Suchergebnisse

"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.

Despite several decades of attention, there is still no consensus on the effects of racial or sexual discrimination in the United States. In this landmark work, the well-known sociologist Samuel Lucas shows how discrimination is not simply an action that one person performs in relation to another individual, but something far more insidious: a pervasive dynamic that permeates the environment in which we live and work.Challenging existing literature on the subject, Lucas makes a clear distinction between prejudice and discrimination. He maintains that when an era of "condoned exploitation

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."

Intro -- Contents -- Preface -- Chapter 1 -- Higher Education: Opportunities to Strengthen Federal Accountability( -- Why GAO Did This Study -- What GAO Found -- Educational Quality -- Financial Stability -- Student Loan Defaults -- Background -- Education's Oversight of Accreditation -- Education's Oversight of College Finances -- Education's Oversight of School Default Rates -- Education Does Not Use Available Data to Identify Weaknesses in Accreditor Oversight of Schools' Academic Quality -- Limitations in Education's Financial Oversight Metric Hinder Its Ability to Identify At-Risk Schools -- Education's Ability to Hold Schools Accountable for Loan Default is Limited by Schools' Ability to Distort Their Cohort Default Rates -- Chapter 2 -- Higher Education: Education Should Address Oversight and Communication Gaps in Its Monitoring of the Financial Condition of Schools* -- Abbreviations -- Why GAO Did This Study -- What GAO Recommends -- What GAO Found -- Background -- Financial Responsibility Standards -- Financial Oversight of Schools by Accreditors -- Education Focuses Oversight on Schools not Meeting Financial Responsibility Standards and Has Increased Oversight of Certain Types of Schools -- Education Reviews Schools' Annual Audits and Places Additional Requirements on the Small Percentage of Schools Not Meeting Financial Responsibility Standards for Schools that Participate in Federal Student Aid Programs -- Education Has Taken Steps to Increase Oversight of Certain Types of Schools, Including Those Owned by Publicly Traded Companies and Private Equity Firms -- While School Closures are Rare, Limitations in Education's Oversight Hamper Its Ability to Identify At-Risk Schools -- Although the Number of School Closures Is Small, Abrupt Closures of Large Schools Can Result in Substantial Costs.

This paper argues that rising institutional inequality is a component of individual-level inequality in the United States because U.S. higher education provides a diverse group of students with unequal access to different kinds of institutions. Using latent profile analysis, we classified all public and private nonprofit higher education institutions in the U.S. from 2005 to 2013 into seven categories. We held these categories stable over time and allowed institutions to move between them. &ldquo ; Good value&rdquo ; institutions were scarce and tended to limit access through selective admission. Only Subsidy Reliant institutions that were directly supported by government appropriations regularly provided good value seats to a racially diverse group of students. Yet the number of institutions in the Subsidy Reliant category declined markedly over time. The resulting system offered access to many students but provided limited opportunity to secure a good value seat.