Suchergebnisse

Intro -- Critical Storytelling in Uncritical Times: Undergraduates Share Their Stories in Higher Education -- ADVANCE PRAISE FOR CRITICAL STORYTELLING IN UNCRITICAL TIMES -- TABLE OF CONTENTS -- Preface -- Stories of Marginalization, Silencing, and Alienation -- 1. Pagan Religion in the 21st Century: Myths, Stereotypes, and Mass-Media Misrepresentations of Multicultural Spirituality -- 2. Gender and the Media: Degradation of Women in Popular Culture -- 3. Silent Judgments: How I Came to Terms with Depression -- 4. To Be Continued… -- 5. First Day of School -- 6. Mom, I'm Gay -- Identity Politics, Sexism, Racism, and Relationships -- 7. Assimilation of an Alien -- 8. "Brain Dead": Words as Weapons in the Cultural Sanctioning of Bullying Practices -- 9. College Student, Future Educator, Not an "Anchor Baby" -- 10. Growing up without a Father -- 11. My Realization -- 12. My Life with Trichotillomania -- 13. A Letter to the Faceless -- 14. Angels of the Night -- 15. Family Ties -- Mental Health, the Body, and Issues of Stigmatization -- 16. Who Am I? Struggling with My Identity -- 17. Judging from the Outside -- 18. A Kind of My Own -- 19. "Hey, Sister": Utterances, Sexualities, and Dialectical Tensions in Sibling Relationships -- 20. Mean Girls, Interrupted: The Complexities of Female Friendship -- 21. My Personal Hell: Becoming a Hardened Machine at Hardee's -- 22. Coming up from the Depths: Dealing with Depression, Anxiety, and Eating Disorders -- About the Contributors -- Index.

Intro -- Cover -- Title Page -- Dedication -- Epigraph -- Contents -- Introduction -- Part I: Built -- Chapter 1: The Roots -- Chapter 2: A Compromise -- Chapter 3: The Fall of Integrated Education -- Part II: Defended -- Chapter 4: The Tragedy of Lloyd Gaines -- Chapter 5: A New Guinea Pig -- Chapter 6: "Segregated as Conditions Allow" -- Part III: Failed -- Chapter 7: This Whole Facade -- Chapter 8: Thirteen Years a Remedy, Thirty Years a Fight, Two Centuries a Struggle -- Chapter 9: What Hath We Wrought -- Acknowledgments -- Notes -- Index -- About the Author -- Copyright -- About the Publisher.

A variety of organizational, curricular and philosophical features of the system of higher education in the United States distinguish it from higher education systems in the world, but the system's size, egalitarianism, diversity and comprehensiveness are the most notable and significant of these distinguishing features. The system of higher education in the United States is also conspicuously diverse and decentralized. This book describes both the diversity and the standardization that coexist in the higher education system. It generalizes cautiously where standardization is both apparent and predominant. The book also points out that new programs are developed continuously to meet emerging societal needs, such as those in energy and the environment, as well as to meet the needs and interests of new clientele : the elderly, middle-age women attempting to reenter the job market, and the educationally disadvantaged seeking basic skill development. ; UNESCO European Centre for Higher Education

Federal employment law designed to assure equal employment opportunity for faculty has only been applicable to higher education since 1972. Prior to 1972, the higher education world, moreover, was immune from the most comprehensive federal employment law, Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. However, Title VII was amended in 1972 to include education institutions. Ever since the protection of the civil rights law was extended to higher education, faculty employment discrimination litigation has increased. The reality of this phenomenal growth in litigation is clear, the potential for judicial intervention in academic decision making is undeniable, and reliance on the judicial process is increasingly becoming common. Thus, no institution of higher education may consider itself immune from the possibilities of litigation, nor immune from the decisions handed down by the courts. The main focus of this study was a legal one, which necessitated a heavy concentration upon the historical and current state of employment discrimination law, specifically, Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The study was conducted by using a combination of legislative analysis and legal research methods. The legal research methods used in this study included the same problem-solving processes as other traditional research methods: (1) collecting data; (2) analysis; and (3) interpretation. The main purpose of this study was to examine, analyze, and summarize legislative history and case law relevant to Title VII, and sex discrimination in higher education. In summary, although Title VII prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, color, religion, sex and national origin, the issues surrounding women faculty and sex discrimination is probably the fastest growing area of litigation for administrators on the university campus. Therefore, this study was an attempt to examine the employment discrimination issues and developments pertaining to sex discrimination only. College and university administrators may find this study useful for: (1) examining Title VII, and its amendments; (2) examining sex discrimination case law; and (3) utilizing the research for developing procedures, policies and guidelines to minimize potential lawsuits. ; Ed. D.

"Public Law 102-325." ; "July 23, 1992, (S. 1150)"--P. [1]. ; Shipping list no.: 92-0483-P. ; Caption title: An Act to Reauthorize the Higher Education Act of 1965, and for Other Purposes. ; Mode of access: Internet.

Cover -- Contents -- Series Foreword -- REFERENCES -- Preface -- Alicia Dowd's Reflections -- Estela Mara Bensimon's Reflections -- Advancing the Cause of Equity -- The Organization of this Book -- Acknowledgments -- Chapter 1 - Introduction -- Accountability for Racial Equity -- Negotiating Meanings of Justice and Equity -- The Equity Scorecard -- Theory of Change -- Collaborators, Partners, and Settings -- Chapter 2 - Remediating "Race Talk" -- Overview of the Chapter -- Activity Systems Analysis -- Inquiry into Equity Gaps at LFCC -- Contradictions of Race, Diversity, and Equity -- Moving from Diversity to Equity -- Chapter 3 - Enacting Justice as Care -- Overview of the Chapter -- Remediating the Organizational Routine of a Syllabus -- The Activity System of the Syllabus Protocol -- The Emotional Geography of Authentic Care -- Chapter 4 - Enacting Justice as Fairness -- Overview of the Chapter -- The Equity Scorecard in Wisconsin -- Deepening Commitments to Equity through Inquiry -- From Weak to Strong Conceptions of Equity -- Practitioners as Change Agents -- Chapter 5 - Enacting Justice as Transformation -- Overview of the Chapter -- The Wisconsin Transfer Equity Study -- The Problem of Basic Skills Education -- Adopting a Critical Perspective -- Chapter 6 - Designing Equitable Institutions -- Overview of the Chapter -- Engaging Histories of Discrimination -- Equity-Enhancing Data Practices -- Leadership for Equity -- References -- Index -- About the Authors.

El gobierno de las universidades americanas está profundamente enraizado en los ideales de la democracia americana y en el concepto de citizen board of trustees(personas ajenas a la institución que llevan a cabo una supervisión de la Universidad o el College sin llegar a llevar el trabajo cotidiano). Estos ciudadanos no son empleados de la institución o de alguno de los gobiernos de los cincuenta Estados del país. Su tarea consiste en representar a la vez a la institución y al conjunto de los intereses de los ciudadanos.Un governing board posee diferentes e importantes responsabilidades, como la supervisión de las finanzas de la institución financieras, los programas académicos y los estándares, y el conjunto de las directrices estratégicas. Una de las más importantes responsabilidades que asumen los governing board es la protección y preservación de la independencia y la autonomía de la institución. Para que el governing board lleve a cabo con éxito sus tareas hace falta una estrecha relación de trabajo con la administración de la institución de educación superior y, en particular, con el presidente/rector. El presidente/rector es contratado y evaluado por el órgano de gobierno y es el principal gestor y portavoz. Cuenta con un gabinete de vicepresidentes/vicerrectores, y preside la administración académica y tiene la facultad de dirigir los objetivos estratégicos establecidos y aprobados por el governing board. Aunque la máxima responsabilidad resida en el governing board, algunas decisiones se podrían delegar al presidente/rector, y a la autoridad académica como las decisiones curriculares.El sistema de estructuras de multicampus, donde un Consejo gobierna múltiples instituciones, son frecuentes en los Estados Unidos de América. Algunos sistemas gobiernan todos los colegios y las universidades públicas del Estado, otros lo hacen con instituciones que tengan misiones similares, y otros siguen un criterio regional.Mientras los citizen trusteeship generalmente reflejan un enfoque descentralizado en la toma de decisiones, formando parte de la cultura política americana, hay asuntos como las cualificaciones para la selección de los miembros del consejo, una correcta orientación y educación, y competencia que les demanda tiempo y atención. Los retos actuales a los que se enfrenta la educación superior en América son tales como una mejor preparación de los profesores, así como el aumento de la producción de grados deCollege degree, y la reducción de las diferencias que existen en los resultados académicos obtenidos por las minorías demográficas, e incluso cuestionarse si las estructuras de gobierno, apoyadas por citizen boards, resulta adecuada. Hablar de reformas para reforzar el gobierno y sus habilidades para dirigir las respuestas estratégicas hacia esos retos es cada vez más frecuente. Siendo también objeto de crítica la selección, la formación, el compromiso con el interés público general o con la institución educativa, a pesar de las dudas que se refieren a su eficacia para el siglo XXI, los citizen governing boards permanecen como uno de los mejores rasgos de la educación universitaria americana. AbstractAmerican higher education governance is deeply rooted in the ideals of American democracy and in the concept of a citizen board of trustees – persons outside the institution who oversee the university or college but do not run it on a day-to-day basis. These citizens are not employees of the institution or of any of the individual 50 state governments. Their duty it is to represent both the institution and the broad public interest of citizens.A governing board has several important responsibilities, including oversight of the institution's finances, academic programs and standards, and broad strategic direction. One of the most critical governing board responsibilities is protecting and preserving the independence and autonomy of the institution. For the board to successfully carry out its responsibilities requires an effective working relationship with the college or university administration, in particular, the president. The college president is hired and evaluated by the governing board and is the lead manager and lead spokesperson. With a cabinet of vice presidents, he or she leads the academic administration and the faculty toward the strategic goals established approved by the governing board. Although ultimate responsibility rests with the governing board, many decisions should be delegated to the president, and also to the faculty for academic and curriculum decisions.Multicampus system structures, where one board governs multiple institutions, are prevalent in the United States. Some systems govern all public colleges and universities in the state, some govern institutions of similar mission, and some are regionally based. Systems are led by a system executive with constituent campuses by campus presidents. Statewide coordinating boards and agencies exist in most states, and in just under half they play a significant role in state policy development and regulation.While citizen trusteeship generally reflects the decentralized approach to decision making that is part of American political culture, there are concerns about qualifications for board members selection, adequate orientation and education, and competing demands on their time and attention. Modern challenges facing U.S. higher education, such as preparing more and better teachers, increasing college degree production, and narrowing the education achievement gaps of minority populations, also lead many to question whether governance structures undergirded by citizen boards are adequate. Talk of reforms to strengthen governance and its ability to lead strategic responses to these challenges are increasing in frequency. Although subject to criticism about their selection, training, and commitment to either the broad public interest or the institution, and despite concerns about their effectiveness for the 21st Century, citizen governing boards remain one of American higher education's best features.

A preliminary mailing, Dec. 1964, has title: Survey of state legislation relating to higher education. ; Mode of access: Internet.

"Public Law 110-315." ; "122 Stat. 3078." ; "Aug. 14, 2008 (H.R. 4137)." ; Title from title screen (viewed on Oct. 7, 2008). ; Mode of access: Internet. ; Mode of access: Internet from the GPO Access web site. Addresses as of 10/7/08: http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=110%5Fcong%5Fpublic%5Flaws&docid=f:publ315.110 (text version), http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=110%5Fcong%5Fpublic%5Flaws&docid=f:publ315.110.pdf (PDF version) ; current access is available via PURLs.

"While Islamophobia was present in our society before 9/11, it has become more pervasive in recent years. This is evidenced by the current social and political climate, hate speech and hate crimes directed at Muslims, and the Supreme Court's upholding of Presidential Proclamation 645 that effectively bans Muslim immigration from coming to the U.S. What does this mean for Muslim students in college, and indeed for institutions of higher education as they navigate law and policy on the one hand and adhere to their mission of achieving inclusive and equitable educational environments on the other?"--

Testimony issued by the Government Accountability Office with an abstract that begins "Federal assistance helps students and families pay for postsecondary education through several policy tools--grant and loan programs authorized by Title IV of the Higher Education Act of 1965 and more recently enacted tax preferences. This testimony summarizes our 2005 report and provides updates on (1) how Title IV assistance compares to that provided through the tax code (2) the extent to which tax filers effectively use education tax preferences, (3) potential benefits and costs of simplifying federal student aid, and (4) what is known about the effectiveness of federal assistance. This hearing is an opportunity to consider whether changes should be made in the government's overall strategy for providing such assistance or to the individual programs and tax provisions that provide the assistance. This statement is based on updates to previously published GAO work and reviews of relevant literature."