 component of CCD. The selected findings do not represent a complete review of all observed differences in the data and are not meant to emphasize any particular issue. This report presents findings on public education revenues and expenditures at the local education agency (LEA) level using FY 10 provisional data from the F-33 of the CCD survey system. This First Look provides users with an opportunity to access provisional F-33 data that have been fully reviewed, edited, and imputed. Final data, including revisions to the provisional data submitted by the SEAs after the close of data collection, will be available during the following collection year. Appended are: (1) Methodology and Technical Notes; (2) Common Core of Data Glossary; and (3) Reference Tables. (Contains 11 tables and 4 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 (1651K)

Descriptors:
Inservice Teacher Education; Teacher Attitudes; Instructional Effectiveness; Federal Aid; Mixed Methods Research; Educational Technology; Teaching Methods; Beliefs; Technology Integration; Adoption (Ideas); Attitude Change; Epistemology; Correlation

Abstract:
The purpose of this exploratory mixed methods study was to investigate how teacher beliefs were related to technology integration practices. We were interested in how and to what extent teachers' (a) beliefs about the nature of knowledge and learning, (b) beliefs about effective ways of teaching, and (c) technology integration practices were related to each other. The participants were twenty two teachers who have participated in a four-year professional development project funded by the U.S. Department of Education. Specific relations between teachers' beliefs and technology integration practices are presented. The implications for professional development and suggestions for teacher belief change and technology integration are discussed. (Contains 5 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:
Higher Education; Educational Finance; Costs; Tuition; State Policy; Public Policy; Productivity; Expenditure per Student; College Attendance; Government Role; Resource Allocation; Educational Policy; Educational Trends; Trend Analysis; Educational Change; Health Services; Health Care Costs; Federal Aid; Foreign Countries

Abstract:
Rapid increases in what colleges charge and what they spend per student have been and remain one of the most controversial aspects of American higher education. Tuition, fees, and other college charges have increased in both the public and private sectors at more than twice the rate of inflation for over a quarter century. Trends over time in what colleges and universities spend per student are harder to discern because recent changes in accounting conventions have made it difficult to compare spending patterns. This report seeks to examine the extent to which public policies at both the federal and state levels have shaped these trends in price and cost productivity (measured as spending per student). To accomplish this, the report is divided into the following four sections: (1) A theoretical consideration of how public and private providers meet the demand for higher education; (2) An examination of trends over the past 40 years in what colleges charge, how much they spend per student, and tuition as a percentage of educational costs; (3) A discussion of the various theories that have been put forth for why prices and spending per student have increased so rapidly in the past three decades; and (4) An analysis of the effects public policies may have had on pricing and productivity (measured as spending per student) and a series of suggestions for a series of federal and state policy reforms that could slow the future growth of what colleges charge and spend per student. This paper is one of three in a series on higher education costs. (Contains 11 figures, 3 tables, and 28 notes.) [For "Addressing the Declining Productivity of Higher Education Using Cost-Effectiveness Analysis. Stretching the Higher Education Dollar. Special Report 2" see ED541919.] 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:
Outcomes of Education; Competition; Curriculum Development; Manufacturing; Computer Assisted Design; Student Projects; Computer Software; Research and Development; Course Descriptions; School Business Relationship; Curriculum Implementation; Educational Objectives; Program Descriptions; Federal Aid; Educational Technology; Computer Simulation; Computer Assisted Instruction; Instructional Design; Engineering Education; Teaching Methods; Instructional Effectiveness; College Students; College Instruction; Electronics; Electromechanical Technology

Abstract:
This paper describes the goals, pedagogical system, and educational outcomes of a three-semester curriculum in microelectromechanical systems (MEMS). The sequence takes engineering students with no formal MEMS training and gives them the skills to participate in cutting-edge MEMS research and development. The evolution of the curriculum from in-house fabrication facilities to an industry-standard foundry process affords an opportunity to examine the pedagogical benefits of the latter approach. Outcomes that are assessed include the number of students taking the classes, the quality of work produced by students, and the research that has emanated from class projects. Three key elements of the curriculum are identified: 1) extensive use of virtual design and process simulation software tools; 2) fabrication of student-designed devices for physical characterization and testing; and 3) integration of a student design competition. This work strongly leveraged the university outreach activities of Sandia National Laboratories (SNL) and the SNL SUMMiT MEMS design and fabrication system. SNL provides state-of-the-art design tools and device fabrication and hosts a yearly nationwide student design competition. Student MEMS designs developed using computer-aided design (CAD) and finite element analysis (FEA) software are fabricated at SNL and returned on 18-mm[superscript 2] die modules for characterization and testing. One such module may contain a dozen innovative student projects. Important outcomes include an increase in enrollment in the introductory MEMS class, external research funding and archival journal publications arising from student designs, and consistently high finishes in the SNL competition. Since the SNL offerings are available to any US college or university, this curriculum is transportable in its current form. (Contains 2 tables and 2 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