A Historical Perspective of Federally Administered Programs as to Monies Appropriated for Research and Development, Demonstration Projects, and Curriculum Development.

Autor/in	Ricketts, Samuel Clifton
Institution	Ohio State Univ., Columbus.
Titel	A Historical Perspective of Federally Administered Programs as to Monies Appropriated for Research and Development, Demonstration Projects, and Curriculum Development.
Quelle	(1978), (37 Seiten) PDF als Volltext kostenfreie Datei Verfügbarkeit
Sprache	englisch
Dokumenttyp	gedruckt; online; Monographie
Schlagwörter	Coordination; Curriculum Development; Demonstration Programs; Educational Administration; Educational Cooperation; Educational Development; Educational Finance; Educational Improvement; Educational Legislation; Educational Needs; Educational Research; Federal Aid; Federal Legislation; Federal State Relationship; Financial Needs; Financial Support; Project Applications; Research Proposals; Training; Vocational Education + Suchen Sie Ihr Suchwort? Koordination; Curriculum; Development; Curriculumentwicklung; Lehrplan; Entwicklung; Bildungsverwaltung; Schuladministration; Schulverwaltung; Education; cooperation; Kooperation; Bildungsentwicklung; Bildungsfonds; Teaching improvement; Unterrichtsentwicklung; Bildungsrecht; Schulgesetz; Educational need; Bildungsbedarf; Bildungsforschung; Pädagogische Forschung; Bundesrecht; Bund-Länder-Beziehung; Finanzielle Förderung; Forschungsgegenstand; Ausbildung; Berufsbildung
Abstract	Since 1963, Congress has provided funds and support for vocational education by passing the Vocational Education Act of 1963 and two sets of amendments, the Vocational Education Amendments of 1968 and of 1976. Federally authorized appropriations during this time have increased from eight million dollars in 1963 to eighty million in 1978. Enacted to replace the Smith-Hughes Act (1917), the 1963 Act was designed to meet current needs by funding projects in the areas of research, demonstration projects and models, and training. The Vocational Education Amendments of 1968 divided federal funding into three distinct categories: (1) Part C for research and training, (2) Part D for demonstration projects, and (3) Part I for curriculum development. Under this separation of funding it was found that programs often operated in isolation without continuity from research to demonstration to implementation. To correct this situation, amendments were passed in 1976 to consolidate research, exemplary and innovative programs, and curriculum and staff development into a single category. Unlike the earlier legislation, these laws restricted federal funding to applied, close-ended research projects of national significance. Despite the coordinated approach required by these statutes, curriculum development appears to be receiving less emphasis and financial support than other areas. (ELG)
Erfasst von	ERIC (Education Resources Information Center), Washington, DC