California state universities colleges and schools, college tuition hikes, cricketdiane, education in America, endowments, state budgets, state of California, state of Georgia schools colleges and universities, tuition hikes in Universities and Colleges
States and Education budget decision-makers do not understand protests, nor signatures on petitions nor grass roots movements. They act as though they think these are to be mocked and held in contempt, with no decisions impacted as a consequence. The only thing that states, education departments, school systems and district budget decision makers do understand, are lawsuits. Intentional economic exclusion being perpetrated by the state budget comptroller’s office, state legislatures, state governors’ administrations and department of education decision-makers is illegal and that is actually what they are doing.
(my note, cricketdiane)
The Georgia Lottery Corp. today announced record first-half profits for education. Georgia Lottery profits for the first half of fiscal year 2010 totaled $429,754,000, surpassing the previous record set last fiscal year by more than $8.49 million.
This collection relates to the California Post-Secondary Education Commission (CPEC) collected by the Chancellor’s Office of the California State University. Mostly consists of CPEC reports (1976-1994), but also includes minutes, agendas (1975-1980), correspondence and other materials. Reports cover all…
My Note –
In 1975, there was a law made in California insuring that every student, resident, adult and post-secondary candidate would have a right to receive tuition-free or tuition-subsidized education at the state college of their choice provided that they passed the admissions process. Although amendments to that law were made, it still stands and guarantees a right to a higher education for all the citizens of the state of California – It was one of the few states to do it as a response to the system in Norwegian and Scandinavian countries, if I remember correctly, to make freely available higher education available to all in their countries and Canada’s free tuition post-secondary education system which was put into place a little later (I’ll have to look it up – so if this isn’t entirely accurate, please forgive me). To go back on that now, and intentionally exclude thousands of students from that mandate by raising tuitions to non-recoverable rates, is against the law. The comptroller’s office is working with funds that are fungible.
They literally determined to not make available the funds to pay teachers and support education budget needs to use the access to the stimulus funds and other emergency funds to cover it. Then they took cuts in all sorts of programs intending to access funds that would later cover those costs. Then, at the same time, they paid off losses with the money that was originally intended to cover those teachers, education systems, state colleges, schools systems and education budget needs. That is because those funds are literally being used in a shell game to pay off losses that were incurred as a result of plowing money into the stock market, hedge funds, credit derivatives, leverage and other fiscal mismanagement techniques such as putting liabilities on off-balance sheet accounting as if it would not undermine funds coming in the front door.
Now what? There have to be lawsuits and class action suits made to force records to come out of the closets and so that the moneys raided from lotteries and stimulus funds intended for education will have to be brought into line with their original purposes. Without the lawsuits, the state governments, budget offices, endowments, trusts and department of education budgets decision-makers will simply snicker at the protests and do nothing any different. Lawsuits and class action suits made en masse across every state can change this – nothing else will. (The money is there if they choose to use it appropriately. The endowments should be taking the losses themselves and rebuilding their trusts over time from these losses – they have no rights to steal from the schools, colleges and university budgets to do it in the shortfall.)
These entries about California Post-Secondary Legislation as possible places to find the law are from –
(Also found on this site – )
Transcripts and cassette tapes of oral history interviews with various individuals involved in the formation of the California State University system.
Papers of Eugene Forney, official with CSU Auxiliary Business Services. Relates to CSU Procurement and property management.
Minutes and agendas of meetings of the various committees of the California State University Board of Trustees (1958-1993).
Main minutes and/or agenda packets of meetings of the California State University Board of Trustees (1960-present).
Resolutions of Board of Trustees of the California State University system (1960-1992). Includes index.
Records of CSU Business Affairs Office (1966-1988)
Chancellor’s Office Collection consists of the administrative records of the Chancellor’s of the California State University System. The Chancellor is the administrative head of the system reporting to the Board of Trustees. This collections consists of the records mostly…
Minutes, agendas, and related items of the California State University Chief Administrators and Business Officers group (1993-2001). Topics covered in minutes include budget process, environmental health and safety issues, integrated technology strategy, collaborative management systems, and audit planning
Collection of memoranda created by various offices and divisions of the Chancellor’s Office of the California State University (1960-2002).
A number of states sold the electorate on paying for education by installing state lotteries. Supposedly these funds from the sales of lottery tickets would make sure that every adult, every high school student and every person of college age who wanted to go to college could go to college with tuition supported by the lottery. The funds from the lottery were also supposed to be used to underwrite the school systems and department of education budgets. Now, in the last few years, including in 2010, the proceeds from these lotteries have reached record levels and their profits are excessive and monumental. But, for some reason budget cuts are happening in every state that uses the state-run lottery to support education – are they only using 10% of the proceeds for education and the rest is given to what? Where is it going?
Why did the legislatures in these lottery states break the law that originally established these funds and lotteries. There is intent to mislead the public when they were voting for these lotteries because those funds have not allowed every student to access higher education and huge restrictions on which students and under what conditions could have access to those tuition supports. It is ridiculous in an age and time when America must compete in a world whose educations are broader, more provided, more extensive, higher, better and available to more of their populations.
It isn’t without reason that Microsoft and other large corporations needing expert knowledge are insisting on access to individuals from other countries as new hires rather than from the United States. (check H1B Visas – I think that’s the one and the hearings where Bill Gates and others said that if those weren’t made more available – they would take their companies out of the United States.)
ATLANTA – The Georgia Lottery Corp. today announced record first-half profits for education. Georgia Lottery profits for the first half of fiscal year 2010 totaled $429,754,000, surpassing the previous record set last fiscal year by more than $8.49 million.
The Georgia Lottery is the only traditional lottery in the U.S. to experience 11 consecutive years of growth in profits.
My Note –
those are the profits . . .This is what they are doing . . .
In Georgia, a legislative committee proposed $300 million in cuts to the state’s college system, on top of $100 million cut in the past two years, University of Georgia President Michael F. Adams wrote in an open letter to students, faculty and staff.
(from article below -)
Students, professors to protest education cutbacks
March 4, 2010 9:36 a.m. EST
State funding for the California State University system was reduced by nearly $1 billion for the academic years between 2008 and 2010. Schools have responded by increasing fees, canceling classes, cutting student support programs and furloughing professors. Fees have increased 182 percent since 2002.
The only thing that states, education departments, school systems and district budget decision makers do understand, are lawsuits. Intentional economic exclusion being perpetrated by the state budget comptroller’s office, state legislatures, state governors’ administrations and department of education decision-makers is illegal and that is actually what they are doing.
(my note – cricketdiane)
CHECK HERE –
Scope and Content
California State University Government Affairs Office Records CSU Office of Government Affairs records (1960-1991—mostly 1960s, 6 ft) deal with the State College and University systems interactions with the California State Legislature regarding legislation, college sites and controversial issues. Subjects include college sites, campus unrest, buildings and…
COMMUNITY COLLEGE PROGRAMS AND SERVICES
Almost half of the 91 colleges surveyed by Banks and Railsback offered special programs to encourage women and/or minorities to enroll in science and math programs and help them succeed. The literature indicates that such programs tend to focus on one or more of the following goals:
*ensuring that students have the basic skills needed for success in college-level math and science courses
*providing social and academic support networks
*helping students and their families afford the costs of college through scholarships, financial aid, savings programs, and other means
*providing women and minority role models and mentors from within the college and the community
*altering pedagogical approaches and curricula to accommodate students’ learning styles better.
For example, Washtenaw Community College in Michigan has implemented a program to upgrade the basic skills of women and minority students and provide the academic support needed for them to succeed in high technology occupational training programs (Leach and Roberts, 1988). Counseling, peer support, financial aid, and student advocacy are important components for ensuring student persistence.
Devarics, Charles. “Occidental Program Promotes Science for Community College Students.” Community College Week; v2 n7 p11 November 13, 1989.
Leach, Juliette D.; Roberts, Shirley I. “A Soft Technology: Recruiting and Retaining Women and Minorities in High Tech Programs.” Community, Technical, and Junior College Journal; v59 n2 p34-37 Oct.-Nov. 1988.
Lee, Beth S.; And Others. MESA/MEP at American River College. Year One Evaluation Report. Sacramento, CA: Los Rios Community College District, Office of Planning and Research, 1990. 45 pp. (ED 319 472)
McDonnell, L.M.; Oakes, J.; Shavelson, R.J. Indicators for Monitoring Mathematics and Science Education: A Sourcebook. Santa Monica, CA: Rand Corp., 1989.
National Science Board. Undergraduate Science, Mathematics and Engineering Education. Washington, DC: Author, 1986. 67 pp. (ED 272 398)
Task Force on Women, Minorities, and the Handicapped in Science and Technology. Changing America: The New Face of Science and Engineering. Final Report. Washington, DC: Author, 1989. 47 pp. (ED 317 386)
Williams, Ronald A.; Cox, Mary Anne. “Minority Student Recruitment: A Connecticut Model.” New Directions for Community Colleges; v19 n1 p39-46 Summer 1991.
My Note – I updated this to include the above information from ERIC digest – to express that they’ve always known what the problem is and why America’s education system is critical to the survival and prosperity of the United States over the last twenty years and certainly over the next twenty years or hundred years and especially over the course of the immediate five years . . .
Consequently, to cut these universities’, community colleges’, high schools’, post-secondary education resources’ budgets and the budgets of education systems throughout the fifty states is to destroy AMerica’s capacity to succeed now and in the future. At a time when our country needs even more education across every level of our society, including in those who have higher educations – (considering that most of our economic crisis has occurred because many in Wall Street, Harvard, business schools, investment firms, banks and government economic bureaus did not understand the basic laws of physics – that what goes up will come down), the mismanagement of educational financial resources in school systems, colleges, university systems, state budgets, state departments of education, and in other financial decision-making affecting them cannot be tolerated.
Please note that this site is privately owned and is in no way related to any Federal agency or ERIC unit. Further, this site is using a privately owned and located server. This is NOT a government sponsored or government sanctioned site. ERIC is a Service Mark of the U.S. Government. This site exists to provide the text of the public domain ERIC Documents previously produced by ERIC. No new content will ever appear here that would in any way challenge the ERIC Service Mark of the U.S. Government.
ERIC Identifier: ED329807
Publication Date: 1991-00-00
Author: Imel, Susan
Source: ERIC Clearinghouse on Adult Career and Vocational Education Columbus OH.
ERIC and the Adult Education Act: 25 Years of Collaboration. ERIC Digest No. 107.
In 1966, two events of significance for the field of adult education occurred: Congress approved the first adult education act in the Nation’s history and the Educational Resources Information Center (ERIC) system was established. Although these were independent events, it was fortuitous that the passage of the Adult Education Act and the launching of a national education information network occurred during the same year. It meant that at the same time monies to support adult education research and delivery systems became available, there was a mechanism in place to collect and disseminate the results of these activities. This ERIC Digest highlights the 25-year collaboration between the Adult Education Act (AEA) and the ERIC system.
Brief descriptions of both the AEA and the ERIC system begin the Digest. Next, using ERIC to locate AEA-related resources is discussed. Information about making contact with appropriate ERIC components and the U.S. Department of Education’s Division of Adult Education and Literacy concludes the DIGEST.
THE ADULT EDUCATION ACT
The Adult Education Act is the major piece of federal legislation providing funding for adult education programs serving educationally disadvantaged adults. Currently administered by the U.S. Department of Education’s Division of Adult Education and Literacy, this act distributes funds to the states for adult basic education programs offered in a variety of institutions–local education agencies, community colleges, community-based organizations, workplaces, and correctional institutions (Crandall and Imel 1991).
Although it has its origin in the Economic Opportunity Act of 1964, adult basic education was established as a distinctive program with the passage of the Adult Education Act of 1966 (Parker 1990). This historical piece of legislation established the authorization for the Adult Education program in the Office of Education, expanded the program to include adults with limited English proficiency, and authorized grants for special experimental demonstration projects and for teacher training. Since 1966, the AEA has been amended many times, most recently in 1988. These amendments have expanded the scope of the act to include adult school completion, a competency-based approach to assessment and programming, and workplace literacy programs (Division of Adult Education and Literacy ). When reauthorized in 1991, it is expected that the Adult Education Act will provide greater support for and coordination of adult basic education and adult literacy initiatives at local and state levels (Crandall and Imel 1991).
The enlarged scope of the act has been accompanied by an increase in both enrollees and financial support. The number of persons served by the act has grown from a half million adults in 1968 to more than 3 million in 1988. Although the amount of federal funding for the act has increased–from $30.6 million in 1968 to $238.8 million in 1991–it has been the increase in state and local support–from $9.6 million in 1968 to $510.5 million in 1988–that is an indication of widespread support for the act and its purposes (Division of Adult Education and Literacy ).
ERIC–THE EDUCATIONAL RESOURCES INFORMATION CENTER
ERIC–the Educational Resources Information Center–is a federally supported educational database that currently receives its funding from the Office of Educational Research and Improvement, U.S. Department of Education. Designed to put the results of educational research and development in the hands of researchers, practitioners, administrators, and policymakers, ERIC consists of a central unit in Washington, DC, and 16 clearinghouses located throughout the country, each focusing on a specific area of education.
Each clearinghouse is responsible for acquiring and processing information in its assigned area in order to build the ERIC database. The database, which can be accessed through printed index, by computer, or in CD-ROM format, consists of two types of literature. The first is the document literature, sometimes known as “fugitive material” since it would not be readily available unless selected and included in ERIC. Recently completed research reports, curriculum and instructional materials, teaching guides, descriptions and evaluations of exemplary programs, and other documents are examples of the types of materials that are announced in ERIC’s monthly document index, “Resources in Education” (RIE). ERIC also includes journal literature. Each month articles from more than 700 education-related journals are annotated and included in “Current Index to Journals in Education” (CIJE).
In addition to building the database, ERIC Clearinghouses provide reference services to their client groups by answering questions, making referrals to other agencies, and providing searches of the ERIC database. They also develop and disseminate products–such as this ERIC Digest–that provide information on high-interest areas within education and that review and synthesize material in the database.
USING ERIC TO LOCATE AEA-RELATED RESOURCES
For the past 25 years, the ERIC system has been collecting and disseminating materials related to the Adult Education Act. These materials can be classified into two categories: those that are about the act and those that are results (i.e., curricula, project reports) of projects and research funded by the act. Each of these categories is described, including information on terms (ERIC descriptors or identifiers) to provide access to the materials.
MATERIALS ABOUT THE ACT
Over the years, there have been a number of items written about the act itself. Some of these pieces are analyses of the act, some are evaluations, and some recommend changes in the legislation. The earliest ERIC report about the Adult Education Act is “Adult Basic Education. Program Summary” (Office of Education 1967) that provides a brief description of the federal adult basic education program for fiscal years 1965, 1966 and estimates for 1967. Other examples of materials in this category are “An Assessment of the State-Administered Program of the Adult Education Act. Final Report” (Young and others 1980), “The Adult Education Act: Issues and Perspectives on Reauthorization” (Taylor 1983), “State of the Art in Adult Basic Education” (Delker 1984), and “Promoting Innovation and Controversy in Adult Basic Education: Section 309 of the Adult Education Act (Radwin 1984). Materials about the act can be retrieved using the identifier “Adult Education Act.”
INFORMATION ABOUT PROJECTS FUNDED UNDER THE ACT
Reports and products produced by projects funded with AEA monies constitute most of the AEA-related information in ERIC. The majority of these resulted from special research and demonstration projects funded through Sections 309, 310, and, most recently, 353 of the act. Although there is a large collection of materials in this category, it is not complete because many reports were never submitted to ERIC and some that were did not meet the ERIC selection criteria. Unfortunately, it is not as easy to retrieve materials in this category from the database. Since 1983, projects funded under either Section 310 or Section 353 of the act have been cataloged with the identifiers “310 Project” or “353 Project.” To retrieve materials prior to that, it is helpful to know the institution where the project was conducted or some other identifying information such as the name of the project director.
Catalogs of AEA-funded projects included in the ERIC database can be used to locate information about specific projects. Examples of these include “Clearinghouse ADELL’S Catalog of Adult Education Projects, Fiscal Year 1978,” funded under the Adult Education Act Sections 306 (A) (4) and 309 (1) and (2) (Clearinghouse ADELL 1978); and “Catalog of Adult Education Projects, Fiscal Year 1982” (Office of Vocational and Adult Education 1982).
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
Further information about ERIC and AEA-related materials in the ERIC database can be acquired by contacting the ERIC Clearinghouse on Adult, Career, and Vocational Education (ERIC/ACVE) 1900 Kenny Road, Columbus, OH 43210-1090 or the National Clearinghouse on Literacy Education (NCLE), Center for Applied Linguistics, 1118 22nd Street, NW, Washington, DC 20037. NCLE is an adjunct ERIC Clearinghouse that collects literacy materials for adults and out-of-school youth with limited-English proficiency. Both ERIC/ACVE and NCLE produce Digests and other free or low-cost materials on topics related to adult literacy and basic education.
Further information about the AEA can be obtained from the Division of Adult Education and Literacy (DAEL), Office of Vocational and Adult Education, USDE, 400 Maryland Avenue, SW, Washington, DC 20036.
Clearinghouse ADELL. Clearinghouse ADELL’S Catalog of Adult Education Projects, Fiscal Year 1978, Funded under the Adult Education Act Sections 306 (A) (4) and 309 (1) and (2). Rockville, MD: Clearinghouse ADELL, 1978. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 158 017).
Crandall, J., and Imel, S. “Issues in Adult Literacy Education.” The ERIC Review 1, no. 2, (March 1991): 2-8.
Delker, P. V. “State of the Art in Adult Basic Education.” Paper presented at the National Adult Literacy Conference, Washington, DC, January 1984. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 241 698).
Division of Adult Education and Literacy. “Adult Education Act. Silver Anniversary 1966-1991.” Washington, DC: DAEL, U.S. Department of Education, .
Office of Education. Adult Basic Education. Program Summary. Washington, DC: OE, DHEW, March 1967. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 015 380).
Office of Vocational and Adult Education. Catalog of Adult Education Projects, Fiscal Year 1982. Washington, DC: OVAE, U.S. Department of Education, 1982. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 228 379).
Parker, J. T. “Modeling a Future for Adult Basic Education.” Adult Learning 1, no.4 (January 1990): 16-18, 28.
Radwin, E. Promoting Innovation and Controversy in Adult Basic Education: Section 309 of the Adult Basic Education Act. San Francisco: Far West Laboratory for Educational Research and Development; Andover, MA: Network of Innovative Schools, December 1984. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 253 774).
Taylor, P. C. “The Adult Education Act: Issues and Perspectives on Reauthorization.” Lifelong Learning 7, no. 1 (September 1983): 10-11, 26-27.
Young, M. B., and Others. An Assessment of the State-Administered Program of the Adult Education Act. Final Report. Arlington, VA: Development Associates, July 1980. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 195 700).
When reauthorized in 1991, it is expected that the Adult Education Act will provide greater support for and coordination of adult basic education and adult literacy initiatives at local and state levels (Crandall and Imel 1991).The enlarged scope of the act has been accompanied by an increase in both enrollees and financial support. The number of persons served by the act has grown from a half million adults in 1968 to more than 3 million in 1988. Although the amount of federal funding for the act has increased–from $30.6 million in 1968 to $238.8 million in 1991–it has been the increase in state and local support–from $9.6 million in 1968 to $510.5 million in 1988–that is an indication of widespread support for the act and its purposes (Division of Adult Education and Literacy ).
(excerpt from above)