An investigation of the relationship between historical reform initiatives and Blueprint 2000: A System of School Improvement and Accountability

The modern rhetoric of reform in education has been in the forefront since the 1980s, but it has now taken on a new meaning, a greater importance to both students and teachers, a new urgency for change, and a sense of hope that this time reform will truly make a difference. The major purpose of this study was to compare historical reform initiatives to the current Florida state initiative, Blueprint 2000: A System of School Improvement and Accountability.^ Five questions were considered: (1) how similar were historical and current reform initiatives; (2) what aspects of reform were actually accomplished; (3) what are the elements of a profession; (4) what implications might this research have for university programs and inservice training programs regarding their role in the preparation of teachers; and, (5) what implications might research have on the promotion of professional practice. ^

Recruitment, Socialization, and Accountability of School Administrators in Two Urban School Districts

Due to the impending shortage of qualified candidates for administrator positions, school districts are faced with the challenge of attracting and preparing candidates for the administrator role. This empirical study focused on leadership succession planning and leadership development in response to meeting the demands of the social preoccupation of accountability.

Teachers' cultural values and accountability in Nigeria

This study investigates teacher‟s cultural values and accountability in Nigeria. A questionnaire developed by Professor Rosenblatt (University of Haifa, Israel) was used to gather quantitative data from 483 secondary teachers across Oyo, Osun, Ogun, and Lagos States in Southwest Nigeria. Data collected were analyzed using percentages, descriptive statistics, and analysis of variance (ANOVA). The findings show that Nigerian teachers have high dispositions towards both bureaucratic (external) and internal (professional) accountability and their scores for internal accountability (M= 4.4286; SD= 0.5726) were higher than their scores for external accountability (M= 3.9759; SD = 0.5575). Geographical locations made a significant difference in the scores. Teachers from urban and suburban areas demonstrate higher scores than teachers from the rural in both bureaucratic (external) and internal (professional) accountability

Multilevel Governance and Accountability: Does Decentralization Promote Good Governance?

Today, the trend towards decentralization is far-reaching. Proponents of decentralization have argued that decentralization promotes responsive and accountable local government by shortening the distance between local representatives and their constituency. However, in this paper, I focus on the countervailing effect of decentralization on the accountability mechanism, arguing that decentralization, which increases the number of actors eligible for policy making and implementation in governance as a whole, may blur lines of responsibility, thus weakening citizens’ ability to sanction government in election. By using the ordinary least squares (OLS) interaction model based on historical panel data for 78 countries in the 2002 – 2010 period, I test the hypothesis that as the number of government tiers increases, there will be a negative interaction between the number of government tiers and decentralization policies. The regression results show empirical evidence that decentralization policies, having a positive impact on governance under a relatively simple form of multilevel governance, have no more statistically significant effects as the complexity of government structure exceeds a certain degree. In particular, this paper found that the presence of intergovernmental meeting with legally binding authority have a negative impact on governance when the complexity of government structure reaches to the highest level.

Capital 2.0 capital formation and legal risk in a new global economic order from fiat to exit: including case studies of the proposed transatlantic trade and investment partnership between the United States and the European Union and the financing relation between the United States and the People’s Republic of China

Following the intrinsically linked balance sheets in his Capital Formation Life Cycle, Lukas M. Stahl explains with his Triple A Model of Accounting, Allocation and Accountability the stages of the Capital Formation process from FIAT to EXIT. Based on the theoretical foundations of legal risk laid by the International Bar Association with the help of Roger McCormick and legal scholars such as Joanna Benjamin, Matthew Whalley and Tobias Mahler, and founded on the basis of Wesley Hohfeld’s category theory of jural relations, Stahl develops his mutually exclusive Four Determinants of Legal Risk of Law, Lack of Right, Liability and Limitation. Those Four Determinants of Legal Risk allow us to apply, assess, and precisely describe the respective legal risk at all stages of the Capital Formation Life Cycle as demonstrated in case studies of nine industry verticals of the proposed and currently negotiated Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership between the United States of America and the European Union, TTIP, as well as in the case of the often cited financing relation between the United States and the People’s Republic of China. Having established the Four Determinants of Legal Risk and its application to the Capital Formation Life Cycle, Stahl then explores the theoretical foundations of capital formation, their historical basis in classical and neo-classical economics and its forefathers such as The Austrians around Eugen von Boehm-Bawerk, Ludwig von Mises and Friedrich von Hayek and most notably and controversial, Karl Marx, and their impact on today’s exponential expansion of capital formation. Starting off with the first pillar of his Triple A Model, Accounting, Stahl then moves on to explain the Three Factors of Capital Formation, Man, Machines and Money and shows how “value-added” is created with respect to the non-monetary capital factors of human resources and industrial production. Followed by a detailed analysis discussing the roles of the Three Actors of Monetary Capital Formation, Central Banks, Commercial Banks and Citizens Stahl readily dismisses a number of myths regarding the creation of money providing in-depth insight into the workings of monetary policy makers, their institutions and ultimate beneficiaries, the corporate and consumer citizens. In his second pillar, Allocation, Stahl continues his analysis of the balance sheets of the Capital Formation Life Cycle by discussing the role of The Five Key Accounts of Monetary Capital Formation, the Sovereign, Financial, Corporate, Private and International account of Monetary Capital Formation and the associated legal risks in the allocation of capital pursuant to his Four Determinants of Legal Risk. In his third pillar, Accountability, Stahl discusses the ever recurring Crisis-Reaction-Acceleration-Sequence-History, in short: CRASH, since the beginning of the millennium starting with the dot-com crash at the turn of the millennium, followed seven years later by the financial crisis of 2008 and the dislocations in the global economy we are facing another seven years later today in 2015 with several sordid debt restructurings under way and hundred thousands of refugees on the way caused by war and increasing inequality. Together with the regulatory reactions they have caused in the form of so-called landmark legislation such as the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, the Dodd-Frank Act of 2010, the JOBS Act of 2012 or the introduction of the Basel Accords, Basel II in 2004 and III in 2010, the European Financial Stability Facility of 2010, the European Stability Mechanism of 2012 and the European Banking Union of 2013, Stahl analyses the acceleration in size and scope of crises that appears to find often seemingly helpless bureaucratic responses, the inherent legal risks and the complete lack of accountability on part of those responsible. Stahl argues that the order of the day requires to address the root cause of the problems in the form of two fundamental design defects of our Global Economic Order, namely our monetary and judicial order. Inspired by a 1933 plan of nine University of Chicago economists abolishing the fractional reserve system, he proposes the introduction of Sovereign Money as a prerequisite to void misallocations by way of judicial order in the course of domestic and transnational insolvency proceedings including the restructuring of sovereign debt throughout the entire monetary system back to its origin without causing domino effects of banking collapses and failed financial institutions. In recognizing Austrian-American economist Schumpeter’s Concept of Creative Destruction, as a process of industrial mutation that incessantly revolutionizes the economic structure from within, incessantly destroying the old one, incessantly creating a new one, Stahl responds to Schumpeter’s economic chemotherapy with his Concept of Equitable Default mimicking an immunotherapy that strengthens the corpus economicus own immune system by providing for the judicial authority to terminate precisely those misallocations that have proven malignant causing default perusing the century old common law concept of equity that allows for the equitable reformation, rescission or restitution of contract by way of judicial order. Following a review of the proposed mechanisms of transnational dispute resolution and current court systems with transnational jurisdiction, Stahl advocates as a first step in order to complete the Capital Formation Life Cycle from FIAT, the creation of money by way of credit, to EXIT, the termination of money by way of judicial order, the institution of a Transatlantic Trade and Investment Court constituted by a panel of judges from the U.S. Court of International Trade and the European Court of Justice by following the model of the EFTA Court of the European Free Trade Association. Since the first time his proposal has been made public in June of 2014 after being discussed in academic circles since 2011, his or similar proposals have found numerous public supporters. Most notably, the former Vice President of the European Parliament, David Martin, has tabled an amendment in June 2015 in the course of the negotiations on TTIP calling for an independent judicial body and the Member of the European Commission, Cecilia Malmström, has presented her proposal of an International Investment Court on September 16, 2015. Stahl concludes, that for the first time in the history of our generation it appears that there is a real opportunity for reform of our Global Economic Order by curing the two fundamental design defects of our monetary order and judicial order with the abolition of the fractional reserve system and the introduction of Sovereign Money and the institution of a democratically elected Transatlantic Trade and Investment Court that commensurate with its jurisdiction extending to cases concerning the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership may complete the Capital Formation Life Cycle resolving cases of default with the transnational judicial authority for terminal resolution of misallocations in a New Global Economic Order without the ensuing dangers of systemic collapse from FIAT to EXIT.

RESULTADOS DO 13º CONTECSI USP – CONGRESSO INTERNACIONAL DE GESTÃO DA TECNOLOGIA E SISTEMAS DE INFORMAÇÃO; 36th WCARS – WORLD CONTINUOUS AUDITING AND REPORTING SYSTEMS SYMPOSIUM; 2º TOI ECA USP

In this document, we wish to describe statistics, data and the importance of the 13th CONTECSI – International Conference on Information Systems and Technology Management, which took place in the University of São Paulo, from June 1st through 3rd and was organized by TECSI/EAC/FEA/USP/ECA/POLI. This report presents statistics of the 13th CONTECSI, Goals and Objectives, Program, Plenary Sessions, Doctoral Consortium, Parallel Sessions, Honorable Mentions and Committees. We would like to point out the huge importance of the financial aid given by CAPES, CNPq, FAPESP, as well as the support of FEA USP, POLI USP, ECA USP, ANPAD, AIS, ISACA, UNINOVE, Mackenzie, Universidade do Porto, Rutgers School/USA, São Paulo Convention Bureau and CCINT-FEA-USP.

Engineering a financial bloodbath: how sub-prime securitization destroyed the legitimacy of financial capitalism

"This book investigates the origins and implications of the securitization crisis, described by the chief executive of ANZ as a "financial services bloodbath". Based on extensive interviews it offers an integrated series of case studies drawn from the United States, the United Kingdom and Australia. A central purpose is to not only chart what went wrong with the investment houses and why the regulatory systems failed, but also provide policy guidance. The book therefore combines the empirical with the normative. In so doing, it provides a route map to navigate one of the most significant financial and regulatory failures in modern times."

Empirical evidence of lack of significant support for whistleblowing

Whistleblowing has often been regarded as an intrusion into the commercial functioning of organisations, and whistle-blowers have frequently found their career prospects to go into steep decline. Recent evidence, however, suggests that individuals in organisations are increasingly being encouraged to report wrongdoings, with whistle-blowing being highlighted as an effective method of reducing the costs of fraudulent activities. This single organisation case study finds that many employees are still reluctant to report wrongdoings in their workplace. This is particularly the case in respect of male employees. It is also found that those employees who do whistle-blow are motivated by feelings of loyalty towards their organisation, rather than by self-interest.

Audit reports in Australia 2005-2013 : preliminary analysis

This paper provides a preliminary summary of audit reports for Australian listed public companies for the period 2005 to 2013. This summary focuses on auditor reporting in the most recent period 2011 to 2013.

Defining Europe's Capital Markets Union. Bruegel Policy Contribution Issue 2014/12, 13 November 2014

The new European Commission has signalled that it will work to create a ‘capital markets union’. This is understood as an agenda to expand the non-bank part of Europe’s financial system, which is currently underdeveloped. The aim in the short term is to unlock credit provision as banks are deleveraging, and in the longer term, to favour a more diverse, competitive and resilient financial system. Direct regulation of individual non-bank market segments (such as securitisation, private placements or private equity) might be useful at the margin, but will not per se lead to significant capital markets development or the rebalancing of Europe’s financial system away from the current dominance by banks. To reach these goals, the capital markets union agenda must be broadened to address the framework conditions for the development of individual market segments. Six possible areas for policy initiative are, in increasing order of potential impact and political difficulty: regulation of securities and specific forms of intermediation; prudential regulation, especially of insurance companies and pension funds; regulation of accounting, auditing and financial transparency requirements that apply to companies that seek external finance; a supervisory framework for financial infrastructure firms, such as central counterparties, that supports market integration; partial harmonisation and improvement of insolvency and corporate restructuring frameworks;and partial harmonisation or convergence of tax policies that specifically affect financial investment.