Education & Pedagogy

This report provides current information on the status of physical education in each of the states and the District of Columbia. Advocates can use this information in presentations, letters and other means of communication with federal and state policymakers, the media and the general public as part of the basis for expanding and improving physical education. This project was supported by the professional members and leaders of the National Association for Sport and Physical Education (NASPE), an association of the American Alliance for Health, Physical Education, Recreation and Dance (AAHPERD), and by the volunteers and leaders of the American Heart Association (AHA). This report not only brings attention to the importance of quality, daily physical education programs for all school-age children, it also provides information that can be used as a basis for expanding and improving physical education programs in those states that need assistance. Quality physical education programs for all of our children are the foundation for healthy, physically active lifestyles as adults. The vision is that every student will become physically educated and thus possess the knowledge, skills and confidence to be physically active and healthy for a lifetime. During the winter of 2011-12 NASPE asked physical education coordinators in all 50 state education agencies and the District of Columbia to complete an online questionnaire about physical education mandates and practices in their states. Follow-up email messages and phone calls achieved complete response by all 51 entities. The data were reviewed and compiled into individual state profiles and summary charts. The profile for each state was returned to the respective state education agency representatives for confirmation of the contents and revisions were made as needed. Appended are: (1) National Standards and Guidelines for K-12 PE; (2) Federal Legislation Affecting PE; (3) The Fight for PE in the States; and (4) Public Policy Agenda for PE Research. (Contains 25 resources.)

Students are often referred for special education evaluations following teacher generated referrals. These referrals indicate observable poor academic progress, although often there is no indication of the cause of the poor performance as well as no indication of remediation attempts prior to a special education referral. Students who demonstrate reading difficulties struggle in nearly all areas due to the dependence on reading that permeates all academic classes. Poor reading abilities are a prominent concern in schools and one of the primary reasons for special education referrals (NAEP, 2007). The purpose of this study was to determine whether effectively implementing a reading fluency intervention prior to referring a student for a special education evaluation led to fewer overall special education referrals as well as more accurate special education referrals. Results of this study indicated that the implementation of a reading intervention did significantly decrease the number of overall special education referrals that were made. The students who were referred for special education following participation in the intervention program were also more likely to qualify for special education services compared to students who had not participated in the intervention program. Additional student characteristics that were explored included sex, work habits, attendance rates and socioeconomic status (SES). Results indicated that work habits and sex did not significantly affect the rate of teacher referral for special education evaluations. Poor attendance did have a significant relationship on special education referral rates, indicating that students with poor attendance were more likely to be considered in need of special education support. SES was found to have a significant relationship to special education referrals over the length of the study as well as during the pre-intervention period, but did not have a significant impact on special education referrals during the intervention period. [The dissertation citations contained here are published with the permission of ProQuest LLC. Further reproduction is prohibited without permission. Copies of dissertations may be obtained by Telephone (800) 1-800-521-0600. Web page: http://www.proquest.com/en-US/products/dissertations/individuals.shtml.]

"Education in Taiwan (Formosa)" is based mostly on official reports of the Ministry of Education published in Taiwan, including other official and private reports which are not yet published. The text has been supplemented with additional data and information obtained from other official sources and through interviews with Chinese educators who have visited the author's office in Washington. This bulletin attempts to give a brief picture of the educational system in Taiwan at the present time. In presenting this information, both time and space should be taken into consideration. Traditions, ideas, or principles underlying the present educational system in Taiwan are similar to those which existed in the Chinese mainland prior to the Communist regime. In addition, most of the teachers, educators, and other school authorities in Taiwan who are responsible for the conduct of education in that country are products of the rich traditions and culture of China. Education on the island also owes debt to the Japanese whose occupation ended with the liberation of Formosa. Among the nations of the world, China has had one of the longest histories; many centuries of tradition and important political and social upheavals have caused many changes both in methodology and curricula. Western and other foreign impacts have also influenced Chinese education. The American influence through Christian missionary activities in the field of education has been important. While the data include certain information needed by school authorities in dealing with student transfers, it is hoped that the scope of the material presented is comprehensive enough to be useful to scholars in the field of comparative education and others who are actively engaged in international educational affairs in official or private capacity. A bibliography is included. (Contains 14 tables, 3 charts and 4 footnotes.) [Best copy available has been provided.]

This paper focuses on Slovenia's arts and cultural education. The Ministry of Education and Sport is responsible for laying down the aims for cultural and creative dimensions of education. Concerning the creation of the curriculum related to culture and creativity (both within education) and the arts curriculum, most curricular decisions are made at the national/central level. The cultural and creative aims laid down by the Basic School Act include: (1) To educate for a continuous development and an active role in the democratic society, including self-awareness and responsibility towards oneself, personal health, other people, personal and other peoples' cultures, natural and social environment; (2) To develop pupils' awareness of their national background and national identity, their knowledge about the history of Slovene nation, their cultural and natural heritage; and to promote responsible citizenship; (3) To educate for common cultural and civilisation values, which originate from European tradition; (4) To educate for: mutual respect and collaboration; tolerance for diversity and interpersonal tolerance; respect of human rights and fundamental freedoms; (5) To develop literacy and improve the average level of knowledge in the following fields: natural-technical science, mathematics, information science, social science and arts; (6) To develop creativity and education required for comprehension and perception of artistic works and artistic expression in different fields of art; and (7) To develop the spirit of entrepreneurship as a personal orientation, promoting effective actions, innovation and creativity of pupils. This paper contains the following sections: (1) Responsibility and purpose; (2) Organisation and aims of arts education; (3) Special provision with a focus on art education; (4) Assessment of pupils' progress and monitoring of standards in the arts; (5) Teacher education in the arts; (6) Initiatives; (7) Ongoing reforms and proposals; and (8) Existing national surveys and reports on practices. (Contains 8 footnotes.) Bibliographical references are included.

This report is a summary of study visits plus workshops that took place in Bhutan, Nepal, and India in 1998 within the framework of UNESCO's Asia-Pacific Programme of Education for All (APPEAL). Three educators each from China, Lao PDR, and Vietnam and educators from the host countries participated. The project aimed to promote literacy and primary education in disadvantaged rural areas and was based on two UNESCO-supported pilot projects: the promotion of primary education for girls and disadvantaged groups in China, India, Nepal, and Vietnam; and the promotion of literacy for youth and adults in Bhutan, China, Lao PDR, and Nepal. Study visit objectives included exchanging experiences through presentations and discussions, observing literacy classes and other nonformal education in the countries visited, contributing experience to teacher training workshops, and offering concrete proposals and suggestions to governments. Among the main issues discussed was the difference among countries in social context and disparities that hinder the achievement of APPEAL. While the urban-rural gap was common to all six countries (those visited and those of study team members), gender disparity was more serious in South Asia, and caste was an important social factor in India and Nepal. Issues affecting the sustainability and potential expansion of initial projects included program quality and relevance to the needs of communities and learners, community participation and ownership, national commitment through concrete policies, and effective planning and management. Research also plays an important role in ensuring program quality, building bridges between intellectuals and the grassroots, and influencing policy makers. Other important issues included the need for coordinated planning and implementation of formal and nonformal education and the overwhelming need for nonformal education of girls and women. Appendices contain a list of participants and activities during the study visit. (TD)

In response to increasing requests for funding of parenting education programs, The Pew Charitable Trusts funded a study to examine parenting education in the United States. This resulting report provides a general overview and highlights the "peaks and valleys, risks and opportunities" of the parenting education field. Chapter 1 of the report, "Introduction to Parenting Education," describes the growth of parenting education. Chapter 2, "Getting Grounded: Definitions," defines parenting education, family support, parent, and caregiver. Chapter 3, "Understanding Why: The Compelling Evidence," discusses the urgency of strengthening families because of demographic shifts and increases in child abuse and neglect, juvenile delinquency, crime, and violence. Chapter 4, "The Universe of Parenting Education; A Typology," gives examples of eight types of programs, education, health care, multiple/complex needs, normative, work, special needs, research, and advocacy. Chapter 5, "Descriptive Categories for Parenting Programs," includes discussion of service delivery methods, cultural diversity efforts, and program activities. Chapter 6, "Overview of Content in Parenting Education Programs," describes the typical content of parenting education programs. Chapter 7, "Training, Shared Learning and Practitioner Support," includes inservice and preservice training, certification and standards, and infrastructure. Chapter 8, "Evaluation, Research and Accountability," examines evaluation studies and the issues involved in evaluation. Chapter 9, "Funding of Parenting Education and Family Support," identifies public and private funding sources. Chapter 10, "Review of Key Programs," describes some leading parenting programs. Chapter 11, "Parenting Education and Fathers," outlines major issues surrounding fathering programs. Chapter 12, "Parent Leadership and Advocacy Training Programs," describes programs for parent leadership and advocacy training. Chapter 13, "Conclusions," notes the growing impact of parenting education and needs within the field. (Contains 147 references.) (KB)

For nearly 20 years the National Association for Sport and Physical Education (NASPE) has been conducting the Shape of the Nation Report every few years to summarize information for the profession and the public regarding the status of physical education in the American educational system. The preeminent national authority on physical education and a recognized leader in sport and physical activity, NASPE is partnering on the 2006 Shape of the Nation Report with the American Heart Association (AHA), a national voluntary health agency whose mission is to reduce disability and death from cardiovascular diseases and stroke. This joint project is important to both organizations because, in a time of increasing health risks and health care costs in America, prevention is key and exemplary physical education programs must be part of the solution for inactivity, obesity, and related chronic diseases. The challenge of the first "Shape of the Nation" Report in 1987 continues in this latest survey. That is, typically state mandates are broad and general, leaving many specifics open to interpretation. The purpose of this "Shape of the Nation" Report is to provide current information about the status of physical education in each state and the District of Columbia. This report will not only bring attention to the importance of quality, daily physical education programs for all school age children; it will also provide information that can be used as a basis for expanding and improving physical education programs in those states that need assistance. The vision is that every student will become physically educated and thus possess the knowledge, skills, and confidence to be physically active and healthy for a lifetime. Appended are: (1) National Standards and Guidelines for K-12 Physical Education; (2) Federal Legislation Impacting Physical Education; (3) The Fight for Physical Education in the States; and (4) Public Policy Agenda for Physical Education Research. [This project was also sponsored by the volunteers and leaders of the American Heart Association.]

This resource provides schools and jurisdictions with a sample framework and strategies for developing and/or supporting a culture of character and citizenship. The framework encourages individual schools to assess and put action plans in place to improve their cultures. It also looks at how character and citizenship education can be supported by administrators, school staff, parents, students, school jurisdictions and the larger community. It supports safe and caring schools. This resource may be especially helpful to leadership teams who are working collaboratively to make character and citizenship an integral part of school culture. The following chapters are included: (1) Character and Citizenship Education in Alberta Schools; (2) A Sample Framework for Character and Citizenship; (3) Choosing Approaches for Character and Citizenship Education; (4) Assessing Character and Citizenship Education Initiatives; (5) Creating a Safe and Caring School Culture; (6) Infusing Character and Citizenship Education Across the Subjects; (7) Choosing Resources to Support Character and Citizenship Education; (8) Integrating Character and Citizenship Education in Co-curricular and Extracurricular Activities; (9) Bullying Prevention and Character and Citizenship Education; (10) Involving Parents in Character and Citizenship Education; (11) Developing Community Partnerships; (12) Instructional Strategies that Support Character and Citizenship Education; and (13) Getting to the Heart of the Matter. Appended are: (1) Assessment Tools; (2) What Character and Citizenship Looks Like; (3) Using Action Research to Initiate School Change; (4) Attributes of a Safe and Caring School; (5) Sample Evaluation Tools and Strategies; (6) Bullying Prevention Resources; (7) Graphic Organizers; (8) Service Learning; and (9) Issue-based Inquiry. Assessing character and citizenship education initiatives, creating a safe and caring school culture, infusing character and citizenship education across subjects and co-and extracurricular activities, as well as bullying prevention and parental and community involvement are discussed in this publication. (An index is included.)

For the past 25 years UK Higher Education institutions have forged research and teaching partnerships with their counterparts overseas. Many of these links were funded by the British Government and managed by the British Council's Higher Education Links Scheme. This book takes an informed and critical look at issues and trends in global higher education over the past twenty five years with an in-depth and often personal account of how these links were managed and led. Ten experts representing a variety of disciplines from areas such as conserving the natural environment, the promotion of human rights, and education and gender present an "insider's" view of their link, reflecting upon the successes and challenges in promoting research, developing institutional capacity at home and abroad, and the lessons they have learned. This book will be of particular interest to those working in higher education and international development generally; as well as students, researchers and professionals engaged in bilateral and multi-lateral development assistance programmes. Contents include: Foreword (Christopher Colclough); Series Editor's Preface: International Partnerships and Capacity Building in Higher Education (Michael Crossley); Introduction and Overview: Twenty-Five Years of Higher Education and International Capacity-Building Partnerships (David Stephens); Higher Education and International Cooperation: The Role of Academic Collaboration in the Developing World (Kenneth King); Enhancing Quality and Capacity for Educational Research (Sally M. Thomas and& Wen-Jung Peng); Improving Health and Social Well-Being (Hazel Slavin); Economic Development and Sustainable Livelihoods (Adam Pain); Conserving the Natural Environment in Tropical South-East Asia (Jack Rieley); More Difficult Times Ahead? The Impact of Patriarchy and Globalisation on Gender In/Equality in Higher Education (Gaby Weiner); The Place of Higher Education in Improving Human Rights and Governance (Lynn Davies); Influencing Public Policy (Maria Fe Villamejor-Mendoza); and The Emergence of Peace Studies in Chinese Higher Education (Alan Hunter).

As demands for a more advanced workforce increase, the relationship between higher education and economic success is more recognized by leaders in both academia and economic development. As Larry Walther, Director of Arkansas Department of Economic Development, stated in a recent presentation to the Blue Ribbon Committee on Higher Education, "Education is the key to economic development." Arkansas is 17 years behind the rest of the country in movement away from its dependence on manufacturing. There are dozens of reasons for this lag, but always at the top of the list are education and workforce skills. For most of us, workforce development is typically a product of associate-and baccalaureate level education; however, there is an abundance of information that indicates doctoral education and the research and development (R&D) that frequently accompany it are equally vital to a strong state economy. The purpose of this report is to provide a useful context for Coordinating Board members as they consider new doctoral program proposals and develop further strategies for the delivery of doctoral education in the state. Since the moratorium on doctoral programs expired in January 2003, the Coordinating Board has considered and approved the Doctor of Public Health (DrPH) at UAMS. Based on letters of notification and discussions with graduate faculty and staff across the state, the ADHE staff expects to receive six to eight doctoral proposals over the next few months. Appended are: (1) Progress Policy Institute New Economy Index; (2) Arkansas Research Activity Milestones; (3) Timeline for Doctoral Education; (4) Doctoral Programs Offered by Arkansas Institutions; (5) Science and Engineering Graduate Students by State and Institution; (6) Carnegie and SREB Institutional Categories; (7) Carnegie/SREB Institutional Categories for Arkansas Institutions; (8) Degrees Awarded by Arkansas Public Institutions; (9) Report on Doctoral Education, University of Arkansas, Fayetteville; and (10) UAF Graduate School Response to Doctoral Education Review.

This report represents the State Board of Education's recommended FY 2007 budget as adopted by the Board on January 17, 2006. This budget supports the important work of Vermont's education system as the state invests in its future to help all Vermont students to achieve success. The FY 2007 budget proposal increases General Fund amounts by 6.15 percent (about $800,000). However, this is primarily from funding shifts and increased charges from other state departments and not due to department program increases. The largest increase results from a $525,000 shift from Transportation Funds to the General Fund for the driver education program as part of an effort to limit the use of Transportation Funds. The driver education program is level-funded and only the funding source changed. An increase of $50,000 was made by the Administration, requesting that the department add a part-time consultant to work with technical education activity clubs around the state. Increased charges from the Department of Innovation and Information account for another $156,000, and finally another $115,000 cover salary and benefit changes for department staff. The Education Fund budget increases $65 million (5.8 percent). This is primarily due to a projected $52 million (5.4 percent) increase in school district education spending, a $9 million increase (7.9 percent) in the special education aid formula, and $2 million increase (15.3 percent) in state-placed student funding. The increase in Essential Early Education funding of $500,000 (10.5 percent) is due to a correction in the way the department calculates the increase required by statute. This report is divided into the following sections: (1) Organizational Chart; (2) Vermont Education Overview; (3) Budget Recommendations & Summaries; and (4) Stand-Alone Appropriations.

Since 1923, Minnesota educators have been engaged in teaching and promoting Physical Education. In 2005, it has become apparent that the 2,500 physical education instructors in Minnesota are in need of a Best Practices document to support quality Physical Education. As a result, this manual has been developed to provide assistance to school districts and teachers to help them maintain and increase quality K-12 Physical Education programs. A group of physical educators from the Quality Teachers Network, along with Mary Thissen-Milder from the Minnesota Department of Education, developed this Lifeline document to serve as a tool and resource for present and future physical educators. The first and perhaps most important aspect of physical education is the direct bearing it has on children's physical, mental, and social well-being. The Center for Disease Control and Prevention, in its Dietary Guidelines for Americans in 2005, recommends that children and adolescents participate in at least 60 minutes of moderate intensity physical activity most days of the week, preferably daily. The child who is well-educated physically is likely to become a healthy adult who is motivated to remain healthy. Educators can help motivate students to make a commitment to be physically active by aligning instruction with these standards for physical education, and creating curriculum and activities designed to instill within students a desire to be active for life. The Minnesota Physical Education Benchmarks are the foundation to build meaningful physical education experiences for all students. Additional resources included in this document are: (1) Useful Websites for Physical Education; (2) Works Cited (also includes lists of: Assessment Resources; Fitness Resources; General Resources; Grades K-12 Curriculum Guides and Lesson Plans; Key Publishers in Physical Education Activity Area; Periodicals; Materials Useful for a Variety of Activities; Technology Resources) and (3) Glossary. A March 31, 2004, memorandum entitled, "Must Health and Physical Education Be Taught in Minnesota Schools?" is appended.

South Carolina is home to a robust higher education system including 33 public institutions including 3 research universities, 10 comprehensive four-year universities, 4 two-year regional campuses of the University of South Carolina and 16 technical colleges. The State is also home to a number of independent and private colleges including: 23 independent senior colleges and universities, 2 independent two-year colleges, a private senior college, a private for-profit law school, and a private for-profit junior college. Together, these institutions with their varied missions and character are serving over 240,000 students. Other options for those seeking higher education opportunities within the State include at least 23 out-of-state degree granting institutions that are licensed by the South Carolina Commission on Higher Education to operate in the state. Apart from the public institutions, there are three state agencies tasked with specific responsibilities and duties relating to higher education in South Carolina. The South Carolina Commission on Higher Education is the agency in state government specializing in post-secondary education and responsible for quality, efficiency, accountability, accessibility, and studies and plans for higher education and recommending courses of action to ensure a coordinated system of higher education in the state. The State Board for Technical and Comprehensive Education has key responsibilities in regard to ensuring that the system of technical colleges is responsive to needs for industry and workforce development. A third state agency, the South Carolina Tuition Grants Commission, was established in 1970 with the responsibility of administering the tuition grants to independent college students. The purpose of this publication is to provide a brief overview of South Carolina's system of higher education and outline some of the opportunities and challenges facing higher education in South Carolina.

The new federal stimulus law, the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA), offers Southern states a historic opportunity to improve public education from pre-school through college especially for low income students. ARRA allocates over $100 billion directly to the 15 states of the South for creating jobs and spurring economic renewal during the next two years, and more than one-third of these funds will go toward education. Never before has a federal economic recovery law recognized to this degree the central role that education plays in states' economic growth. As early as the end of March 2009, the US Department of Education will begin to send the first payments totaling $35 billion for education in Southern states. The total amount each Southern state receives will range from approximately $602 million in West Virginia to as much as $7.9 billion for Texas schools and students. Some funds must be spent in one year; other funds can be spent over two or three years. ARRA expressly advises states that these new funds are a "one-time funding opportunity" for stabilizing education budgets and improving schools. In a region plagued by a long history of underfunded education, ARRA presents an unprecedented opportunity to lessen the effects of the deep recession on education spending in the South. It will provide significant federal funding to help the South's low income students, now a majority in the South's public schools, as well as improve the region's low-achieving schools. Amid hard times, the South should make the most of this unique opportunity. Appended are: (1) ARRA Fiscal Stabilization Funds and State Education Budget Shortfalls 2009 & 2010; and (2) Per Pupil Revenues from ARRA Education Funds by Major Programs. (Contains 2 tables, 4 charts and 4 footnotes.)

In 2009 AONTAS commissioned a piece of research to examine the outcomes and impact of community education in relation to the three aims that the Government has defined for it: enhancing learning; fostering empowerment, and contributing to civic society. In part, the research also responds to a need to measure the wider benefits of learning (such as social, civic and health outcomes) in order to demonstrate how investment in education can decrease state spending in other policy areas, and can contribute to the functioning of democracy and achievement of equality. It also meets a requirement at national and European level to carry out research into adult learning that supports evidence-based policy-making. It joins other nation-wide studies into the benefits of adult learning, such as those carried out in Finland and Denmark. The main research methods employed were a representative survey of 683 community education learners, eleven case studies of community education centres, surveys of personnel in the Vocational Education Committees (VECs) and interviews with key informants in community education. The survey was carried out with learners funded through the Adult Literacy and Community Education Scheme (ALCES) in the VECs. The case studies were a mix of providers funded through the Back to Education Initiative Community Strand and the ALCES budget. The research demonstrated that community education has wide ranging positive outcomes for learners, effectively engages some of the groups living with inequality in Ireland, and is very positively experienced by learners. Appended are: (1) Sample Profiles for VEC Personnel, CEFs, Case Studies and Interviews; and (2) Duties of CEFs. A glossary is included. (Contains 56 tables, 21 figures and 168 footnotes.)