Influence, policy formation, and higher education in Florida: 1989--1994

This study examined the perceptions of state governmental officials and administrators from the state university system, community college system, and independent institutions concerning the ability of various groups to influence state-level higher education policy formation. The study was conducted in Florida for the period 1989-94. Florida has a history of legislative involvement in higher education, a unique system of state universities and community colleges, and a limited number of private institutions of higher education. This study was grounded in the works of Mortimer and McConnell (1978), Millett (1987), Marshall, Mitchell, and Wirt (1989) and Finitfer, Baldwin, and Thelin (1991).^ The study represented the application of an embedded, single-case design. A survey was the primary collection instrument. Respondents were asked questions concerning: (a) personal involvement in higher education, (b) perceptions of the ability of various groups to influence higher education policy, (c) the names of particular individuals considered key players in higher education policy formation, (d) important state-level documents, (e) personal knowledge of key areas of policy formation, and (f) emerging higher education issues in Florida. Quantitative and qualitative methods were used to analyze the different sections of the survey.^ The findings indicated that a power and influence hierarchy exists among the various groups that attempt to influence higher education policy and that this hierarchy is recognized by state government officials and higher education administrators. While an analysis of variance of the various groups revealed a few differences between state government officials and higher education personnel, the high overall agreement was an important finding. Leading members of the legislature, especially the Chair of the Senate Higher Education Committee, and key staff members, especially from the Senate Ways & Means Committee, were considered the most influential. Representatives from higher education institutions and research organizations were considered among the least influential. Emerging issues identified by the respondents included: (a) the political nature of state-level policy formation, (b) the role of legislative staff, (c) the competition for state moneys, (d) legislative concern for state-wide budgetary efficiency, and (e) legislative attempts to define quality and supervise academic program development for higher education. ^

A comparative analysis of school satisfaction and dropout risk of middle school students attending programs for students with emotional handicaps, severe emotional disturbance and general education students attending center schools and satellite schools

This study evaluated school satisfaction as an indicator of dropout risk of students with Emotional Handicaps (EH) and students with Severe Emotional Disturbance (SED). The students attended two different kinds of middle schools in a largely urban school district in South Florida. One hundred eight students in grade 8 (ages 13-16) participated in this study. Participants were administered the National Dropout Prevention Assessment (NDPA). Forty participants with EH and SED attended a special center school. Thirty-one participants with EH and SED attended satellite programs in a regular middle school. Thirty-seven general education participants attended the same regular middle school. Overall school satisfaction scores were generated, as well as three primary factors (school, environment and personal) and 16 subscales (school atmosphere, future income, difficulty level of classwork, teacher relationships, peer relationships, intrinsic interest in classwork, school hours, classwork stress, general attitude towards school, family influence, perceived opportunity for career, future goals, travel distance, leisure time, self-appraisal of performance, and self-esteem).^ Comparison of students with EH and SED revealed that both groups of students were rated at "low risk" of becoming dropouts on the Environmental factor and the Difficulty of Schoolwork subscale. Students with EH were rated at "caution risk" risk on the Travel Distance subscale. Students with SED were rated at "high risk" on this subscale.^ There were no significant differences in school satisfaction and dropout risk between different program delivery models. There were also no significant differences for category of students (EH, SED) by school type (center school, satellite program). All students were rated at "low risk" of dropping out of school.^ There were significant differences between general education students and students with EH and SED attending satellite programs. Students with EH and SED were rated at "caution risk" for dropping out on the Travel Distance and the Leisure Time subscales. Discussion of results, implications for practice and recommendations for further research are included. ^

Administering an International Hospitality Education Program

Understanding the political structure of educations and applying principles of political action may help avoid the destruction of educations alliances formed between partners of divergent backgrounds. The author discusses how this form of analysis may also be of benefit in understanding the problem technically-oriented hospitality programs from abroad often have articulating with the academic administrations in most American universities.

A developmental education program model for high -risk minority baccalaureate nursing students

The purpose of this study was to define and describe a Developmental Education Program Model for high-risk minority baccalaureate nursing students based upon perceived needs determined by nursing students and nursing faculty. The research examined differences between Black and Non-Black nursing students in level of importance of concerns and issues related to academic, financial, psycho-social and personal areas of student life; faculty perceptions of the differences between Black and Non-Black nursing students in the level of importance of concerns and issues related to academic, financial, psycho-social and personal areas of student life; and the difference between Black and Non-Black nursing faculty perceptions of level of importance of issues and concerns of academic, financial, psycho-social, and personal areas for Black nursing students. In this study two data collection methods were used, questionnaire and interview. The questionnaire was completed by all students and faculty. Black baccalaureate nursing students and nursing faculty were interviewed. The most significant differences were seen in the category of Personal Issues. Student identified concerns and issues related to both academic and health problems. Faculty identified the greatest differences in Academic Issues. The framework for the model which evolved out of the data uses needs from: (1) a whole person perspective (outcome oriented needs); (2) a programmatic perspective (input oriented needs); and (3) learning domain perspective (process oriented needs). ^

Increasing nurse's knowledge of neonatal pain assessment through inservice education program

Recognizing neonatal pain is a challenge for nurses working with newborns due to the complexity of the pain phenomenon. Pain is subjective, and infants lack the ability to communicate, and their pain is difficult to recognize. The purpose of this study is to determine the effectiveness of education on the NICU nurses' ability to assess neonatal pain. With a better understanding of pain theory and the effects of pain on the newborn the nurse will be better able to assess newborns with pain. Designed as a quasi-experimental one-group pretest and posttest study, the data was collected on a convenience sample of 49 registered nurses employed in the neonatal and special care nursery units at a Childrens Hospital in the Miami area. The nurses were surveyed on the assessment of neonatal pain using the General Information and Pain Sensitivity Questionnaire. After the initial survey, the nurses were inserviced on neonatal pain assessment using a one hour inservice education program. One week after the intervention the nurse was asked to complete the questionnaire again. Data analysis involved comparision of pre and post intervention findings using descriptive methods, t test, correlation coefficients, and ANOVA , where applicable. Findings revealed a significant ( p=.006) increase in nurse's knowledge of neonatal pain assessment after completing the educational inservice when comparing the pre-test and post-test results.

Influence, policy formation, and higher education in Florida : 1989-94

This study examined the perceptions of state governmental officials and administrators from the state university system, community college system, and independent institutions concerning the ability of various groups to influence state-level higher education policy formation. The study was conducted in Florida for the period 1989-94. Florida has a history of legislative involvement in higher education, an unique system of state universities and community colleges, and a limited number of private institutions of higher education. This study was grounded in the works of Mortimer and McConnell (1978), Millett (1987), Marshall, Mitchell, and Wirt (1989) and Finitfer, Baldwin, and Thelin (1991). The study represented the application of an embedded, single-case design. A survey was the primary collection instrument. Respondents were asked questions concerning: (a) personal involvement in higher education, (b) perceptions of the ability of various groups to influence higher education policy, (c) the names of particular individuals considered key players in higher education policy formation, (d) important state-level documents, (e) personal knowledge of key areas of policy formation, and (f) emerging higher education issues in Florida. Quantitative and qualitative methods were used to analyze the different sections of the survey. The findings indicated that a power and influence hierarchy exists among the various groups that attempt to influence higher education policy and that this hierarchy is recognized by state government officials and higher education administrators. While an analysis of variance of the various groups revealed a few differences between state government officials and higher education personnel, the high overall agreement was an important finding. Leading members of the legislature, especially the Chair of the Senate Higher Education Committee, and key staff members, especially from the Senate Ways & Means Committee, were considered the most influential. Representatives from higher education institutions and research organizations were considered among the least influential. Emerging issues identified by the respondents included: (a) the political nature of state-level policy formation, (b) the role of legislative staff, (c) the competition for state moneys, (d) legislative concern for state-wide budgetary efficiency, and (e) legislative attempts to define quality and supervise academic program development for higher education.