Suchergebnisse

1. Establishing the goals -- 2. Equalizing and expanding individual opportunity -- 3. Organizing higher education -- 4. Staffing higher education -- 5. Financing higher education -- 6. Resource data. ; Mode of access: Internet.

This chapter provides a general overview of the mechanisms for accreditation and recognition of qualifications in higher education in the United States. It introduces the role of some main actors in this field of accreditation, such as the Council for Higher Education Accreditation (CHEA) and the United States Department of Education (USDE). Furthermore, it refers to the international activities of US accrediting organisations. Finally, it examines the role of accreditation in acceptance of degrees, transfer of credit and individual certification and licensure in the United States. (DIPF/Orig.).

Many higher education administrators in the United States are still in denial that the higher education landscape has changed and what worked in the past will no longer be sufficient to meet the needs of future generations of students.

"B-233646."--P. [1]. ; "GAO/HRD-89-33." ; "January 1989." ; Distributed to depository libraries in microfiche. ; Cover title. ; Includes bibliographical references. ; Mode of access: Internet.

The authors examined the state of United States student academic readiness for higher education from a global perspective utilizing data from the Organization of Economic and Co-operation and Development (OECD) and Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA), which tests over a half a million 15 year old student's skills and knowledge. These scores were compared to the expenditures per student according to GDP growth and relation to U.S. dollars to draw conclusions. While it is true that the United States is among the top nations in terms of expenditures per student per year, the United States does not score in the top nations when tested by PISA. The author's did not find a correlation between the Gross Domestic Product (GDP) growth rate and the PISA Scores. The authors also examined several OECD studies across age groups and national performance and the United States students performed below the national averages. The authors, however, suggest that the declining average GDP growth rates and deteriorating standard of living in the United States are related in part, to the weakening academic performance in the United States. While the statistical correlation between academic performance and economic growth rates has not been proven, the United States mediocre test results are still disquieting. It may prove true that it will take several decades before the correlation becomes statistically evident and, at that point, it may take a generation, or much more, for the United States to recover and become competitive globally once again.

Education is one of the most potential variables and relates to different indicators of socio-economic development. Going beyond the campaign for universal literacy, which is otherwise supported by constitutional and statutory provisions, the article seeks to explore the presence as well as the dominance of Scheduled Castes (SC) in Higher Education and gets into the paradoxes of social and bureaucratic structures that facilitate or impede SC entry to and continue with higher education. At this juncture, it seems to be imperative to search for an alignment between constitutional mandates on one hand and social and bureaucratic constraints on the other. Moreover, the relevant methodological framework has been adopted to put facts and figures into perspective, to identify the reason for their slow progress in higher education and to locate the reasons why the reservation policy failed to assist them as per the expectations of the founding fathers of the constitution.

OBJECTIVE: To examine experiences of racial/ethnic discrimination among Latinos in the United States, which broadly contribute to their poor health outcomes. DATA SOURCE AND STUDY DESIGN: Data come from a nationally representative, probability‐based telephone survey including 803 Latinos and a comparison group of 902 non‐Hispanic white US adults, conducted January—April 2017. METHODS: We calculated the percent of Latinos reporting discrimination in several domains, including health care. We used logistic regression to compare the Latino‐white difference in odds of discrimination, and among Latinos only to examine variation by socioeconomic status and country of birth. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: One in five Latinos (20 percent) reported experiencing discrimination in clinical encounters, while 17 percent avoided seeking health care for themselves or family members due to anticipated discrimination. A notable share of Latinos also reported experiencing discrimination with employment (33 percent applying for jobs; 32 percent obtaining equal pay/promotions), housing (31 percent), and police interactions (27 percent). In adjusted models, Latinos had significantly higher odds than whites for reporting discrimination in health care visits (OR: 3.18, 95% CI: 1.61, 6.26) and across several other domains. Latinos with college degrees had significantly higher odds of reporting discrimination in multiple domains than those without college degrees, with few differences between foreign‐born and US‐born Latinos. CONCLUSIONS: Latinos in the United States report experiencing widespread discrimination in health care and other areas of their lives, at significantly higher levels than whites. Being born in the United States and earning a college degree are not protective against discrimination, suggesting that further health and social policy efforts to eliminate discrimination are needed.

Nation-states vary tremendously in terms of their historical, demographic, economic, political, and cultural characteristics and contexts. And they differ in terms of their current levels of educational attainment and the characteristics of their educational systems. Despite the differences, higher education policymakers, college and university leaders, and educational researchers in many nations are asking similar questions about higher education. Among the most important questions are: How can a nation increase its overall level of higher education attainment? And, how can a nation close persisting gaps in attainment that persist across demographic groups? I have developed further appreciation for the insights that may be gleaned from comparative research through a multi-year "state review project". Despite the countless differences, many nations are grappling with the questions: How can a nation increase its overall level of higher education attainment? And, how can a nation close persisting gaps in attainment across demographic groups? This paper seeks to inform understanding of these questions by providing an overview of related data and research on higher education in the United States. This paper suggests the utility of drawing comparisons not just between the United States and other nations, but also between individual U.S. states and other nations.

Nation-states vary tremendously in terms of their historical, demographic, economic, political, and cultural characteristics and contexts. And they differ in terms of their current levels of educational attainment and the characteristics of their educational systems. Despite the differences, higher education policymakers, college and university leaders, and educational researchers in many nations are asking similar questions about higher education. Among the most important questions are: How can a nation increase its overall level of higher education attainment? And, how can a nation close persisting gaps in attainment that persist across demographic groups? I have developed further appreciation for the insights that may be gleaned from comparative research through a multi-year "state review project". Despite the countless differences, many nations are grappling with the questions: How can a nation increase its overall level of higher education attainment? And, how can a nation close persisting gaps in attainment across demographic groups? This paper seeks to inform understanding of these questions by providing an overview of related data and research on higher education in the United States. This paper suggests the utility of drawing comparisons not just between the United States and other nations, but also between individual U.S. states and other nations.

Legislation prohibiting age discrimination in the United States dates back to the 1960s, when along with the Equal Pay Act and the Civil Rights Act barring discrimination against women and minorities, Congress passed the 1967 Age Discrimination in Employment Act. Questions regarding the rationale for and effectiveness of age discrimination legislation are likely to become increasingly important in light of a rapidly aging population in the United States (and other industrialized countries). This article provides a summary, critical review, and synthesis of what we know about age discrimination legislation. It first traces out the legislative history and the evolving case law and discusses implementation of the law. It then reviews the existing research on age discrimination legislation—research that addresses the rationale for the legislation, its effectiveness, and criticisms. (JEL J1, J7, L3)

The United States experienced a period of rapid higher education expansion between the mid-1940s and mid-1970s. Although this expansion likely improved the health of people able to take advantage of new education opportunities, expansion may have also intensified health inequalities between college-educated and non-college-educated people (1) through the compositional change in the relative (dis)advantage of these groups, (2) through the displacement of non-college-educated people in a more competitive post-expansion labor market, and (3) by increasing health returns to a college degree. Our analyses, rooted in a counterfactual perspective, draw on data from the Health and Retirement Study that spans birth cohorts who came of age before and after the period of expansion, allowing us to differentiate people who earned a degree because of expansion but would not otherwise (conditional-earners) from people who would or would not have earned a degree regardless of expansion (always-earners and never-earners, respectively). Comparing changes in the health of these three groups before and after education expansion permits us to individually evaluate how compositional change, displacement, and increasing returns to education exacerbated health inequalities. Our findings suggest that education expansion improved the health of conditional-earners and magnified health inequalities through the mechanism of displacement.

A letter report issued by the General Accounting Office with an abstract that begins "Pursuant to a congressional request, GAO provided information on student loan trustee arrangements, focusing on the: (1) number and cost of trustee arrangements and their shared characteristics; (2) benefits and protections afforded the federal government through use of trustee arrangements; and (3) effect of trustee arrangements on market participation and the availability of student loans."