Your search found 6079 results.

Descriptors:
Philosophy; Departments; Higher Education; Surveys; Change; Tenure; Financial Support; Grants; Interdisciplinary Approach; Foreign Countries

Abstract:
The academy is widely reported to be going through a period of transformation: not just changes to what is taught, but threats to tenure and internal funding, perhaps balanced by new possibilities for external funding and interdisciplinary projects. This article discusses a recently conducted survey of US and Canadian Philosophy departments, in an effort to understand one discipline's perspective on and reaction to these changes. The survey found that, for the majority of departments, Philosophy has largely not changed over the last decade in terms of shifts in subfields, tenure and tenure criteria, internal funding and external grant awards. However, a minority of departments are demonstrating potentially transformative possibilities, especially as related to interdisciplinarity. 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:
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:
Higher Education; Private Financial Support; Skilled Workers; Grants; Scholarships; Employees; Labor Force Development; Public Policy; Expenditure per Student; Economic Climate; Competition; Tuition; Social Problems

Abstract:
It's no secret that states and the federal government have found themselves in a financial pinch when it comes to higher education. After years of recession and sluggish recovery, states have slashed per-pupil public spending on higher education by 14.6 percent since 2008. At the federal level, though money for Pell Grants has more than doubled since 2008, the program faces a shortfall of about $6-billion for 2014. It's time to experiment with a new way of leveraging private capital to finance postsecondary education and training--the social-impact bond. In its simplest form, a social-impact bond has three players: (1) the government; (2) private investors; and (3) providers of a social program. Under a bond agreement issued by the government, private investors front the money to providers, who offer services designed to reduce the likelihood that those in the program will need additional government services in the future. But unlike traditional state or municipal bond programs, the government repays investors only if the social program meets agreed-upon performance targets. If the program fails, the government pays nothing. And if it exceeds expectations, resulting in public savings, investors reap a return on their investment. These bonds are now popping up around the United States, including a partnership between Goldman Sachs and New York City to decrease recidivism of young offenders in Riker's Island jail and new programs in Massachusetts to reduce homelessness and juvenile recidivism. President Obama has announced pilot "pay-for-success projects" at the Departments of Labor and Justice to achieve specific social-service outcomes. What do such programs have to do with solving the skills gap? It's time to experiment with a new way of leveraging private capital to finance higher education. Local employers who need more skilled workers face a dilemma when it comes to investing in training employees. Directly subsidizing tuition for employees can help retain workers temporarily, but better-educated employees may also be more likely to defect and join competitors. Meanwhile, binding them to the company in return for postsecondary training raises legitimate concerns about "indentured servitude." Business-sponsored scholarship programs for prospective students present a similar problem: Competitors can get a "free ride" on those investments. The social-impact bond mitigates those problems. It also provides local businesses with an additional avenue to shape postsecondary offerings to reflect labor-force needs. 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:
Credentials; Academic Freedom; College Faculty; Tenure; Web Sites; Electronic Publishing; Financial Needs; Doctoral Degrees; Grants; Intellectual Disciplines; Computer Mediated Communication; Employment; Research

Abstract:
Independent scholars are a growing part of the academic landscape. They may have been jilted by the academic job market, or are uninterested in either being on the tenure track or in cobbling together full-time work as adjuncts. Like traditional professors, they perform research, secure grants, and publish books and papers. In some cases, their work is having an impact on their disciplines, challenging established views and advancing knowledge in the field. But independent scholars say their contributions are frequently discounted by tenured professors, who, as gatekeepers of scholarly conversations and the distribution of intellectual ideas, tend to exclude those who lack university credentials. Some prominent professors acknowledge that such scholars do important academic work. Yet professors question whether the blogs, podcasts, Facebook posts, and tweets that independent scholars sometimes depend on as alternatives to journal publishing are more harmful than helpful to the quality of scholarship. The work life of an independent scholar--with its freedom from the performance requirements of the tenure track--can be attractive to those with young children and those who can't or don't want to relocate for a faculty job. Yet theirs can be a spartan existence, lacking intellectual colleagues or recognition, a calling that most can afford to pursue only by working extra part-time jobs or relying on a partner's income. The financial needs of independent scholars can also get in the way of academic freedom by limiting the kinds of questions they are able to ask and the projects they are willing to pursue. "The Chronicle" talked with Ph.D.'s who work as independent scholars in anthropology, Asian studies, biology, education, English, evolution, history, political science, religion, and theater. Some set up shop on their own after they failed to earn tenure or grew disillusioned with the culture of large research universities, which they found too limiting, in terms of the kinds of projects they could pursue, or too competitive. Others sidestepped academe from the very beginning, some for jobs outside higher education, others because they didn't want to be tied down to a full-time position. 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:
Grants; Private Colleges; Institutional Characteristics; Universities; Graduation; Scores; Full Time Equivalency; Predictor Variables; School Size; College Entrance Examinations; Expenditure per Student; Correlation; Graduation Rate; Probability; Undergraduate Students; Academic Persistence; Student Characteristics; Personality Theories; Regression (Statistics); Models

Abstract:
Graduation outcomes are analyzed at public and private baccalaureate colleges and universities in the United States. The purpose is to determine the effect of institutional characteristics on a binary indicator of college graduation. The effect of the percentage of Pell grant recipients on graduation outcomes is of primary interest, controlling for other covariates. Institutional characteristics have a major effect on college graduation outcomes. Key institutional variables that appear to have the largest effect on graduation outcomes include percent Pell recipients, private college status, and institutional average SAT scores. College size and expenditures per FTE student have a direct but more moderate relationship to graduation outcomes. Implications for baccalaureate education are discussed. (Contains 1 figure and 9 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:
Parent Attitudes; Paying for College; Higher Education; Money Management; Parent Financial Contribution; Family Financial Resources; Parent Responsibility; Economic Factors; Motivation; Family Income; Racial Differences; Ethnicity; Student Loan Programs; Grants; Goal Orientation

Abstract:
Sallie Mae has conducted an ongoing study, "How America Pays for College," annually since 2008. Through that study, the researchers are able to provide a clearer picture of how the typical American undergraduate is paying for college today. This report is the third in the "How America Saves for College" series conducted since 2009. Interviews took place in August 2012 with a nationally representative sample of more than 1,600 parents. Sallie Mae's "How America Saves for College 2013" shows American families overwhelmingly expect their children to attend college and that most parents are optimistic about their ability to save for it. It also shows that anticipated savings often don't tie to the amount that families are currently saving, nor meet with the reality of the cost of college. Families who have set a savings goal for themselves plan to save close to $39,000 for each child's college education costs. When asked another way, parents who are saving plan to save about 32 percent of the future cost of college. Based on families' current savings behaviors, actual savings will amount to about half their goal amount. (Contains 10 figures, 54 tables, and 10 footnotes.) [For 2010 report, see ED540411.] 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 (2262K)

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:
Academic Achievement; Higher Education; Program Effectiveness; Organizational Change; Student Needs; Grants; Human Resources; Hispanic American Students; Success; Student Recruitment; School Holding Power; College Transfer Students; Two Year Colleges; Academic Support Services; Student Personnel Services; Sustainability

Abstract:
How does the country accelerate Latino student success in higher education? The U.S. has to find programs and strategies that improve the success of Latino students, and then replicate or scale up those programs and strategies to serve more students. Those are the basic principles behind "Excelencia" in Education's Growing What Works (GWW) initiative. The Growing What Works initiative is "Excelencia" in Education's concerted effort to expand the reach of programs increasing Latino student success, as identified through the Examples of "Excelencia," and demonstrating how these programs can be replicated through small SEMILLAS (Seeding Educational Models that Impact and Leverage Latino Academic Success) grants. The results described in this brief were made possible through a working partnership with foundations and institutions of higher education who committed to achieve and propagate demonstrable results in accelerating Latino student success in higher education. This brief includes lessons learned from implementing the Growing What Works initiative and SEMILLAS grants. Critical in this time of great change for higher education and for Latino students is the following lesson. Targeted, well managed financial and human resources focused on Latino student success, not only produce effective results for students, the participating institutions and supporting foundations, but demonstrate the strength and viability of the these strategies to accelerate larger social impact and serve as catalysts for institutional change to increase Latino student success. 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 (846K)

Descriptors:
Academic Achievement; College Credits; Grade Point Average; Enrollment; Program Effectiveness; Community Colleges; Control Groups; Grants; Scholarships; Remedial Instruction; Low Income Groups

Abstract:
"Can Scholarships Alone Help Students Succeed? Lessons from Two New York City Community Colleges" examined the effects of performance-based scholarships for low-income community college students (ages 22-35) who were required to enroll in remedial courses. The study evaluated the impact of the scholarships on continued community college enrollment, credits attempted and earned, and cumulative grade-point average (GPA). All study subjects were eligible for Pell Grants. Study authors randomly assigned 1,502 students at two New York City community colleges into one of three groups: (a) students were offered a performance-based scholarship for two semesters (up to $2,600); (b) students were offered a performance-based scholarship for two semesters plus one summer term (up to $3,900); and (c) students were not offered a performance-based scholarship, though these students were still eligible to receive other financial aid. Scholarships were awarded directly to students, on top of their existing financial aid, at the beginning, middle, and end of each semester, contingent on their continued enrollment and grades. The two scholarship groups were combined for most analyses. Study authors reported findings for a number of outcomes related to enrollment, course taking, and grades. The portion of the study that examined enrollment rates reported that at the end of the two-semester program, 78.1% of the scholarship students were still enrolled, versus 76.6% of the students in the control group. Enrollment for the scholarship and control groups, respectively, was 61.9% versus 60.7% one semester after the program ended, and 51.2% versus 49.5% two semesters after the program ended. None of these differences are statistically significant. 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 (89K)

Descriptors:
Academic Achievement; Academic Standards; Accountability; Achievement Gap; Administrator Effectiveness; Alignment (Education); Budgets; Career Readiness; Charter Schools; College Readiness; Core Curriculum; Data; Educational Assessment; Educational Change; Educational Improvement; Elementary Secondary Education; Federal Legislation; Formative Evaluation; Grants; Higher Education; Language Arts; Leadership Effectiveness; Literacy; Low Achievement; Mathematics Achievement; Measurement Objectives; Models; Outcomes of Education; Partnerships in Education; Poverty; Principals; Professional Development; Program Effectiveness; Program Implementation; School Districts; School Effectiveness; School Turnaround; State Government; State Standards; STEM Education; Teacher Effectiveness; Teacher Evaluation

Abstract:
This State-specific summary report serves as an assessment of Tennessee's second year of Race to the Top implementation. The report highlights successes and accomplishments, identifies challenges, and provides lessons learned from implementation from approximately September 2011 through September 2012. During Year 2, the Tennessee Department of Education (TDOE) revamped its approach to project management to ensure meaningful project oversight and revised project work plans and goals that focus on measuring project performance and impact at the State educational agency (SEA) level. The State also participated in partnership meetings with local educational agencies (LEAs) to build relationships focused on data and collaborative problem solving. These meetings reinforced the State's goal of transitioning from compliance monitoring to a more collaborative role as LEAs implemented their Race to the Top plans. Although Tennessee made excellent progress in Year 2, it still faced challenges as it rolled out the Tennessee Educator Acceleration Model (TEAM) and the Common Core State Standards (CCSS), built data systems to support instruction, and expanded its science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) network. Moving into Year 3 of its grant, Tennessee plans to build on its accomplishments and address its challenges from Year 2. The State is reassessing its implementation plans in several reform areas to ensure continuous improvement and effective implementation. For example, the State is making changes to its educator evaluation system to address feedback from teachers and principals. In addition, TDOE is enhancing its existing Field Service Centers (FSCs) to provide content-specific supports to LEAs and schools. The FSCs will now be called Centers of Regional Excellence (COREs) and will leverage the existing strengths of FSCs and add additional capacities to provide support to LEAs as they implement the CCSS and the new evaluation system. The State's plans for Years 3 and 4 rely heavily on effective CORE implementation, highlighting the need for the State to establish high-quality centers and mechanisms to assess their effectiveness. A glossary is included. (Contains 20 footnotes.) [For "Race to the Top. Tennessee Report. Year 1: School Year 2010-2011. [State-Specific Summary Report]," see ED529330.] 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 (1550K)