Home Zimbabwe - Land Reform.
Caught between extraordinary public expectations and relatively modest constitutional authority, U. Like his predecessors, Obama has sought to harness and consolidate his influence outside of Congress.
He also has made contributions of his own to the arsenal of administrative policy devices. The most creative, perhaps, is his Race to the Top initiative, which attempted to spur wide-ranging reforms in education, a policy domain in which past presidents exercised very little independent authority.
In doing so, it does not assess the efficacy of the particular policies promoted by the initiative, nor does it investigate how Race to the Top altered practices within schools or districts.
Rather, the focus is the education policymaking process itself; the adoption of education policies is the outcome of interest. No single test provides incontrovertible evidence about its causal effects. The overall findings, however, indicate that Race to the Top had a meaningful impact on the production of education policy across the United States.
In its aftermath, all states experienced a marked surge in the adoption of education policies. This surge does not appear to be a statistical aberration or an extension of past policy trends.
Legislators from all states reported that Race to the Top affected policy deliberations within their states. In the main, the evidence suggests that by strategically deploying funds to cash-strapped states and massively increasing the public profile of a controversial set of education policies, the president managed to stimulate reforms that had stalled in state legislatures, stood no chance of enactment in Congress, and could not be accomplished via unilateral action.
Asking States to Compete On February 17,President Obama signed into law the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of ARRAlegislation that was designed to stimulate the economy; support job creation; and invest in critical sectors, including education, in the aftermath of the Great Recession.
From the outset, the president saw Race to the Top as a way to induce state-level policymaking that aligned with his education objectives on college readiness, the creation of new data systems, teacher effectiveness, and persistently low-performing schools.
Department of Education ED exercised considerable discretion over the design and operation of the Race to the Top competition.
Within a handful of broad priorities identified by Congress in ARRA, the Obama administration chose which specific policies would be rewarded, and by how much; how many states would receive financial rewards, and in what amount; and what kinds of oversight mechanisms would be used to ensure compliance.
From an operational standpoint, Race to the Top was nearly entirely the handiwork of ED. Race to the Top comprised three distinct phases of competition.
Both Phase 1 and Phase 2 included specific education-policy priorities on which each applicant would be evaluated. States were asked to describe their current status and outline their future goals in meeting the criteria in each of these categories.
The education policy priorities spanned six major scoring categories and one competitive preference category see Table 1. To assist states in writing their applications, ED offered technical assistance workshops, webinars, and training materials. Additionally, nonprofit organizations such as the National Council on Teacher Quality published reports intended to help states maximize their likelihood of winning an award.
Nonetheless, substantial uncertainty shrouded some components of the competition, including the exact grading procedures, number of possible winners, total allocated prize amount per winning state, and prize allocation mechanism and timeline.
When all was said and done, 40 states and the District of Columbia submitted applications to Phase 1 of the competition.
Finalists and winners were announced in March Figure 1 identifies all winners and award amounts. Thirty-five states and the District of Columbia submitted applications to Phase 2 of the competition in June Having exhausted the ARRA funds, the president in sought additional support for the competition.
That spring, Congress allotted funds to support a third phase, in which only losing finalists from Phase 2 could participate.
A significantly higher percentage of participating states won in Phase 3, although the amounts of these grants were considerably smaller than those from Phases 1 and 2.
States that won Race to the Top grants were subject to a nontrivial monitoring process, complete with annual performance reports, accountability protocols, and site visits. After receiving an award letter, a state could immediately withdraw up to PRINCIPLES OF SUCCESSFUL HEALTH CARE REFORM.
Achieving a successful health care system rests on the following principles: Cost-cutting innovation is achievable. In recent times, health care technology’s miraculous leaps have been accompanied by dramatic cost increases. But this pattern is established by current laws, regulations, and institutions.
CEPR organises a range of events; some oriented at the researcher community, others at the policy commmunity, private sector and civil society. Butchers Semester Exam: Chapter 12 study guide by torivarney includes 15 questions covering vocabulary, terms and more.
Quizlet flashcards, activities and games help you improve your grades.
Any successful reform of education will require. the active participation of the teachers involved. D.C.'s Political Report hyperlink and list of American Political Parties. The Problems With Policing the Police.
Political and Social Reforms During the Progressive Era (–), the country grappled with the problems caused by industrialization and urbanization. Progressivism, an urban, middle‐class reform movement, supported the government taking a greater role in addressing such issues as the control of big business and the welfare of the public. Zimbabwe - Land Reform. How Successful? Details Category: Land Facts Zimbabwe - Land Reform. How Successful? By ProfessorTonyHawkins, University of Zimbabwe Published in the May issue of Welt-Sichten, Germany. CEPR organises a range of events; some oriented at the researcher community, others at the policy commmunity, private sector and civil society.
As the Justice Department pushes reform, some push back. by Simone Weichselbaum, The Marshall Project.
No sooner had the video gone viral than the Justice. The election has proved to be the biggest victory for marijuana reform since , with voters in California, Massachusetts, Nevada and Maine approving recreational marijuana initiatives.