Search results

(165,901 - 165,920 of 181,723)

Pages

New directions in antitrust law?
Title
New directions in antitrust law?: Current proposals for reform, with emphasis on proposals concerning mergers and monetary damage awards
Date
1986
Summary
Much legislation to deal with various aspects of antitrust laws' impact on the United States business community has been introduced or enacted during the past several years. This report places them in the context of the background controversies surrounding antitrust damage reform, merger law standards and the role of antitrust law in the worldwide competitiveness of United States industry.
CRS84640EPWpage07
Title
CRS84640EPWpage07
Page from
info:fedora/mu:80409
Text
FEDERAL POLlCY FOR res EDUCATION 0? THE GIETED AND TALENTED INTRODUCTION Prior to the 1970s there is no evidence of any continued Federal interest in or commitment to the education of gifted and talented children. In 1971, U.S. Commissioner of Education, Sidney Marland, completed a congressionally— mandated study on the status of the education of gifted and talented children in the Ur
CRS84640EPWpage21
Title
CRS84640EPWpage21
Page from
info:fedora/mu:80409
Text
improvement in science, mathematics, and foreign languages. In FY 1974 this sum increased to approximately $1.1 million in Federal education discretionary funds for gifted and talented education, the pmajority of these funds were authorized under the EPDA and title V of the ESEA. 11. PART 11: rDEVELOPMBNT or A FEDERAL CATEGORIQAL PROGRAM rot THE GIFTED AND .TALENTED; l974el978 In 1974 the Elementary
CRS84640EPWpage19
Title
CRS84640EPWpage19
Page from
info:fedora/mu:80409
Text
Education was established within the U.S. Office of Education. There were no specific funds appropriated by Congress for the Office of Gifted and Talented Education between the fiscal years l972 and 1974. However, portions of the U.S. Office of Education's salaries and expenses were directed not only to support staffing for the Federal Office of Gifted and Talented Education but . (continued) .4
CRS84640EPWpage15
Title
CRS84640EPWpage15
Page from
info:fedora/mu:80409
Text
was repealed under the Education Amendments of 1976, P. L. 94-482, section 151(a)(4)(A). §/ The report is entitled, "Education of the Gifted and Talented, vol. 1: Report to the Congress of the United States by the U;S. Commissioner of Educa- tion." The study involved a review of research and available literature on gifted and talented education. A national survey of leaders in the education
CRS84640EPWpage03
Title
CRS84640EPWpage03
Page from
info:fedora/mu:80409
Text
AB STRACT This paper prpvides background information and a discussion of the issues »relating to Federal policy for the education of gifted and talented children since the late 1960s.
CRS84640EPWpage31
Title
CRS84640EPWpage31
Page from
info:fedora/mu:80409
Text
cas-13 the 1972 Marland report continued to be in effect, i.e., lack of adequate fund~ ing at all levels of government, shortage of trained personnel, lack of pro- i cedures to identify the gifted and talented children, and lack of adequate in- iformation on program effectiveness. It should be noted that the Office of Education-sponsored surveys con- iducted in 1977 and 1978 used State
CRS84640EPWpage13
Title
CRS84640EPWpage13
Page from
info:fedora/mu:80409
Text
- ement and expansion of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (ESEA), .which provided Federal financing for special groups of students, i.e., the edu~ cationally disadvantaged, tne physically and mentally handicapped, and the limited English-proficient. Direct Federal involvement in the education of gifted:and talented chil- dren began with the enactment of the 1969 amendments to the ESEA
CRS84640EPWpage29
Title
CRS84640EPWpage29
Page from
info:fedora/mu:80409
Text
CRS*12 departments of education had a position with designated responsibility for sgifted and talented education. Only 10 of the 24 States had persons assigned to gifted and talented education for more than half~time. In 1977, CEC found that 27 States had at least one full-time staff person and 14 States had at least one half~time staff person responsible for gifted and talented programs. ilhe
CRS84640EPWpage30
Title
CRS84640EPWpage30
Page from
info:fedora/mu:80409
CRS86545EPWpage24
Title
CRS86545EPWpage24
Page from
info:fedora/mu:56635
CRS86545EPWpage18
Title
CRS86545EPWpage18
Page from
info:fedora/mu:56635
CRS86545EPWpage28
Title
CRS86545EPWpage28
Page from
info:fedora/mu:56635
CRS86545EPWpage30
Title
CRS86545EPWpage30
Page from
info:fedora/mu:56635
CRS86545EPWpage02
Title
CRS86545EPWpage02
Page from
info:fedora/mu:56635
CRS86545EPWpage26
Title
CRS86545EPWpage26
Page from
info:fedora/mu:56635
CRS86545EPWpage13
Title
CRS86545EPWpage13
Page from
info:fedora/mu:56635
Text
terized by listing the main points supported in the Humanist Manifesto II, ‘published in 1973 and signed by approximately 275 individuals from several Nations. 2/ lIn outline form, the Manifesto supported: §/ :‘ l._ [T]raditional dogmatic orhauthoritarian religions that place revelation, God, ritual, or creed above human needs and experience do a disservice to the human species We find insufficient
CRS86545EPWpage27
Title
CRS86545EPWpage27
Page from
info:fedora/mu:56635
Text
CRS-ll their'children's development and all children received moral instruction out-‘ side the public school classroom;’suth education in the schools might not be f necessary." They argue that sinceethis "ideal" situation does not exist, the public schools should attempt tofulfill this need. Further, they note that many of the same individuals who criticiae "moral education" in the schools _also argue that schools,must not ignore the need for "character development" in pupils. «Regarding other specific curricular topics, opponents of‘the view of- "secular humanism" presented in this section argue that many subjects have been _lumped into this critique'simply because they are opposed by the critics, not because they have any logical relationship to the concept of "secular.humanQi’ ism”. iSuch topics include global education or policy on nuclear war. ~ Finally, with respect to the role of Federal education assistance in this area, its defenders argue that, except for a brief period at the initialimple- mentation of the program, funds under ESEA titles’IIl and IVLC were allocated ..\ and utilized at the direction of and in accord with the preferences of State! and local educational agencies, not the Federal Government. Further they contend, Federal agencies have infrequently been involved in the development of curricular materials--and always in the‘form of financially supporting non- Federal curriculum preparers, never directly. In addition, it is argued that critics of even this form of Federal involvement are rarely able to mention p specific "problem" cases other the celebrated MACOS program. C. "Secular Humanism" as "Religion" A third principal perspective propounded by critics of "secular humanism" in the public schools is based on definition of this concept as a "religion,"
CRS86545EPWpage31
Title
CRS86545EPWpage31
Page from
info:fedora/mu:56635
Text
;secular humanism" and others, public schools have evolved through three general periods qywith respect to religious orientation: first, an explicitly Protestant period, lasting through the 19th century; a nondenominational but generally Christian »period from the beginning through the middle of the 20th century; anda contem- porary, secular period. 2/ Of course, such terse characterizations and espec- ially
CRS83557EPWpage23
Title
CRS83557EPWpage23
Page from
info:fedora/mu:87381
Text
CRS-l0 through national competition. The authorized funding level would be $106 mil- lion for FY 1984 and such sums as necessary for the 2 succeeding fiscal years. The pre-grant review and plan eligibility standards from prior law would be continued. Finally, the bill removes the ESAA activities from those authorized for chapter 2 and provides that the new ESAA could not be funded in the event

Pages