Suchergebnisse

Abstract Background Special education provides an array of support that can advantageously meet special education needs (SEN) of children with autism. This report maps autism and SEN policies, and tension of international legislation in Malta, Cyprus, Luxembourg and Slovenia. Methods A policy path analysis was performed using a scoping review as fundamental methodological framework. Results Education for children with SEN developed from limited education towards segregation, and further to integration, and inclusion in mainstream education. International policy has greatly influenced the education systems under study. The rights to education and to have SEN addressed have been adopted in all countries. Inclusion is seen to be gradually incorporated by Malta, Cyprus and Luxembourg—closely following values of international documents through concise SEN policies. Slovenia's education system remains segregated, indicating potential tension. Conclusions It appears that mainstream schools offer SEN services until no longer feasible for the child in the majority of investigated countries. Inclusion has become a guiding principle for most education systems under study. Finally, small states either commit to the implementation of inclusion or delay it and attempt to improve the education system for children with SEN in different ways.

Chapter 1: Emerging innovations in policy pedagogies and practice in Asia -- THEME I: BEYOND BOUNDARIES -- Chapter 2: Role of trans-disciplinarity in public policy pedagogy- Experience from three contexts of public policy education -- Chapter 3: Teaching comparative public policy comparatively -- Chapter 4: Policy Learning through Fieldwork Engagement: A Geography classroom – fieldwork assessment on issues of water for policy understanding -- Chapter 5: Bridging a North-South epistemological divide in public policy research and education -- THEME II: DIGITALIZATION OF POLICY STUDIES -- Chapter 6: Teaching Digital Natives -- Chapter 7: How the Digital Age is Transforming Higher Education Public Policy -- Chapter 8: A Connected Government: The Use of Social Media and the Betterment of Public Service -- THEME III: NOVEL CAPACITIES FOR POLICY EDUCATION -- Chapter 9: Building Public Policy Capacity through Systems Thinking & System Dynamics Modeling Education in an Undergraduate Residential College Setting -- Chapter 10: Uses of serious games and simulations in education -- Chapter 11: Learning by 'Doing' and then Reflecting -- Chapter 12: Combining qualitative and quantitative data for policy research and practice: Evaluation, learning, and aid effectiveness of the Asian Development Bank -- Chapter 13: Looking Ahead: opportunities and challenges for policy education and practice in Asia.

The article reveals the problems and prospects of interaction between public and private structures in education, among which the main problems that hinder the effective development of public-private partnership in the educational sphere are highlighted. The effectiveness of the development of this form of partnership cooperation greatly expands the possibilities of educational institutions in training higher-level specialists, and for business structures opens up the possibility of personnel renewal of production in accordance with the needs of innovative economic development, in this connection, the article shows that the development of public-private partnership in Ukraine has great prospects. It is noted that the essence of interaction between the state and business in the framework of projects is the formation of partnerships, which are not a simple addition of resources, but the need to coordinate interests. It is determined that the effectiveness of the state in the implementation of projects mainly depends, on the one hand, on the need for business resources, and, on the other hand, on awareness of the need to involve non-state structures in the development of educational institutions. So, the interaction between the state and business is based on the conscious need for both the state and business to cooperate effectively in the educational sphere. It is proved that the main directions of stimulating this process should focus on direct state participation in educational projects that have a national priority in the implementation of state support for innovative activities of business structures through lending, preferential taxation and other preferences that facilitate the conditions of enterprises activities. Partnership in the field of higher education encourages the unification of the state, the business community and educational organizations for the implementation of socially oriented projects and the provision of public services.

"B-252334"--P. 1. ; "GAO/HEHS-94-102." ; "April 1994." ; Cover title. ; Includes bibliographical references. ; Mode of access: Internet.

Single-sex education in public school systems has become increasingly popular in recent years. The Equal Rights Amendment to the Washington State Constitution (ERA) requires that males and females be treated equally where state action, such as public education, is involved. As demonstrated by the ERA's legislative history and Washington case law, the ERA prohibits differentiation on the basis of sex alone, which occurs where an individual would be treated differently in a given situation if that person were of the opposite sex. Legislative history and case law recognize two narrow exceptions to the ERA. Under the first exception, classification based on sex is permissible if it is based on actual physical differences between the sexes. The second exception allows sex-based distinctions in the context of affirmative action programs intended solely to ameliorate the effects of past discrimination. This Comment argues that based on the Amendment's plain meaning and legislative history, as well as both binding and persuasive precedent, single-sex public education contravenes the ERA by differentiating on the basis of sex alone. Single-sex public education violates the ERA based on the plain meaning of the Amendment, which mandates equality between the sexes. Single-sex public education also runs afoul of the ERA by effecting arbitrary sex-based classifications: but for a given student's sex, that student would be allowed into a particular class or school. Moreover, a Pennsylvania court has held that single-sex public education violates Pennsylvania's ERA, which parallels Washington's ERA in language, purpose, and application. Finally, single-sex public education does not currently satisfy either of the two narrow exceptions to Washington's ERA: learning does not involve an actual physical difference between the sexes, and single-sex classes and schools are not affirmative action programs intended solely to mitigate the effects of past discrimination.