Your search found 2102 results.

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:
Educational Certificates; Graduates; Time to Degree; Degree Requirements; Credits; Undergraduate Students; Student Characteristics; Enrollment; Employment; Education Work Relationship; Salaries; Unemployment; Job Satisfaction; Working Hours; Occupations; Fringe Benefits

Abstract:
The number of certificates conferred by U.S. postsecondary institutions increased 64 percent in the last decade, from 572,000 in 2000-2001 to 936,000 in 2009-2010, surpassing the 850,000 associate's degrees conferred in 2009-2010. Certificates are overwhelmingly conferred in vocational fields and are intended to prepare students for the growing number of jobs requiring education at the subbaccalaureate level. National statistics on certificate requirements are reported in three broad categories of completion time (less than 1 year, 1 year to less than 2 years, and 2 years or more) but do not indicate credit requirements in detail or actual time to completion. Therefore, few statistics exist on how long it actually takes students to earn a certificate, in contrast to more extensive estimates of completion time for associate's degrees and bachelor's degrees. Because time spent earning a certificate may equate to reduced time in the labor market, accurately measuring time to certificate is critical in understanding certificate students' true investment when earning this form of human capital. These Web Tables provide estimates of certificate credit requirements, completion times, and labor market outcomes for undergraduate students who entered postsecondary education for the first time in 2003-2004 and whose postsecondary transcripts indicated the first credential earned by spring 2009 was a subbaccalaureate certificate (certificate completers). The results are based on data from about 1,700 certificate completers representing a population of approximately 311,000 students in the 2003-2004 Beginning Postsecondary Students Longitudinal Study, Second Follow-up (BPS:04/09), a nationally representative sample of undergraduates first interviewed during the 2003-2004 academic year and followed over a period of 6 academic years. Table 1 presents empirically derived credit hour requirements for certificate completers. Given the wide range in the number of required credits, table 1 displays the number required at the 10th percentile, the 25th percentile, the 50th percentile (median), the 75th percentile, and the 90th percentile among certificate completers. The credit requirements are presented for certificate completers overall and by selected field of study, the sector of institution where the student earned the certificate, and various enrollment, demographic, and employment characteristics. Table 2 describes certificate completers overall and separately for each of three categories of credit requirements. For each category, the table shows the percentage distribution by sector of the institution awarding the certificate and selected student characteristics. These distributions are also reported for the 23 percent of certificate completers whose certificate requirements were missing. Tables 3-5 report the time certificate completers took to complete their certificates in terms of the average number of months elapsed (table 3) and the median number of months elapsed (table 4) from first enrollment to certificate completion. The estimates in both of these tables are broken out by enrollment, demographic, and employment characteristics. The estimates in table 5 present the time to certification completion by credits required for certificate completion. Tables 6 and 7 focus on employment outcomes for certificate completers and noncompleters (that is, students who initially enrolled in a certificate program in 2003-2004 but had not completed any degree or certificate and were not enrolled as of spring 2009). Table 6 shows median and average salaries, labor force participation and unemployment rates, past unemployment, and satisfaction with various aspects of employment by categories of credit requirements. Table 7 reports additional employment characteristics, including full-time employment status, occupation, and availability of employer-provided benefits, by credits required for certificate completion. (Contains 14 tables and 1 endnote.) 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 (673K)

Descriptors:
Case Studies; Homosexuality; Sexual Orientation; Sexual Identity; Activism; Social Discrimination; Fringe Benefits; State Universities; Organizational Change; Intergroup Education; Adult Education; Interviews; Content Analysis; Diaries

Abstract:
In this case study, I examine the approaches to education used in various organizational contexts by lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer (LGBTQ) activists seeking domestic partner benefits within a major state university system throughout a nearly 20-year effort. Diversity education by activists occurred through self-censoring behaviors, varying degrees of coalition building, and the regular use of testimonials. I consider these efforts through the lens of five approaches to diversity, which illuminate the complex, multifaceted tactics utilized in various phases and contexts of the 20-year effort. Activists primarily used identity-aware approaches and harmonious diversity approaches. The article provides insight into the influence of identity, ressentiment, and intergroup coalitions in seeking these policy changes. In particular, the study provides researchers, activists, and other practitioners with evidence demonstrating the successful use of different approaches to diversity. These flexible approaches were used in response to varying organizational contexts throughout this long-term organization change effort. Despite the tension that arose among activists in determining which approach to use, the deliberative and flexible use of these approaches resulted in a well-respected and generally successful effort. (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

Descriptors:
College Presidents; Compensation (Remuneration); Fringe Benefits; Private Colleges; Taxes; Higher Education; Retirement Benefits

Abstract:
Private-college presidents often draw scrutiny for their hefty compensation packages, but most of them have a ready comeback: I could make a lot more money in the corporate world. While this statement is surely sometimes true, it is also true that some of the nation's top-paid presidents continue to receive perks that their corporate counterparts have relinquished under shareholder criticism. Among the 50 highest-paid private-college presidents in 2010, half led institutions that provided top executives with cash to cover taxes on bonuses and other benefits, a "Chronicle" analysis has found. This practice, known as "grossing up," has fallen out of fashion at many publicly traded companies, where boards have decided the perk is simply not worth the shareholder outrage it can invite. The author reports on how pay and perks creep up for private-college presidents. 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 Finance; Educational Technology; Educational Innovation; Sustainability; Blended Learning; Computer Assisted Instruction; Charter Schools; Elementary Schools; Costs; School Personnel; Teacher Student Ratio; Salaries; Fringe Benefits

Abstract:
Even as new educational technologies have emerged, staffing innovations have seemed all but impossible in American schools. Charter and district schools alike long ago surrendered to the notion that education requires at least as many core teachers as is determined from dividing enrollment by class size. A few new school designs suggest that we can fundamentally alter the basic schooling model, so that a given number of students can be taught well by fewer teachers who are leveraged in new ways. The innovations come with the promise of fundamental cost redesign. Of course, any large-scale adoption of these new school designs should depend most on whether the models are effective with students. Even if they are, many states have formidable barriers to staffing innovations, including funding formulas rigidly tied to student-teacher ratios. Policymakers are unlikely to let go of some of those barriers without relevant evidence of what such reforms might mean for their states. This paper provides that evidence. Using real wage and staffing data from each state, the authors project the financial and staffing implications of one innovative school model--the Rocketship lab rotation--to highlight potential impacts on the schooling workforce and total per-student spending. Cost factors used in the analysis in Table 2 are appended. (Contains 2 figures, 2 tables, and 19 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 (891K)

Descriptors:
Unions; Boards of Education; Teacher Strikes; Teaching Experience; Academic Degrees; School Districts; Retirement Benefits; Educational Finance; Budgets; Teacher Evaluation; Job Layoff; Class Size; Fringe Benefits; Time Factors (Learning)

Abstract:
Chicago teachers voted last week to suspend a 7-day-old strike, sending some 350,000 students back to the classroom and paving the way for the teaching force to vote on a tentative contract. But for many in the Windy City, the contract has raised another potentially tall hurdle: how the cash-strapped district will manage to pay for it. District officials estimate the agreement forged with the Chicago Teachers Union will cost $295 million over four years--cheaper than the two previous city teachers' contracts, but nevertheless costly in a school district that estimates it will carry a $1 billion shortfall by fiscal 2014. The contract will run for three years, but can be extended for a fourth if the union and the school board jointly agree to it. The new agreement raises salaries across the board for teachers by an average of 17.6 percent over four years and maintains premiums for experience and advanced degrees. The district has touted a number of cost savings tucked into the pact, achieved through changes to sick-day and leave policies and a new wellness plan. And the district's overall financial health is tied to broader issues, including some, like teacher pensions, that are governed by state rules. Still, observers said they felt the contract could have done a better job at outlining a path forward for the cash-strapped district. 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:
Costs; Cost Effectiveness; Change Strategies; Teacher Employment Benefits; Fringe Benefits; Best Practices; Finance Reform

Abstract:
State and local governments today face significant financial stress from the most recent recession, which makes their need to control benefit costs even greater. Revenues declined 22% from 2008 to 2009, mostly because of reduced tax income. At the same time, state and local government spending on unemployment compensation jumped 86%. It is no wonder education institutions are looking at all means possible to save money on benefit costs. The good news is that many effective cost-containment strategies are readily available, are proven to work, and can be implemented at no direct cost to the employer. This article offers five smart ways on how educators can save money on their benefit costs: (1) Implement wellness initiatives; (2) Move noncore benefits to employee-paid voluntary benefits; (3) Conduct a dependent verification audit; (4) Increase employee participation in pretax benefit programs; and (5) "Right source" benefits communication and enrollment. A list of references and resources is included. 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:
Public School Teachers; Compensation (Remuneration); Teacher Salaries; Fringe Benefits; Job Security; Salary Wage Differentials; Retirement Benefits

Abstract:
Over the past few years, as cash-strapped states and school districts have faced tough budget decisions, spending on teacher compensation has come under the microscope. The underlying question is whether, when you take everything into account, today's teachers are fairly paid, underpaid, or overpaid. In this forum, two pairs of respected economists offer very different answers. Andrew Biggs of American Enterprise Institute and Jason Richwine of the Heritage Foundation argue that, considering skills, workload, and benefits, today's teachers are, on average, overpaid. Lawrence Mishel of the Economic Policy Institute and Joydeep Roy of Columbia University and New York City's Independent Budget Office argue that Richwine and Biggs are off the mark, and that teachers deserve a raise. (Contains 3 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:
Job Satisfaction; Retirement Benefits; Fringe Benefits; Health Insurance; Organizational Communication; Health Care Costs

Abstract:
What's the main factor coloring employee satisfaction? Many organizations' leaders think the answer is salary, yet in reality, employee benefits packages are one of the biggest incentives an employer can offer. Educational institutions have done well in providing benefits to employees. However, with an unpredictable economic climate and a complex health care reform bill, school business decision makers face several challenges when it comes to offering the right kinds of health benefits to their staff. In this article, the author discusses the challenges that school administrators should address in light of the ever-changing health care landscape. Benefits packages have been shown to influence employee loyalty, productivity, job satisfaction, and retention. With all these factors at stake, understanding and addressing today's top benefits challenges and opportunities need to be a priority for educational institutions now and in the coming years. 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; Women Faculty; Females; Job Satisfaction; Parks; Sex Fairness; Faculty Development; Recreation; Career Development; Leisure Time; Organizations (Groups); Surveys; Internet; Family Work Relationship; Academic Rank (Professional); Teacher Education; Salaries; Fringe Benefits

Abstract:
Women represent growing numbers of faculty members in higher education as well as in recreation/leisure departments. The purpose of this study is to describe the career development of women faculty in recreation-related areas and to offer implications for faculty development and the preparation of future faculty. Data were collected from women who belong to National Parks and Recreation Association and who identify as educators. An online survey used a career development model, which combines factors related to current position, career patterns, career satisfaction, family/work/leisure balance, and gender equity. Similarities are found across the academic ranks related to job satisfaction, attitudes toward job, life balance perceptions, and the gender equity subscales. However, some notable differences are evident relative to influence in the organization, extrinsic expectations (e.g., salary, benefits and perks), and perceived career advancement opportunities, which are all rated higher by full professors than women faculty in other ranks. (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