Your search found 7852 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:
Federal Government; Legislators; Federal Legislation; Constitutional Law; Debate; Rhetoric; Voting; Civil Rights; Females; Feminism; United States History; Race; Immigrants; Politics

Abstract:
Through its analysis of the rhetorical means by which the US Congress overcame jurisdictional objections to federal action on the issue of woman suffrage, this essay argues that the stasis of jurisdiction operates as a mode of assemblage of discourses, institutions, and populations. In Congress, the woman suffrage issue helped re-organize federal and state prerogatives over the management of racial and ethnic relations at home and US leadership abroad. Thus, from a governmental perspective women did not emerge as constituents but as tools of public policy. As a legislative precedent, the 19th Amendment debates prompt critical attention to the particular constraints that the discourses of state institutions pose for feminist political change. (Contains 84 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:
Productivity; English Departments; Costs; Humanities; Federal Government; Cost Indexes; Citation Analysis; Funding Formulas; Research Needs; Research Opportunities; Research Administration; Financial Support; Agenda Setting; Experimenter Characteristics; Robustness (Statistics); Investment; Value Judgment; Statistical Bias; Intellectual Disciplines

Abstract:
Over the last decade, and in the context of the fiscal crisis in the nation in general and in higher education in particular, a debate has raged over the value of humanities research. Various commentators have argued that unlike nonhumanities disciplines, fields such as English studies and other humanistic disciplines bring very little into their universities. The federal government simply does not fund the National Endowment for the Humanities--the major federal funding agency for humanities research--at a level comparable to that of the National Science Foundation or the National Institutes for Health. This funding inequity in and of itself is an illustration of the society's value system vis-a'-vis the humanities. In this article, the author focuses on a report published at the end of 2011: "Literary Research: Costs and Impact," authored by Emory University English professor Mark Bauerlein for the Center for College Affordability and Productivity. The report presents the results of an empirical analysis of faculty productivity: Bauerlein examines the costs of research in four English departments and then juxtaposes those costs to the numbers of citations of works published by faculty in those departments. The author aims to show first how this is a critically flawed study because it is representative of many attacks on the humanities and especially English studies, and because it thus illustrates a set of common assumptions about educators' work as humanists. Then he discusses how educators might better respond to these types of misunderstandings of and attacks on their work. (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:
Military Personnel; Dependents; Paying for College; Federal Government; Veterans; Federal Legislation; Spouses; Fringe Benefits; Educational Finance; Public Policy; Costs; Program Descriptions

Abstract:
As a new GI Bill moved through Congress in 2008, a handful of influential politicians grew concerned. Would such a generous education program trigger an exodus of service members during two wars? At the Pentagon's urging, the lawmakers proposed a fix: Give troops the option to transfer their benefits to a child or spouse. That policy quickly proved to be one of the most popular provisions associated with the Post-9/11 GI Bill. In 2009, when the law took effect, the Department of Defense announced that in exchange for four more years of service, education benefits could be passed on. In the following year, dependents of service members and veterans--most of them children--represented a fifth of the half-million users of the GI Bill. Service members, veterans' groups, and politicians laud the policy as a well-deserved benefit for military families, many of which have endured the strain of multiple deployments during a period of protracted conflict. That comes at a cost: The Department of Veterans Affairs has spent just shy of $26-billion on the Post-9/11 GI Bill; over the program's life span, it is projected to cost $90-billion. Given such investment, some educators have questioned whether the children of high-ranking officers in particular should benefit from the related Yellow Ribbon Program, which gives some GI Bill recipients even more aid--pledged by participating colleges and matched by the federal government. Of the 900,000 people who have pursued college or technical training on the Post-9/11 GI Bill so far, the VA has not shared what proportion, over all, are dependents. And it does not track whether transferred benefits are more common among officers or the enlisted ranks. But dependents are apparently getting a boost--from not only the GI Bill and Yellow Ribbon Program, but also a patchwork of related policies at the state and campus levels. 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:
Governance; Educational History; Federal Government; Pedagogical Content Knowledge; Social Change; Educational Administration; Expertise

Abstract:
The consolidation of the Argentine Federal Government by the 1870s aimed to modernise local society, establish state institutions and reach political stabilisation. Building a modern schooling system articulated both utopia and bureaucracy by establishing the use of knowledge as an instrument of social intervention, vindicating and legitimising the concept of rational control. This approach established the formal and material bases for the constitution of a field of pedagogical knowledge on one hand, and a field of bureaucratic knowledge on the other. These two fields approached the articulation of regulating devices of the educational system in distinctive ways. While normalist pedagogical knowledge involved a set of instructions on schooling, the bureaucratic knowledge of inspectors resulted in regulation of the schooling process. (Contains 34 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:
Student Financial Aid; Paying for College; Federal Government; Costs; Internet; Tuition; Information Sources; Educational Attainment; Information Needs; Family Needs

Abstract:
Families flummoxed about what college will cost them have more information at their disposal than ever before. The Internet offers tuition data, advice on saving and borrowing, and explanations of financial aid. New online calculators let families estimate their bottom-line price at any college. But not all the information out there is easy to make sense of, and some of it's no good. A big push from the federal government to provide better consumer information has not created better-informed consumers. Families have more information than ever before, but no more clarity about the eventual cost of a diploma. 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:
Program Effectiveness; Program Evaluation; Preschool Education; Preschool Children; Disadvantaged Youth; Federal Government; Followup Studies; Grade 3; Elementary School Students; Outcomes of Education; School Readiness; Kindergarten

Abstract:
In 2008, the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) completed data collection for its third-grade follow-up study of Head Start, a federal preschool program designed to improve the kindergarten readiness of low-income children. Four years later, just before Christmas, the agency finally published the results of the congressionally mandated evaluation. Since 1965, taxpayers have spent more than $180 billion on Head Start. Yet, over the decades, this Great Society relic has failed to improve academic outcomes for the children it was designed to help. The third-grade follow-up evaluation is the latest in a growing body of evidence that should urge policymakers to seriously consider Head Start's future. HHS has released definitive evidence that the federal government's 48-year experiment with Head Start has failed children and left taxpayers a tab of more than $180 billion. In the interest of children and taxpayers, it's time for this nearly half-century experiment to come to an end. "If" the federal government continues to fund Head Start, policymakers should allow states to make their Head Start dollars portable, following children to a private preschool provider of choice. (Contains 17 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 (1827K)

Descriptors:
Childrens Literature; Developing Nations; Ideology; Social Change; Federal Government; Foreign Countries; Social History; Political Issues; Social Justice; Social Bias

Abstract:
This article demonstrates, through Michael Gascoigne's "Tunzi the Faithful Shadow" (1988), that literature for children is sometimes employed by the government into the service of propagating dominant state ideologies in Zimbabwean schools. Such texts disseminate issues of inclusion and exclusion that characterise all nation building projects. I argue, through a reading of "Tunzi the Faithful Shadow," that texts for children studied in Zimbabwean schools have been shaped by a distinctly Zimbabwean socio-historical context which includes, but is not limited to, the formation of a new national sensibility after the liberation war and the political unrest in the emerging nation. 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; Foreign Countries; Graduate Study; Federal Government; Educational Administration; Vocational Education; Canada Natives; Educational Policy; Professional Associations; Government Role; Graduate Students; College Administration; College Faculty; Educational History; Universities; Professional Education

Abstract:
This report describes programs that require a bachelor's degree, not necessarily in the same field, for entry to the program. They are equivalent to at least one semester of full-time study, with at least some of the instruction delivered face-to-face in British Columbia, Canada. Graduate programs, professional programs such as law and medicine, and post-baccalaureate diploma programs in public, not-for profit, and for-profit institutions are all within its scope. The paper touches on an extensive and representative sample of programs and institutions, but does not provide a complete inventory. The focus is on how programs were established, not on everything that has happened subsequently. Although a few graduate programs existed prior to 1945, postsecondary education in BC until then consisted mainly of undergraduate teaching institutions and various apprenticeship and articling opportunities. With the growth of research funding from the federal government, graduate education began expanding in the 1950s and, by the 1960s, doctoral education had become common. Professional programs had a more varied evolution, with some moving from training provided by the profession into the university and with many raising their entry qualifications to a bachelor's degree. The most recent post-baccalaureate developments have concerned post-degree certificates and diplomas. BC Public Institutions are appended. [For "Agencies and Organizations. Made in B.C.: A History of Postsecondary Education in British Columbia. Volume 6," see ED536089.] 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 (1166K) |  More Info:
Help Find in a Library