Search

The "Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report" ("MMWR") Series is prepared by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). Data presented by the Notifiable Disease Data Team and 122 Cities Mortality Data Team in the weekly "MMWR" are provisional, based on weekly reports to CDC by state health departments. This issue of "Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report" includes the following reports: (1) Bullying Among Middle School and High School Students--Massachusetts, 2009 (M McKenna, E Hawk, J Mullen, and M Hertz); (2) State Smoke-Free Laws for Worksites, Restaurants, and Bars--United States, 2000-2010 (M Tynan, S Babb, A MacNeil, and M Griffin); and (3) Grand Rounds: The Opportunity for and Challenges to Malaria Eradication (KE Mace, MF Lynch, JR MacArthur, SP Kachur, L Slutsker, RW Steketee, and T Popovic). Announcements are also included. Individual reports contain figures, tables and references.

The "Census in Schools Educator Update" is sent to educators and educational organizations periodically to keep them informed about current and upcoming census data and to provide ideas about how to use data in the classroom. This issue of the "Census in Schools Educator Update" newsletter focuses on the following topics: (1) 2010 Census; (2) Fourth of July 2009--Facts and Classroom Activities; (3) Population Numbers--Facts and Classroom Activities; (4) Fourth of July Cookouts--Facts and Classroom Activities; and (5) Patriotic-Sounding Names--Facts and Classroom Activities.

The "Census in Schools Educator Update" is sent to educators and educational organizations periodically to keep them informed about current and upcoming census data and to provide ideas about how to use data in the classroom. This issue of the "Census in Schools Educator Update" newsletter focuses on the following topics: (1) 2010 Census: The Census in Schools Program--It's About Us; (2) Mother's Day Facts and Student Activity; (3) Mother's Day Facts Student Activity; (4) Everything Old Is New Again?: Used Merchandise Store Sales Top $9 Billion in 2007; and (5) Classroom Ideas.

Iranian Journal of Language Studies (IJLS) is devoted to all areas of language and linguistics. Its aim is to present work of current interest in all areas of language study. No particular linguistic theories or scientific trends are favored: scientific quality and scholarly standing are the only criteria applied in the selection of papers accepted for publication. IJLS publishes papers of any length, if justified, as well as review articles surveying developments in the various fields of language study (including Language Teaching, Language Testing, TESOL, ESP, Pragmatics, Sociolinguistics, (Critical) Discourse Analysis, Curriculum Development, Politeness Research, Classroom Research, Language Policy, and so on). Also, a considerable number of pages in each issue are devoted to critical book reviews. IJLS commenced publication 2006 for people involved in language and linguistic studies. Articles highlighted in this issue include: (1) Persian Requests: Redress of Face through Indirectness (Mohammad Ali Salmani-Nodoushan); (2) The Effect of Constructivist Language Teaching/Learning on Students' Conceptions of L2 Reading (Gholam Reza Zarei); (3) The Construct Validation and Application of a Questionnaire of Attribution Theory for Foreign Language Learners (ATFLL) (Reza Pishghadam and Ghasem Modarresi); (4) The Sociolinguistics of Edo Personal Name Constructions (Harrison Adeniyi); (5) Making Good Tasks Better: Fundamental Concerns (Esmaeel Abdollazade); (6) The Hidden Curriculum in Children's Literature: The Hogwarts School of Witchcraft and Wizardry (Abbas Eslami Rasekh and Nematullah Shomoossi); and (7) Assessment in a Multilingual World: English as an International Language (EIL) (Nematullah Shomoossi and Mansoor Tavakkoli). (Individual articles contain references, tables, and figures.) [IJLS is published by American Lulu, Inc. Abstract modified to meet ERIC guidelines.]

The ordinal regression method was used to model the relationship between the ordinal outcome variable, e.g., different levels of student satisfaction regarding the overall college experience, and the explanatory variables concerning demographics and student learning environment in a predominantly minority health sciences center. The outcome variable for student satisfaction was measured on an ordered, categorical, and four-point Likert scale-- "very dissatisfied", "dissatisfied", "satisfied", and "very satisfied". Explanatory variables included two demographics, e.g., gender and ethnic groups, and 42 questionnaire items related to the satisfaction of faculty involvement, curriculum contents, support services, facilities, and leisure activities at the college. The major decisions involved in the model building for ordinal regression were deciding which explanatory variables should be included in the model and choosing the link function (e.g., logit link or complementary log-log link) that demonstrated the model appropriateness. In addition, the model fitting statistics, the accuracy of the classification results, and the validity of the model assumption, e.g., parallel lines, were essentially assessed for selecting the best model. The research findings indicated that explanatory variables such as faculty competence and student-faculty relations were significantly associated with the satisfaction of the overall college experience. This discovery suggests that faculty members have played a major role in creating a pleasant environment to facilitate student satisfaction. In addition, the curriculum content regarding health promotion and disease prevention was significantly associated with the satisfaction of the overall college experience. It may also provide strong evidence that a specific component of the medical curriculum addressed student needs and contributed to the fulfillment of the medical college goal, e.g., delivery of primary care through health promotion and disease prevention. (Contains 5 tables.)

This SPEC (Systems and Procedures Exchange Center) Kit presents the results of a survey of Association of Research Libraries (ARL) member libraries designed to examine the systems research libraries use to authenticate and authorize the users of their online networked information resources. A total of 52 of 121 ARL member libraries responded to the survey. A copy of the questionnaire with tabulated results is presented. Representative documents include: explanations for users from the University of Alberta, University of California-Davis, University of California-Irvine, University of Colorado, Colorado State University, University of Connecticut, Cornell University (New York), Dartmouth College (New Hampshire), Duke University (North Carolina), University of Florida, McMaster University (Ontario), University of Manitoba, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, University of North Carolina, University of Oregon, University of Washington, Washington University (Missouri), and University of Waterloo (Ontario); technical specifications from Cornell University, Universite Laval (Quebec); and project plans from the University of Connecticut and University of Waterloo. (Contains 43 references.) (MES)

This SPEC (Systems and Procedures Exchange Center) Kit presents the results of a survey of Association of Research Libraries (ARL) member libraries designed to gather information about who has responsibility for the development, management, and maintenance of library World Wide Web sites and to determine which combination of human resources works best. A total of 62 of 122 ARL member libraries responded to the survey. A copy of the questionnaire with tabulated results is presented. Representative documents include: Webmaster responsibilities from the University of Alberta, Colorado State University, University of Kentucky, University of Minnesota, and Texas A&M University; Web team/committee responsibilities from Brown University (Rhode Island), Massachusetts Institute of Technology, University of North Carolina, Purdue University (Indiana), and University of Waterloo (Ontario); distributed responsibilities from Boston College (Massachusetts), University of California-Irvine, Colorado State University, and University of Georgia; Website design guidelines from Boston College, Brown University, Cornell University (New York), University of Florida, Indiana University, University of Manitoba, University of North Carolina, Ohio State University, and University of Western Ontario; user surveys from University of California-Irvine, McMaster University (Ontario), University of Minnesota, and Purdue University, and other evaluations from University of California-Irvine, University of Guelph (Ontario), and Massachusetts Institute of Technology. (Contains 19 references.) (MES)

This SPEC (Systems and Procedures Exchange Center) Kit presents the results of a survey of Association of Research Libraries (ARL) member libraries. The survey was designed to gather information about the changes that have taken place in the last five years in the services libraries offer to support instruction on campus and in the library, as well as information about partnerships created between libraries and other campus units to provide these services. Information was gathered about the following types of instructional support services: World Wide Web course development; custom Web programming; instructional development; digital imaging and graphics; video production; instructional evaluation; instructional technology; distance learning classroom and instructional development support; and other instructional support services or expertise. A total of 58 of 121 ARL member libraries responded to the survey. A copy of the questionnaire with tabulated results is presented. Representative documents include organization charts, service request and registration forms, library-based service descriptions, collaborative program descriptions, job descriptions, and service evaluation. Selected resources, including books, journal articles, and World Wide Web sites are listed. (Contains 21 references.) (MES)

This SPEC (Systems and Procedures Exchange Center) Kit presents the results of a survey of Association of Research Libraries (ARL) member libraries designed to provide a description of how they are responding to demands for greater hours of access and service. Survey responses indicate what hours of access and service libraries are providing and for what parts of the year. They answer questions about staffing, security, which specific library areas are opened additional hours, partnerships, and special funding that supports extended hours. They also describe how libraries are evaluating extended hours and what libraries plan in the future. A total of 63 of 121 ARL member libraries responded to the survey. A copy of the questionnaire with tabulated results is presented. Representative documents include building access and use policies, visitor policies, extended service hours, user surveys, other service evaluation, job descriptions, budget information, and security guidelines. Selected resources, including books, journal articles, and World Wide Web sites are listed. (Contains 21 references.) (MES)

This SPEC (Systems and Procedures Exchange Center) Kit presents the results of a survey of Association of Research Libraries (ARL) member libraries. The survey addressed the following questions about numeric data (i.e., any information resource, print or non-print, with considerable numeric content) in academic libraries: (1) What relationships exist between libraries and other academic units that have responsibility for numeric data? (2) What are the principle sources for numeric data? (3) How much are libraries spending to acquire numeric data resources? (4) How much staff time are libraries devoting to numeric data? and (5) How do libraries evaluate their own performance regarding numeric data? The survey was divided into six topical areas: background; numeric data product collections; access to machine-readable numeric data products; staffing; budget; and evaluation of numeric data collections and services. A total of 66 of 121 ARL member libraries responded to the survey. A copy of the questionnaire with tabulated results is presented. Representative documents include collection policies, user guides, data service descriptions, job descriptions, and access policies from participating libraries. Selected resources, including books, journal articles, and World Wide Web sites are listed. (Contains 21 references.) (MES)

This SPEC (Systems and Procedures Exchange Center) Kit is based on a survey of Association of Research Libraries (ARL) member libraries in June 2000. The goal of the survey was to identify issues to be addressed and actions ARL might take to advance the preservation goals of the members. The survey was designed to gather data on recent changes, successes, and challenges to preservation programs, staffing and funding patterns for preservation, staffing and funding patterns for digitization efforts, and trends in managing preservation programs. A total of 87 libraries responded to the survey. A copy of the questionnaire with tabulated results is presented. The following representative documents from participating libraries are included: policy and procedure documents from Arizona State University, Columbia University (New York), the National Library of Canada, and the Smithsonian Institution (District of Columbia); plans and reports from Johns Hopkins University (Maryland), the New York State Library, Syracuse University (New York), the University of Washington, and the University of Western Ontario; organization charts from Arizona State University, Columbia University, Pennsylvania State University, and the Smithsonian Institution; and budgets from Syracuse University and the University of Tennessee. (Contains 21 references.) (MES)

In an effort to inform foreign language teaching efforts in elementary and secondary schools in the United States, a small-scale, 3-month exploratory study was designed to collect information that would highlight what was most interesting and illuminating about foreign language education in various countries. Twenty-two educators from 19 countries responded to a series of questions about methodologies, strategies, and policies in their communities that could help improve language teaching in the United States. From their responses, specific policies and practices were identified that could inform American language education. These characteristics are described in this report. The following implications for American schools were drawn from the study results: start language education early; learn from other countries' successes and failures; conduct long-term research; push for stronger federal leadership in language teaching; identify how technology can improve language instruction; improve teacher education; develop appropriate language assessment instruments; designate foreign language as a core subject; and take advantage of the rich sociolinguistic context in the United States. It is apparent that Americans can learn a lot from other countries in this area. The entire language education profession could benefit from systematic international collaboration in language teaching efforts. Three appendices contain a review of selected comparative language studies, a list of countries and language educators contacted, and a cover letter and sample questions. (Contains 39 references.) (KFT)

This SPEC (Systems and Procedures Exchange Center) Kit reports results of a survey of ARL (Association of Research Libraries) that examined post-tenure review of librarians throughout higher education in North America. The purpose of the survey was to identify which institutions apply post-tenure or post-continuing appointment review to library professionals, whether the policy is the same as for faculty, what the process and criteria for review are, and what the consequences and impact of review are for library professionals. A copy of the questionnaire with tabulated results is presented. The following representative documents from participating libraries are included: (1) tenure and continuing appointment policies from Colorado State University, Iowa State University, and Texas Tech University; (2) tenure criteria from Colorado State University, Iowa State University, Pennsylvania State University, and the University of Tennessee; (3) post-tenure review policy from Colorado State University, Iowa State University, the University of Florida, Pennsylvania State University, the University of Tennessee, Texas A&M University, Texas Tech University, and Virginia Tech University; (4) professional development plans from the University of Hawaii, Indiana University, and Texas A&M University; and (5) discipline and dismissal policies from Colorado State University, Iowa State University, Pennsylvania State University, and Texas Tech University. (Contains 71 references.) (MES)

This SPEC (Systems and Procedures Exchange Center) Kit reports results of a survey of ARL (Association of Research Libraries) that examined the nature and structure of the interview process at large research and academic libraries in the United States and Canada. By determining the nature and structure of the interview, it is hoped that candidates will have a guide from which to draw in their preparation for an interview. Libraries will benefit from better-prepared candidates and from exposure to procedures and practices of other institutions. A copy of the questionnaire with tabulated results is presented. The following representative documents from participating libraries are included: (1) interview schedules form the University of Alabama, Brown University (Rhode Island), Colorado State University; (2) interview policies and procedures from the University of Delaware, McMaster University (Canada), and the University of New Mexico; (3) interview questions from the University of Houston, Indiana University, and Massachusetts Institute of Technology; (4) collateral information supplied to candidates from the University of California-Irvine, North Carolina State University, and Rutgers University (New Jersey); (6) announcement of candidate presentations from the University of Colorado, University of North Carolina, and Pennsylvania State University; and (6) forms to evaluate or rank candidates from the University of Colorado, University of Iowa, University of Michigan, and Michigan State University. (Contains 15 references.) (MES)

This survey of ARL (Association of Research Libraries) libraries was conducted in 1999 to determine whether findings of a 1994 survey that examined if research libraries were hiring non-M.L.S. (Master of Library Science) degreed applicants into professional positions had changed. Results revealed that, of the 111 ARL members responding, 73 libraries do require an M.L.S. or equivalent library degree for all librarian positions. This document includes survey results and selected documents addressing institutional policies and procedures for the hiring and appointment process from Brigham Young University (Utah), the University of Delaware, the University of Saskatchewan, and the University of Utah, as well as promotion and tenure criteria from Pennsylvania State University, Purdue University (Indiana), the State University of New York at Albany, Texas A&M University, the University of Utah, and Washington State University. Selected resources are listed, including 25 books and journal articles and 31 World Wide Web sites. (MES)

This issue includes the following articles: "A Problem Solving Approach to the Management of Change in Language Education" (Andy Curtis); "Nonverbal Communications Skills in the EFL Curriculum" (Chung-Il Kang); "Korean Student Exposure to English Listening and Speaking: Instruction, Multimedia, Travel Experience and Motivation" (David I. Kim, Douglas Margolis); "Web-Based Language Learning in Korea: A Pedagogical Critique" (Gerry Lassche); and "A Study of Goal Setting for Language Acquisition In the ESL Classroom" (John Skye). (KFT)

The articles in this volume are based on a survey of language learners carried out at five Swiss universities. The surveys (done through interviews and questionnaires) concern the ways that students encounter their second language (French) outside the classroom, and which of those practices are the most effective in improving their French. The research reveals the experience of language learners in "everyday" situations, and examines when and why the subjects use their second language outside of class. These articles also deal with the social context of language learning, especially as students move in and out of situations in which they belong to the linguistic majority or the linguistic minority. This research addresses the difference between communicative competence and grammatical skill, and the fact that students' linguistic competence reflects not only on their intellectual capability but also on their identity. Knowing how students use what they learn in the classroom, and what difficulties they encounter in those real-life situations, helps teachers and teacher-educators to make second language classes relevant to students' use of language and to take advantage of the increased autonomy of language learners in "immersion" situations. (JSS)

This survey of Association of Research Libraries (ARL) members gathered data on library support staff classification specifications in ARL libraries, the process for classifying these positions, and salary and title comparisons with similar positions outside of the library. It also asked when the last classification study was performed within the library, what triggered the process, which was involved, and what the results of the classification study were in both economic and human terms. A copy of tabulated results from the questionnaire is included. Representative documents include job descriptions/specifications from the University of Alabama, University of British Columbia, University of Maryland, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, University of Oregon, University of Saskatchewan, University of Virginia, University of Washington, and Washington University-St. Louis (Missouri). Contains selected resources, including books, journal articles, and World Wide Web sites. (MES)

The goals of this SPEC Kit were to report on the extent to which ARL (Association of Research Libraries) libraries provide electronic reference services and to offer a snapshot of the types of users reached, questions received, policies established, data-gathering techniques utilized, and innovations implemented. The first section of the kit provides an executive summary, a copy of the tabulated results from the questionnaire, and a list of responding institutions. Representative documents include: electronic reference World Wide Web sites from the University of Arizona, Brown University (Rhode Island), University of California-Irvine, Case Western Reserve University (Ohio), University of Colorado, University of Connecticut, Dartmouth College (New Hampshire), Indiana University, University of Maryland, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, University of Miami (Florida), University of Michigan, Michigan State University, University of New Mexico, University of Pennsylvania, Temple University (New Jersey), Yale University (Connecticut), and York University (Canada); and electronic reference policies, reports, and statistics from Columbia University (New York), the University of North Carolina, the University of Waterloo (Canada), and Yale University. Contains selected resources, including books, journal articles, Web sites, and listservs. (MES)

This SPEC (Systems Procedures and Exchange Center) Kit and Flyer summarizes results of a survey of ARL (Association of Research Libraries) members that was designed to gather information about current approaches to bibliographic control of materials digitized for preservation. The survey is intentionally limited to the cataloging treatment of materials that were digitized from the library's own collections for preservation purposes. It is assumed that, in most cases, bibliographic records already exist for the paper analogs either at the item- or collection-level. The survey does not attempt to deal with bibliographic control of remotely accessed electronic resources or resources that exist only in digital form. Representative documents are provided, including guidelines for managing electronic resources from the University of Florida, McGill University (Canada), and Pennsylvania State University; cataloging policies from Brown University (Rhode Island), Cornell University (New York), the University of Florida, the Library of Congress, and Pennsylvania State University; examples of catalog records from McGill University, the University of Michigan, the National Library of Canada, Northwestern University (Illinois), Pennsylvania State University, and the University of Texas; and examples of network-based access to digital resources from McGill University, the University of Michigan, Northwestern University, and the University of Texas. Selected journal articles and World Wide Web sites are listed. (Contains 20 references.) (MES)

This survey was conducted to delineate the growing relationship between marketing and public relations and library funding by identifying: (1) the extent to which North American research libraries have developed organized programs in the areas of marketing and public relations; (2) who holds positions in these areas; and (3) the impact these programs have on library funding. Results indicate that little clearly differentiates marketing from public relations. Out of 34 libraries responding to the survey, the majority, 37% reported having one department, area or individual responsible for combined marketing and public relations activities. For those without any marketing or public relations department, 17% reported plans to implement one in the future, while 19% indicated no plans for future implementation. Responding libraries favor the mass distribution of brochures and flyers over other means of self-promotion and fundraising. The least-used method was government lobbying. Over 79% of the respondents experienced fund increases because of promotional activities. A copy of the survey with tabulation of responses is provided. Representative documents include: planning documents from the University of Alberta and Texas Tech University; capital campaign materials from the University of Alabama; gifts documents from the University of Alabama, Cornell and Georgetown universities; library associates newsletters from Georgetown University and the University of Iowa; announcement materials for Georgetown, University of Kentucky, and Texas Tech; and campus communication newsletters and reports from the University of Alabama, Georgetown, Indiana, and Texas Tech universities. A list of selected resources is also included. (AEF)

A 1996-97 national survey of elementary and secondary schools investigated current patterns and shifts in foreign language enrollment, languages and programs offered, teaching methodologies, teacher qualifications and training, and reactions to national reform issues. An introductory section of the survey report offers background information on this and several previous surveys. The second section outlines key questions to be addressed by the present study. A third section is devoted to explanation of the research methodology used and a demographic profile of the sample surveyed. The bulk of the report is devoted to a summary of results, including numerical data, concerning: number of schools teaching foreign languages; interest in offering language instruction; language enrollment; languages taught; program types; grade levels and minutes per week (elementary schools); levels offered and hours per week (secondary schools); class scheduling during the school day; funding sources (elementary schools); schools having curriculum frameworks or guidelines; sources of language curricula; instructional materials; sequencing/articulation; number of language teachers; teacher qualifications; staff development/inservice training; foreign language use in the classroom (secondary schools); schools' characterizations of their programs; assessment; and standards for language learning. A concluding section contains a discussion of findings. The questionnaires are appended. Contains 9 references. (MSE)

This bulletin reports on a survey of existing school-district foundations in Oregon to determine their organizational structures, their fund-raising efforts, their expenditure priorities, and their successes. Included in the report are the results of survey data from 34 school foundations, along with the names and phone numbers of contact people in each of the responding foundations. The survey questionnaire was sent to the superintendents of all Oregon's 198 school districts. In addition to the survey, respondents were asked to provide samples of their bylaws and other materials they considered to be of interest to school districts planning to establish a foundation. A total of 120 districts responded, and of these, 34 districts identified themselves as having foundations. The results describe how many years the school foundations have been in existence, how the funds are used, what support the districts provide foundations, how the foundations raise their money, how much money the foundations have, the extent and nature of the foundations' publicity efforts, and the governance of the foundations, such as the size of the board of directors and the length of board members' service. Three appendices contain examples of publicity information, annual reports, and bylaws of school foundations from different size districts. (RJM)

The last several years have seen a dramatic increase in the popularity of two-way immersion (TWI) programs around the country. These programs integrate native English speakers and language-minority students for academic instruction and aim to promote bilingual proficiency, high academic achievement, and cross-cultural awareness. The expanded popularity of these programs has meant a surge in the demand for and recruitment of TWI teachers. Thus far, there is little research documenting the teaching experiences or professional development needs of current teachers in this unique teaching environment. Research on TWI being conducted at the Center for Applied Linguistics (CAL) under the auspices of the Center for Research on Education, Diversity, & Excellence (CREDE) is investigating the professional development of TWI teachers. An important premise of the investigation is the belief that questions about how to prepare teachers to work in TWI settings are best answered by teachers themselves. For this reason interviews and questionnaires were used to elicit teachers' perspectives and to gain demographic information about this understudied population. The interviews and questionnaires elicited information on who the teachers are (e.g., native language, highest level of education), on their professional experiences, and on what they thought new TWI teachers should know. (Author/VWL)

This survey was conducted to determine to what extent ARL (Association of Research Libraries) libraries permit food and drink to be consumed in library facilities, whether there has been a shift in recent times toward a liberalization of policy and practice, how restrictions are enforced, and whether there are particularly successful strategies for the management of food and drink. Results indicate that, although there have been some recent changes in ARL libraries' programs, most do not permit the consumption of food and drink in general use areas. Out of the 72 libraries responding to the survey, 71% prohibit food and drink entirely, and 29% permit food and drink--most with restrictions. Leading reasons for the restriction of food and drink included: preservation of library materials; maintenance of a healthy environment; and protection of the facility, furniture, and equipment; and pest control. A copy of the survey with tabulation of responses is provided. Representative documents include: (1) general policies and regulations from 12 universities; (2) planning documents from the University of Oregon; (3) policies and guidelines for staff from six universities; and (4) signs from two universities. Contains a list of selected resources. SPEC Flyer 237 summarizes survey results. (DLS)

This digest addresses principles of planning science programs for high ability learners. It notes various evaluation reports that have reviewed needs in science learning and teaching, identified essential science concepts and processes, and evaluated teacher enhancement programs and curricula. Research on gifted learners in science is briefly reviewed, noting the effectiveness of accelerated courses for groups of students with high science aptitudes and the value of problem-based learning in teaching science to this population. The digest identifies the following important elements of a science curriculum for gifted students: an emphasis on learning concepts; an emphasis on higher level thinking; an emphasis on inquiry, especially problem-based learning; an emphasis on the use of technology as a learning tool; and an emphasis on learning the scientific process by using experimental design procedures. Teachers are urged to consider the following approaches to science curriculum reform: (1) selection of modular materials rather than basals for classroom use; (2) training of teachers in content-based pedagogy; and (3) employment of curriculum monitoring processes in schools. The Curriculum Reform Classroom Indicators checklist is attached. (DB)

This survey was conducted to determine how ARL (Association of Research Libraries) libraries are participating in extension/outreach through three objectives: identify the level of involvement; determine the types of outreach service, as well as user populations; and ascertain the impact on the library, including its financial donor programs. A secondary goal was to identify any major issues and trends related to extension/outreach. In the fall of 1997, the survey was distributed to 121 ARL libraries, of which 61 (50%) responded. A copy of the questionnaire with a tabulation of responses is provided. The kit also contains representative documents, including: (1) policy and mission statements from the University of Hawaii, University of Kentucky; Massachusetts Institute of Technology, National Library of Medicine, Smithsonian Institution, and University of Tennessee; (2) promotional pamphlets from the University of Toronto; (3) cooperative library networks materials from the University of Michigan, Ohio State University, and Texas Tech University; (4) fee-based library services materials from the University of Michigan and University of New Mexico; (5) distance education materials from the University of Kentucky, University of Nebraska-Lincoln, and Texas Tech University; and (6) an evaluation and assessment report from Auburn University. SPEC Flyer 233 summarizes survey results. Contains the survey with results and a list of responding institutions. (Contains 20 references.) (DLS)

This survey was conducted to discover how extensively ARL (Association of Research Libraries) libraries are involved in formal, active programs of collaboration for collections management. Seventy ARL libraries completed a questionnaire focusing on all collections formats and a number of related collections management activities. Results indicated that 83% had a collaborative collections management (CCM) relationship with another library, and 55 respondents reported that they were members of at least one consortium in which active CCM is part of the consortium's program. The most common form of collaboration was in materials acquisition, followed by preservation agreements, processing of materials, collection development work, and management of personnel. In general, respondents were satisfied with their CCM arrangements. A copy of the survey with tabulation of responses is provided. Representative documents from the following institutions are included: University of Arizona; Boston Library Consortium (BLC); Latin America North East Libraries Consortium (LANE); Latin American Studies Consortium of New England (LASC); University of Kentucky/University of Tennessee Information Alliance; North East Research Libraries Consortium (NERL); TriUniversity Group of Libraries (TUG); Association of American Universities (AAU)/ARL Global Resources Program (GRP); and Research Library Cooperative Program. A flyer summarizing survey results is included. (DLS)

This study examined the variety of service delivery models used to provide services to preschool children with disabilities in nine diverse communities across three states (Colorado, North Carolina, and Pennsylvania). Information was derived primarily from interviews conducted with community preschool program administrators, service providers, and families, and analysis of policies and interagency questionnaires completed by representatives of the Local Interagency Coordinating Council in each community. Analysis revealed five qualitatively different organizational models: (1) single-program dominated; (2) network of education providers; (3) loosely coupled systems; (4) moderately coupled interagency systems; and (5) comprehensive interagency systems for all children. Each model is described in terms of: overall organizational structure, amount and nature of interagency decision making, target population, and scope and nature of service resources utilized. The study found that eight of the nine communities had made progress in moving from a narrow, insular approach to service delivery. State policy appeared to facilitate development of more coordinated service delivery models, as did interagency structures developed for infant and toddler programs. The study also concluded that federal policy, which aligns requirements for preschool children to those for school-age children, appears to pose a major barrier to the development of comprehensive and coordinated models. Data tables are appended. (Contains 17 references.) (DB)

This study surveyed local interagency coordinating councils (LICCs) required under Part H of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act concerning: the composition of council membership; information regarding frequency of meetings, membership turnover, and other demographic characteristics of the groups; and how well the LICCs are functioning, the tasks they have accomplished, and what remains undone. Nine diverse communities with varying sociodemographics and population/resource densities in three states (Colorado, North Carolina, Pennsylvania) were selected. A questionnaire, the Coordination of Infant-Toddler-Preschool Services Questionnaire, was sent to 57 individuals in groups responsible for service coordination, and 43 responses were received. Results are detailed and then analyzed in terms of a four-state model of the development of interagency groups. Responses indicate that positive outcomes of efforts by LICCs include a more efficient service system, improved quality of services, an increase in the number of children and families served, an increase in referrals, and a service system that is easier for families to use. However, LICCs appear to be avoiding the more difficult tasks, such as performing needs assessments of the service system and analyzing agencies' policies. Analysis suggests that the development of many LICCs has been thwarted in the early stages. (Contains 23 references.) (DB)

"Adventures in Assessment" is an annual journal of the system for Adult Basic Education Support (SABES), a comprehensive training and technical assistance initiative for adult literacy educators and programs. SABES accomplishes this goal through staff and program development workshops, consultation, mini-courses, mentoring, peer coaching, and other training activities provided by five Regional Support Centers located at community colleges throughout Massachusetts. The first three volumes present a comprehensive view of the state of practice in Massachusetts through articles written by adult literacy practitioners. Volume 1, "Getting Started," includes start-up and intake activities; volume 2, "Ongoing," shares tools for ongoing assessment as part of the learning process; volume 3, "Looking Back, Starting Again," focuses on tools and procedures used at the end of a cycle or term, including self, class, and group evaluation by both teachers and learners. Volume 4 covers a range of interests, and volume 5, "The Tale of the Tools," is dedicated to reflecting on Component 3 tools of alternative assessment. Volume 6, "Responding to the Dream Conference," is dedicated to responses to volumes 1-5. Volume 7, "The Partnership Project," highlights writings from a memtoring project for practitioners intersted in learning about participatory assessment. Volumes 8-11 cover a range of topics, including educational reform, workplace education, learner involvement in asseessment, etc. (MN)

This report, which is written for curriculum managers, student services managers, and learning support managers in further education (FE) colleges throughout the United Kingdom, summarizes and examines the results of a study in which eight FE colleges worked with the Further Education Development Agency to evaluate different approaches to learning support. ("Learning support" is defined as any activity beyond a college program's prescribed content that contributes to individual students' attendance, retention, learning, and achievement.) The following topics are among those discussed: summary of the study findings (strategy, culture, and organization; take-up of support; liaison; models; information, outcomes); role and context of learning support and catalysts for learning support; management of learning support (strategy, policy, key issues); models of learning support (initial needs assessment, learning centers, specialist workshops, tutorials and active guidance, partnership teaching, differentiation in teaching, specialist in-class support, ever-changing models); methods of funding learning support (centralized and college support); central systems for learning support (information systems, quality, staff development); and evaluation of learning support (methods, key issues, future developments). Twelve tables/figures are included. The bibliography contains 16 references. Appended are the following: staff questionnaire; course checklist; self-assessment checklist regarding Advanced (A-level) studies; staffing chart; and study center questionnaire. (MN)

The structures/systems required to ensure the quality of individual learning programs in further education (FE) in Britain and the coherence of learner achievement were examined through a study in which data were obtained from a survey of students in individual learning programs at two FE colleges and a literature review. At both colleges, personal tutors played the key role in ensuring ongoing guidance/support and access to central college services for all students. Neither college allocated personal tutors to part-time students, however. The subject tutors who acted as personal tutors for part-time students did not necessarily know about possible progression routes or central services within their college. Existing systems for part-time students did not systematically collect information about student purpose, and there was no central system for ensuring coherence for students studying units from different courses or across qualification routes. Most students considered the help they received in choosing their courses adequate; however, only 55% considered the various parts of their program to be linked together properly. (Concluding this document are checklists for evaluating coherence of student purpose, program design, and the learning experience and assessment. Appended are the student questionnaire and a summary of questionnaire responses.) (MN)

The extent to which staff appraisal has been implemented at Britain's public sector further education (FE) institutions and the characteristics, benefits, and disadvantages of existing appraisal systems were examined in a survey of 233 FE institutions (36% of all institutions in the public FE sector). Of the FE institutions surveyed, 76% had one appraisal scheme, and 18% had two or more. Of those systems, 57% were introduced in 1992-1994 and 37% covered all full-time staff. FE institutions were using appraisal systems to identify and implement appropriate staff development and identify targets related to organizational objectives for staff development. Appraisal was almost completely unrelated to performance-related pay. Most appraisal systems reflected principles of good practice in terms of development, design, and implementation, and most were separate from disciplinary, grievance, capability, promotion, and reference procedures. Most monitoring and evaluation systems focused on individuals rather than the organization. Appraisal systems were praised for contributing to staff and organizational development and providing opportunities for dialogue between appraiser and appraisee. The most commonly cited disadvantage of appraisal systems was the heavy time commitment involved (especially for appraisers). (Eleven tables are included. The report contains 26 references, a 48-item bibliography, the survey questionnaire, and 31 figures.) (MN)

Phase one of the Effective College Library research project, conducted between July 1995 and March 1996, entailed a review of evidence about library support for teaching and learning in further education. The results are detailed in this report. Questionnaires focusing on innovative practices were distributed to all 453 Further Education (FE) colleges in England and selected colleges in Scotland and Wales; only English responses were analyzed for the report. The second major source of data was a series of interviews with staff at selected colleges. Five models of the library in support of teaching and learning are discussed here. The following sections comprise the report: The Context of Effectiveness; The FE College Library and the College; Survival in the Changing College; Towards Effectiveness; and Some Issues and Proposals. Appendices include the questionnaire, the case study and source colleges, interview question areas, and participants at the Effective College Library seminars. A list of acronyms used in the report is also included. (Contains 31 references.) (AEF)

The role of further education (FE) colleges in England and Wales was examined through a survey mailed to a representative sample of 478 of the United Kingdom's 622 FE colleges. Questionnaires were returned by 102 (21%) of the colleges. Data were also collected through seminars, conferences and consultation meetings, cases studies, and a best practice analysis. The study confirmed that FE is already making significant contributions to economic development by assuming the following roles: stakeholder (where FE colleges express, either individually or collectively, their own economy power as employers, purchasers, tenants, contractors, developers, and corporate citizens); service provider (where FE provides services directly to people, businesses, and other organizations); and strategic partner (where FE colleges contribute to the leadership and coordination of economic development efforts at local, regional, and national levels through civic commitment, partnership boards, and planning and interagency liaison). Economic development was seen as the wider ambition for all FE activity, and FE's relations with businesses and the disadvantaged were considered a critical dimension of FE. External funding and Further Education Funding Council flexibility were identified as critical resource issues. (The survey questionnaire and a list of participating colleges are appended. The bibliography contains 21 references.) (MN)

This document, which is intended to help individuals interested in developing or strengthening partnerships between the further education (FE) colleges and the United Kingdom's National Youth Agency (NYA), contains information about current youth work contributions in FE and materials for FE colleges to use to assess their need for and develop youth work programs. Discussed first is the joint Further Education Development Agency-NYA project out of which the document developed. The second section, which is devoted to youth work's contributions to supporting young people in FE, considers the role of youth workers in the following: curriculum enhancement and support; advice, information, and informal counseling; mentoring; supporting the student union; security and youth work; and recruitment. Examined next are various aspects of youth program management and support, including recruitment and training of youth workers and partnership arrangements. Section 4 presents a framework and materials (including focus sheets and student questionnaires) for FE colleges to use in assessing their youth work. Concluding the document are 10 case studies. Appended are the following: data on development and management of youth work in and with FE colleges; grading criteria matrix; and job description for a full-time youth worker. The bibliography contains 17 references. (MN)

This document examines three studies that explored additional support, retention, and guidance in England's urban colleges. The foreword and summary discuss the mission, focus, and results of each study. "Funding and Tracking Additional Support in Basic Skills and ESOL (English for Speakers of Other Languages)" (Liz Lawson, Philida Shellekens) reports a study that identified the basic skills and ESOL needs of mainstream and disabled students. In "Retention of Students across Different Programmes" (Adjei Barwuah, Felicity Munday) describes and identifies reasons for variations in program retention rates. "Using Destinations Data to Improve Guidance and Support" (Muriel Green, Jackie Sadler), documents how colleges can improve their use of destinations data. The conclusion highlights key messages, common themes, and issues, including the following: additional funding needs, improved guidance, coherent strategies of early identification and follow-up, and the significance of the urban dimension. Seventeen tables/figures are included. Appended are the following: background to Further Education Funding Council funding of additional support; case studies of support of colleges and studies; checklist to help achieve effective support delivery and claim submission; student profiles by age, gender, and ethnicity; student questionnaire regarding guidance and progression after age 17; guidelines for establishing and managing a process to capture feedback from early leavers; and checklist for collecting and using destinations data to improve guidance and support. Contains 14 references. (MN)

Modern Apprenticeships, which were introduced in 1994, allow young people in the United Kingdom who do not want to commit to full-time further education the chance to achieve a National Vocational Qualification in their field while continuing in employment. The different models for delivery of Modern Apprenticeships that have been developed in further education were examined in a study of 12 further and higher education colleges delivering one or more Modern Apprenticeships. The sample, which was selected to reflect a cross-section of program sizes, occupational areas, geographic locations, and college settings, represented more than 25 different Modern Apprenticeships. Data on models of delivery, funding matters, partnerships and competition, and progression were collected through two site visits of each college and a questionnaire administered to college representatives. Each college supported more than one delivery scheme. Modern apprentices were employed predominately by small- to medium-sized enterprises. It was concluded that delivery of Modern Apprenticeships could be facilitated by General National Vocational Qualifications. In 75% of colleges, funding was allocated on an outcome basis. (Appended are the numbers of current registrations of modern apprentices on schemes offered by colleges in the project and the study questionnaire.) (MN)

This digest offers tips on designing questionnaires and on avoiding common design errors. The following useful suggestions are offered: (1) keep the questionnaire brief and concise; (2) get feedback on the initial list of questions developed; (3) locate personal or confidential questions at the end of the questionnaire; (4) put categories in order; (5) consider combining categories; (6) ask responders to rate both positive and negative stimuli; (7) choose appropriate response category language and logic; (8) avoid open-ended questions; (9) avoid the response option "other"; (10) avoid category proliferation; (11) avoid scale point proliferation; (12) avoid responses at the scale mid-point and neutral responses; and (13) avoid asking responders to rank responses. Carefully evaluating every question and its response choices will yield more meaningful information. (Contains four references.) (SLD)