Literaturnachweis - Detailanzeige
Autor/in | Phelps, L. Allen |
---|---|
Institution | Ohio State Univ., Columbus. National Center for Research in Vocational Education. |
Titel | An Analysis of Fiscal Policy Alternatives for Serving Special Populations in Vocational Education. Information Series No. 278. |
Quelle | (1984), (52 Seiten)
PDF als Volltext |
Sprache | englisch |
Dokumenttyp | gedruckt; online; Monographie |
Schlagwörter | Access to Education; Disabilities; Disadvantaged Youth; English (Second Language); Equal Education; Exceptional Persons; Federal Legislation; Federal Programs; Federal State Relationship; Financial Policy; Financial Support; Minority Groups; Nontraditional Occupations; Policy Formation; Postsecondary Education; Program Improvement; Sex Fairness; Special Needs Students; State Federal Aid; Vocational Education Education; Access; Bildung; Zugang; Bildungszugang; Handicap; Behinderung; Benachteiligter Jugendlicher; English as second language; English; Second Language; Englisch als Zweitsprache; Bundesrecht; Bund-Länder-Beziehung; Fiscal policy; Finanzpolitik; Finanzielle Förderung; Ethnische Minderheit; Non-traditional occupations; Alternatives Berufsfeld; Politische Betätigung; Post-secondary education; Tertiäre Bildung; Sexualaufklärung; Sonderpädagogischer Förderbedarf; Ausbildung; Berufsbildung |
Abstract | This policy analysis focuses on identifying optimal federal fiscal policies for achieving desired programmatic and student outcomes on behalf of special populations in vocational education (i.e., disadvantaged, limited-English-proficient, and handicapped persons, and students interested in nontraditional careers). The present status of unserved special population students, enrollment patterns, and state and local funding suggests a critical need for the development and refinement of effective federal fiscal policy. A series of four major policy goals should be set; they include: improving access to programs and services, enhancing equity, stimulating program improvement, and strengthening interagency collaboration. In order to meet these goals, four major policy alternatives can be suggested: (1) direct federal grants to eligible recipients, (2) student incentive grants, (3) categorical state grants (setaside model) or (4) categorical state grants (separate title). Pupil-weighing formula and ability-to-pay factors are possible options for allocating funds within states. The most promising alternative for the short run appears to be the categorical state grant for vocational education; however, additional fiscal policy research that examines the full range of fiscal policy alternatives is needed. (KC) |
Anmerkungen | National Center Publications, National Center for Research in Vocational Education, 1960 Kenny Road, Columbus, OH 43210 (IN278--$4.95). |
Erfasst von | ERIC (Education Resources Information Center), Washington, DC |