• Refine Query
  • Source
  • Publication year
  • to
  • Language
  • 1
  • Tagged with
  • 1
  • 1
  • 1
  • 1
  • 1
  • 1
  • 1
  • 1
  • 1
  • 1
  • 1
  • 1
  • 1
  • About
  • The Global ETD Search service is a free service for researchers to find electronic theses and dissertations. This service is provided by the Networked Digital Library of Theses and Dissertations.
    Our metadata is collected from universities around the world. If you manage a university/consortium/country archive and want to be added, details can be found on the NDLTD website.
1

The categorical funding of consumer and homemaking education

Combs, Letitia A. January 1983 (has links)
In 1976, Congress amended the Vocational Education Act to include, among other things, categorical funding for consumer and homemaking education. The purpose of this study was to discover why consumer and homemaking education received categorical funding in that legislation. This research was a policy formulation study. In order to formalize the study, the purpose was divided into specific research questions. They formed the structure of the study. The study consisted of three stages. The first stage involved a review of congressional meetings, a study of publications of interest groups and a review of historical accounts of pre-1976 legislation for home economics education. Stage two involved the development of interview questionnaires. Stage three involved interviewing key persons who worked on federal legislation for consumer and homemaking education. This stage also included a study of personal papers, unpublished documents and transcripts of closed meetings relating to federal funding for consumer and homemaking education. It was found that, in 1976, home economics educators not only had to encourage Congress to continue categorical funding, but they were divided about how to affect the continuation. One group wanted to prepare legislation that would closely meet the visions held by the members of Congress. While another group wanted to lobby for provisions favored by home economics educators. Categorical funding was obtained with neither method exclusively. It was obtained through the efforts of home economists, lobbyists, and congressional aides who analyzed proposed provisions and who, through compromise, prepared legislation that was acceptable to all parties. It is recommended that home economists continue to work with Congress and that they improve the image policy makers have of their program. These professionals should develop strong state-level power structures and extensive legislative networks. Furthermore home economics educators should work closely with professional associations to draft acceptable home economics legislation. / Ed. D.

Page generated in 0.088 seconds