Search results

Although access to higher education has increased substantially over the past forty years, student success in college—as measured by persistence and degree attainment—has not improved at all. Thomas Brock reviews systematic research findings on the effectiveness of various interventions designed to help at-risk students remain in college. Brock shows how changes in federal policy and public attitudes since the mid-1960s have opened up higher education to women, minorities, and nontraditional students and also shifted the "center of gravity" in higher education away from traditional four-year colleges toward nonselective community colleges. Students at two-year colleges, however, are far less likely than those at four-year institutions to complete a degree. Brock argues that the nation's higher education system must do much more to promote student success. Three areas, he says, are particularly ripe for reform: remedial education, student support services, and financial aid. In each of these three areas, Brock reviews programs and interventions that community colleges have undertaken in order to raise completion rates. Some colleges have, for example, experimented with remedial programs that build social cohesion between students and faculty and integrate content across courses. Other colleges have tested student support service programs that offer counseling and advising that are regular, intensive, and personalized. Still others have experimented with ways to simplify the financial aid application process and incentivize students to earn good grades and persist in school. Research shows that such programs and interventions can improve student outcomes, but Brock argues that more must be done to bring proven practices to scale and to test new ideas that might lead to better results. Institutions that most need help are those that provide the greatest access to nontraditional and underprepared students in community colleges and less selective universities.

This paper presents an innovative and standardized system for roofs and façades, integrating different technological solutions that improve the energetic efficiency, thermal, acoustic and light comfort, as well as air quality in buildings. The BRESAER system combines industrialized active and passive solutions and nanotechnology over one common modular, versatile and light substructure. The system consists of a base of industrialized and adaptable substructure to which different coverings are installed: Modular ventilated façade with nanotechnology application, multilayer panels of thermal insulation and fiber reinforced concrete with nanotechnology properties, metallic active envelopes connected to the ventilation system and windows with automated dynamic slats with high thermic properties for light and solar radiation control. The system of multi-response envelope is adaptable to the clime and orientation of the building, which allows the replicability of the system on actual inefficient buildings. The overall challenge and required policies at EU level are presented, along with the specific objectives and strategies of BRESAER to solve these issues. Then the characteristics of the whole system are explained, followed by the analysis of each of the innovative elements that integrate the system. Finally, conclusions learnt in the project and future ambitions are presented.

Enthält außerdem Chronologien zu den Ereignissen in Ungarn, der DDR, der Tschechoslowakei, Rumänien und den Baltischen Staaten

This document is intended to serve as the basis for a common understanding within the FIT4FOOD2030 consortium when it comes to potential R&I breakthroughs, but also to stimulate the discussion taking place at the three interconnected structures of the FIT4FOOD2030 platform (City Labs, Policy Labs and the EU Think Tank) and support their roadmap definition. The process to develop this report started with initial desk research and discussion within the project consortium to define key terms, in close cooperation with WP2 and WP3 to clearly distinguish trends, breakthroughs and showcases. The compilation of an inventory for past R&I breakthroughs was based on desk research and an internal meeting with WP4 partners. Findings from WP2 and WP3 were also used in the identification of potential R&I breakthroughs. Furthermore, the survey conducted in WP3 was used to direct questions on potential R&I breakthroughs to the participants.