Greater Educational Benefit Research Articles

Student Managed Investment Programs: Maximizing Learning Opportunities by Increasing Student Control

Student Managed Investment Programs (SMIPs) have been embraced by universities as a powerful learning experience. Although a large number of features have already been implemented by universities, SMIPs have potential for even greater educational benefits. In this paper, we argue students should be given increased control and responsibility for their SMIP to honor the intent of experiential learning and increase the breadth of their educational experience beyond direct money management. Maximizing the educational experience should be the design cornerstone, which can be accomplished through allowing complete student responsibility for the SMIP.

The Technical Efficiency of High Schools: The Case of a Greek Prefecture

Scarce human and fiscal resources of high value are spent in the field of education. Thus, the concept of efficiency, and particularly technical efficiency, that refers to the maximization of outputs at a given set of inputs, can be a possible contribution to the design of education policy and administration; mostly at a time of economic crisis as this in Greece, research could assist in formulating proposals on how resources are actually used within education structures/services, as well as in providing guidance to those responsible for the internal allocation of funds so as to secure greater educational results and benefits. The aim of this study is to measure the degree of technical efficiency of the 23 High Schools (Lyceums) in the Prefecture of Fthiotida in Greece, using the model of Data Envelopment Analysis and explore the factors that could interrelate with these measurements. The results provide evidence that a low percentage of school units (34.8%) achieves maximum technical efficiency. Proposals for improving the technical efficiency of the specific schools are also made.

A Financial Training Program for USDA/FSA Borrowers: Evolution and Impacts

A financial training program designed by Cooperative Extension specialists was provided to over 2,000 USDA/FSA borrowers from the Northeast during the period 1994–1999. Key to the success of the workshops was an in-depth, user-friendly curriculum that evolved over time, eventually replacing satellite-feed instruction with pre-taped videos. Cluster analysis classified nearly 70% of workshop participants as “Low Finance Priority” or “Low Finance Knowledge.” Farmers in these clusters received a relatively greater educational benefit from the program than those not in these clusters. Impact analysis indicated that perceived annual gain in farm net worth from application of workshop tools ranged from approximately $5,000 to $10,000. The training addressed the needs of producers typically isolated from Cooperative Extension because the workshop was the only extension program attended that year by nearly two-thirds of them.

The failure of the public schools and the free market remedy

The replacement of the existing system of publicly operated schools by a market of private ones-supported by government vouchers—would probably yield mixed results. On the one hand, some parents would have greater choices among schools and some schools would have to be productive in order to survive in the competitive framework. The increase in consumer choice and the resultant competition among schools would be likely to lead to greater educational benefits for many students and their families (private benefits) than those which they receive under the present monopolistic system. On the other hand, the schools are also expected to fulfill certain social functions. It is in these that a market approach to schooling is likely to yield poor results. For example, basic schooling represents the primary device for equalizing opportunities among racial and social groups. Yet, advantaged children would probably receive far better schooling under the market proposal than would disadvantaged ones, and it is likely that this disparity would lead to larger future inequalities in opportunity between the children of the middle class and those of the poor. Further, it is not clear that a set of largely autonomous schools could provide the common set of values and knowledge necessary for the functioning of a democratic society. Finally, it is likely that the market proposal would increase racial and social stratification of students among schools. Whatever the success of the market in meeting consumer preferences, it would be offset by the market's failure to satisfy the social goals of basic schooling. Fortunately, we are not limited to choosing between the traditional educational bureaucracy on the one hand or an unmitigated free market for educational services on the other. There are several ways to create competition within a public school system. Jencks, Sizer, and Coleman have suggested particular plans based upon the competitive framework, and the proposal for community schools represents a more general framework in which the competition of the market place might be used to advantage. The time is ripe to experiment with at least one of these plans for the children of the ghetto. Do we have any buyers?