The Experts below are selected from a list of 159 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
Mark C. Weber - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
services for private school students under the individuals with disabilities education improvement act issues of statutory entitlement religious liberty and Procedural Regularity
The Journal of Law of Education, 2007Co-Authors: Mark C. WeberAbstract:Government support for private schooling has been a topic of public discussion from the beginning of the administration of President George Bush. The Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act of 2004 ("Improvement Act") amends the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act ("IDEA") with regard to (among other things) publicly funded services for children with disabilities who attend private schools. This Article describes the private school student provisions of the new law, demonstrating that the Improvement Act represents continuity in the field of special education services for children in private education. The Article then takes up three issues regarding services for private school children: (1) The existence of any individual entitlement that private school children and their parents may have to any particular level of publicly funded special education services; (2) Whether denial of equal, or even of any, services to some private school children unconstitutionally burdens free exercise of religion or parents' rights to control their children's upbringing; and (3) The risk of arbitrary decision making in allocating services among private school children. With regard to the first issue, this Article demonstrates that Congress has not created any enforceable individual entitlement to special education services for any given private school child. Some states, however, have established an individual entitlement. Regarding the second problem, this Article concludes that it is constitutionally permissible for public schools to refuse to fully subsidize private school children's special education services; any contrary view would expand constitutional rights to public services of private school children and their parents beyond acceptable bounds. Regarding the third problem, this Article advances the position that the Improvement Act creates risks of arbitrary and unfair allocations of services that are unacceptably high, and that under due process principles, transparency of the allocation process needs to be guaranteed. Some suspect a hidden agenda.1 For others, the agenda is anything but hidden: The Bush administration favors private schooling.2 The federal budget proposal released in March, 2006 offered $100 million in funding for $4,000 private school scholarships and $3,000 tutoring grants for students in underperforming public schools.3 Last fall, the administration proposed that $500 million be spent on private school tuition for students displaced by the Hurricane Katrina disaster.4 The President himself has consistently supported voucher programs to pay the tuition of students at private elementary and secondary schools.5 The No Child Left Behind initiative, which is the centerpiece of the administration's effort on education, requires remedial activity for schools whose students, including defined subgroups of students, do not make adequate yearly progress towards standards of proficiency.6 The actions include permissive transfers, supplemental private services, and ultimately, school reorganization that may entail ceding operations to an outside provider of services.7 The private education nature of these steps has led to sharp accusations that the real goal of No Child Left Behind is to undermine public education and promote private schools.8 The Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act ("Improvement Act"),9 passed in December of 2004, reauthorizes and amends the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act ("IDEA").10 IDEA is the basic federal legislation that furnishes assistance to states and school districts for providing special education to students with disabilities. It requires states and school districts to guarantee free, appropriate public education to all school-aged children who have disabilities." One of the stated goals of the Improvement Act is to coordinate special education with the No Child Left Behind effort,12 so it is hardly surprising that the Act addresses the availability of services for children with disabilities whose parents have voluntarily placed them in private schools. …
-
Services for Private School Students Under the Individuals With Disabilities Education Improvement Act: Issues of Statutory Entitlement, Religious Liberty, and Procedural Regularity
2006Co-Authors: Mark C. WeberAbstract:Government support for private schooling has been a topic of public discussion from the beginning of the administration of President George Bush. The Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act of 2004 (Improvement Act) amends the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) with regard to (among other things) publicly funded services for children with disabilities who attend private schools. This Article describes the private school student provisions of the new law, demonstrating that the Improvement Act represents continuity in the field of special education services for children in private education. The Article then takes up three issues regarding services for private school children: (1) The existence of any individual entitlement that private school children and their parents may have to any particular level of publicly funded special education services; (2) Whether denial of equal, or even of any, services to some private school children unconstitutionally burdens free exercise of religion or parents' rights to control their children's upbringing; and (3) The risk of arbitrary decision making in allocating services among private school children. With regard to the first issue, this Article demonstrates that Congress has not created any enforceable individual entitlement to special education services for any given private school child. Some states, however, have established an individual entitlement. Regarding the second problem, this Article concludes that it is constitutionally permissible for public schools to refuse to fully subsidize private school children's special education services; any contrary view would expand constitutional rights to public services of private school children and their parents beyond acceptable bounds. Regarding the third problem, this Article advances the position that the Improvement Act creates risks of arbitrary and unfair allocations of services that are unacceptably high, and that under due process principles, transparency of the allocation process needs to be guaranteed.
-
Towards Access, Accountability, Procedural Regularity and Participation: The Rehabilitation Act Amendments of 1992 and 1993
Journal of Rehabilitation, 1994Co-Authors: Mark C. WeberAbstract:The Rehabilitation Act Amendments of 1992, themselves recently amended by 1993 statutory changes, mark the first major revision of federal-state vocational rehabilitation program and the other provisions of the Rehabilitation Act since the passage of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990. Although most of the regulations to implement the law are still in the process of being developed, rehabilitation professionals should begin now to plan for such innovations as presumed eligibility for vocational rehabilitation services, national evaluation standards and performance indicators, independent hearing officers to decide appeals, and client choice of goals and services. The purpose of this article is to be a guide to the most important of the revisions in the rehabilitation law, analyzing them in relation to their intended goals of improving access to services, enhancing accountability, increasing Procedural Regularity, and expanding client participation in rehabilitation services choices. The article concludes that some of the changes made by the new laws are highly likely to meet their goals. Others will meet their immediate objectives, though they may have more difficulty fulfilling their real purposes. Finally, some changes have utterly unpredictable results; developments will require close watching by rehabilitation practitioners. The latest amendments to the federal rehabilitation services program became law on August 11, 1993. These amendments made technical corrections to the Rehabilitation Act Amendments of 1992, which were the first major revision of rehabilitation law since the passage of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990. In the 1992 and 1993 Amendments, Congress instituted changes that will affect the daily work of rehabilitation professionals and the lives of the persons they serve. Although the "extensive proposed regulations" that will implement the bulk of the Amendments' provisions remain to be adopted (Federal Register, May 3 1993), it is not too soon to adjust to the new developments in rehabilitation service delivery that the revisions will cause. Background Twenty years ago, the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 codified the federal-state vocational rehabilitation program and a variety of other training and social service activities for Americans who have impairments that substantially impair major life activities. The Act also set out definitions and established expansive nondiscrimination requirements for federal grantees. The 1992 and 1993 Amendments to the Act primarily affect vocational rehabilitation and the other service programs. They can be organized into four categories according to their objectives: those that improve access to services; those that work towards enhanced accountability; those that increase Procedural Regularity; and those that advance the goal of client participation in the rehabilitation services program. The purpose of this article is to serve as a guide to the most important of the recent changes in the rehabilitation law, analyzing them in relation to their intended goals. Access Equal access is at the heart of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) (Leung, 1990). Though vocational rehabilitation services aim to provide access to the world of employment covered by the ADA (Senate Report, 1992, pp. 5-7), rehabilitation services can themselves be inaccessible to the people with severe disabilities. Senator Dodd stated: "Prior to the introduction of this legislation, there were many diverse concerns about vocational rehabilitation services and what improvements could be made. Some complaints were consistent, however. One was that those with the most severe disabilities were shut out of the system, probably because they were more expensive to serve." (Congressional Record, Oct. 5, 1992, p. S16613.) The principal innovation the 1992 Amendments make to increase access for individuals with severe impairments is a new presumption of eligibility for services. …
Bonatto, Angelo Plinio - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Análise administrativa : licitação na modalidade de pregão eletrônico na Fundação Cultural Palmares
2014Co-Authors: Bonatto, Angelo PlinioAbstract:A complexa tramitação do procedimento licitatório, na modalidade de pregão eletrônico, referente à contratação de serviços e aquisição de bens, no âmbito da Fundação Cultural Palmares, fundação pública federal, vinculada ao Ministério da Cultura, motivou a realização da análise administrativa, à luz dos preceitos afirmados por Cury (2012), Djalma (2011) e Maximiano (2006). Os procedimentos de instrução estão regulamentados pelo Decreto nº 5.450/2005 e as fases não podem ser substituídas ou subtraídas, sob pena de colocar em risco a regularidade e legalidade processuais. A partir daí, desenvolveu-se uma análise situacional a fim de verificar a possibilidade de agilização quanto ao tratamento interno das informações. Após a análise dos dados, depois de identificar os pontos que comportam aperfeiçoamento e assinalar os problemas encontrados, apresenta-se proposta que envolve panejamento, automação (informatização), capacitação e, por fim, alteração na tramitação dos processos licitatórios. ____________________________________________________________________________ ABSTRACTThis administrative analysis based on the ideas from Cury (2012), Djalma (2011) and Maximiniano (2006), was motivated by the complex procedures involved in the Bid processing inside the electronic trading system in relation to hiring services and goods acquisition in the Palmares Cultural Foundation, which is a Federal Public Foundation linked to the Ministry of Culture. The instruction procedures are regulated by the Decree nº 5.450/2005 and the phases cannot be substituted or removed at the risk of compromising the Procedural Regularity and legality. From then on, it was developed a situational analysis in order to verify the possibility to hasten the internal information management. After analyzing the data, identifying the weaknesses and highlighting the mistakes it’s presented a proposal that demands planning, automation (computerization), training and finally alteration in the procedures involved in the Bid processing
-
Análise administrativa : licitação na modalidade de pregão eletrônico na Fundação Cultural Palmares
2013Co-Authors: Bonatto, Angelo PlinioAbstract:Trabalho de Conclusão de Curso (graduação)—Universidade de Brasília, Faculdade UnB Planaltina, 2013.A complexa tramitação do procedimento licitatório, na modalidade de pregão eletrônico, referente à contratação de serviços e aquisição de bens, no âmbito da Fundação Cultural Palmares, fundação pública federal, vinculada ao Ministério da Cultura, motivou a realização da análise administrativa, à luz dos preceitos afirmados por Cury (2012), Djalma (2011) e Maximiano (2006). Os procedimentos de instrução estão regulamentados pelo Decreto nº 5.450/2005 e as fases não podem ser substituídas ou subtraídas, sob pena de colocar em risco a regularidade e legalidade processuais. A partir daí, desenvolveu-se uma análise situacional a fim de verificar a possibilidade de agilização quanto ao tratamento interno das informações. Após a análise dos dados, depois de identificar os pontos que comportam aperfeiçoamento e assinalar os problemas encontrados, apresenta-se proposta que envolve panejamento, automação (informatização), capacitação e, por fim, alteração na tramitação dos processos licitatórios. ____________________________________________________________________________ ABSTRACTThis administrative analysis based on the ideas from Cury (2012), Djalma (2011) and Maximiniano (2006), was motivated by the complex procedures involved in the Bid processing inside the electronic trading system in relation to hiring services and goods acquisition in the Palmares Cultural Foundation, which is a Federal Public Foundation linked to the Ministry of Culture. The instruction procedures are regulated by the Decree nº 5.450/2005 and the phases cannot be substituted or removed at the risk of compromising the Procedural Regularity and legality. From then on, it was developed a situational analysis in order to verify the possibility to hasten the internal information management. After analyzing the data, identifying the weaknesses and highlighting the mistakes it’s presented a proposal that demands planning, automation (computerization), training and finally alteration in the procedures involved in the Bid processing
W. Bradley Wendel - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Nonlegal Regulation of the Legal Profession: Social Norms in Professional Communities
Vanderbilt Law Review, 2001Co-Authors: W. Bradley WendelAbstract:In this Article, Professor Wendel analyzes the advantages and disadvantages of community-based responses to unethical behavior by lawyers. The limits of formal legal regulation of the legal profession are well known. Additional questions have been raised about the efficacy of motivating lawyers to act ethically merely by giving appropriate instruction. What is left, therefore, is a complex and little-studied, but very real, array of informal sanctions. These sanctions are controlled by individual members of the professional community, not by the court or organized bar, and therefore operate largely without the transparency and Procedural Regularity of formal legal regimes. The advantage of this decentralized sanctioning process is that punishment can often be imposed quickly, and with relatively low transaction costs, because an enforcement agency is not required to engage in expensive information-gathering processes. Informal regulation of legal norms also avoids some of the difficulties that would arise if ethical norms were embodied in formal disciplinary rules. Professor Wendel, however, cautions against becoming overly enthusiastic about informal, community-based sanctions. A professional community that is too inward-looking, that is content to regulate itself without checks from the outside, may develop pernicious norms as well as beneficial ones. Furthermore, the resistance to external sources of normative control can make a community slow to change. Informal sanctioning practices can sometimes be used against unpopular or less powerful subcommunities, and members of these communities may be stymied in their attempt to reform the community's practices by the lack of extra-community regulatory authority. Community-based sanctions can also spiral out of control and spawn endless feuds. Because the sanctioning authority is another community member, the lawyer who is sanctioned may retaliate in kind, and possibly overretaliate, prompting a further round of sanctioning. Finally, even if one approves in general of informal regulation of professional communities, it is difficult to apply this kind of regulatory scheme to large-scale, impersonal settings such as the community of practicing lawyers in major commercial centers. Professor Wendel does not argue for the complete adoption or rejection of community-based sanctions. Rather, the claim developed in this Article is that courts, legislatures, and the organized bar ought to be sensitive to the advantages and pathologies of formal legal regulation, on the one hand, and of informal regulation on the other. In the case of the legal profession, some areas of conduct are best left to informal control by local communities, while others are appropriately the province of formal regulation. I. INTRODUCTION What should be done about lawyers who persist in violating ethical norms that are not embodied in positive disciplinary rules? That question has been a recurrent theme in recent legal ethics scholarship. One response has been to propose, experiment, amend, tinker, draft, comment, and redraft, in an attempt to codify the standard of conduct observed to be flouted widely by the practicing bar. Bar associations and courts are seemingly engaged in a never-ending process of promulgating new codes of professional conduct or rules of procedure under which lawyers may be sanctioned for such conduct as bringing frivolous lawsuits, abusing the discovery process, sleeping with their clients, or engaging in discrimination based on race or sex.' Critics fault the project of regulating lawyers through legalistic rules for being predominantly motivated by the organized bar's protectionism or other self-interested reasons;2 for fostering a minimalist or "Holmesian bad man" interpretive stance toward moral questions;3 for slighting the importance of non-legal considerations, such as religious commitments, in professional morality;4 for overlooking the importance of dispositions, character, or other internalized aspects of ethical norms;5 or for failing to account for ethical IMAGE FORMULA10 pluralism, justified disagreement, or the complexity of moral life. …
Andreas Ortmann - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Experimental Practices 1 Behavioral and Brain Sciences (in press) Experimental Practices in Economics: A Challenge for Psychologists?
2015Co-Authors: Andreas Ortmann, Ralph HertwigAbstract:SHORT ABSTRACT: We discuss four key variables of experimental design that tend to be realized quite differently in economics and in areas of psychology relevant to both economists and psychologists, such as judgment and decision making. On theoretical and empirical grounds, we argue that these different realizations, which concern enactment of scripts, repetition of trials, performance-based monetary payments, and the use of deception, are bound to produce divergent experimental results. Furthermore, we argue that the wider range of experimental practices in psychology reflects a lack of Procedural Regularity that may contribute to the variability of empirical findings. We call for more research on the consequences of particular methodological preferences and to further this goal propose a “do-it-both-ways ” rule. Experimental Practices 3 LONG ABSTRACT: This article is concerned with the implications of the surprisingly different experimental practices in economics and in areas of psychology relevant to both economists and psychologists, such as behavioral decision making. We consider four features of experimentation in economics, namely, script enactment, repeated trials, performance-based monetary payments, and the proscription against deception, and compare them to experimental practices in psychology
-
Experimental practices in economics: a methodological challenge for psychologists?
The Behavioral and brain sciences, 2001Co-Authors: Ralph Hertwig, Andreas OrtmannAbstract:This target article is concerned with the implications of the surprisingly different experimental practices in economics and in areas of psychology relevant to both economists and psychologists, such as behavioral decision making. We consider four features of experimentation in economics, namely, script enactment, repeated trials, performance-based monetary payments, and the proscription against deception, and compare them to experimental practices in psychology, primarily in the area of behavioral decision making. Whereas economists bring a precisely defined "script" to experiments for participants to enact, psychologists often do not provide such a script, leaving participants to infer what choices the situation affords. By often using repeated experimental trials, economists allow participants to learn about the task and the environment; psychologists typically do not. Economists generally pay participants on the basis of clearly defined performance criteria; psychologists usually pay a flat fee or grant a fixed amount of course credit. Economists virtually never deceive participants; psychologists, especially in some areas of inquiry, often do. We argue that experimental standards in economics are regulatory in that they allow for little variation between the experimental practices of individual researchers. The experimental standards in psychology, by contrast, are comparatively laissez-faire. We believe that the wider range of experimental practices in psychology reflects a lack of Procedural Regularity that may contribute to the variability of empirical findings in the research fields under consideration. We conclude with a call for more research on the consequences of methodological preferences, such as the use on monetary payments, and propose a "do-it-both-ways" rule regarding the enactment of scripts, repetition of trials, and performance-based monetary payments. We also argue, on pragmatic grounds, that the default practice should be not to deceive participants.
Ralph Hertwig - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Experimental Practices 1 Behavioral and Brain Sciences (in press) Experimental Practices in Economics: A Challenge for Psychologists?
2015Co-Authors: Andreas Ortmann, Ralph HertwigAbstract:SHORT ABSTRACT: We discuss four key variables of experimental design that tend to be realized quite differently in economics and in areas of psychology relevant to both economists and psychologists, such as judgment and decision making. On theoretical and empirical grounds, we argue that these different realizations, which concern enactment of scripts, repetition of trials, performance-based monetary payments, and the use of deception, are bound to produce divergent experimental results. Furthermore, we argue that the wider range of experimental practices in psychology reflects a lack of Procedural Regularity that may contribute to the variability of empirical findings. We call for more research on the consequences of particular methodological preferences and to further this goal propose a “do-it-both-ways ” rule. Experimental Practices 3 LONG ABSTRACT: This article is concerned with the implications of the surprisingly different experimental practices in economics and in areas of psychology relevant to both economists and psychologists, such as behavioral decision making. We consider four features of experimentation in economics, namely, script enactment, repeated trials, performance-based monetary payments, and the proscription against deception, and compare them to experimental practices in psychology
-
Experimental practices in economics: a methodological challenge for psychologists?
The Behavioral and brain sciences, 2001Co-Authors: Ralph Hertwig, Andreas OrtmannAbstract:This target article is concerned with the implications of the surprisingly different experimental practices in economics and in areas of psychology relevant to both economists and psychologists, such as behavioral decision making. We consider four features of experimentation in economics, namely, script enactment, repeated trials, performance-based monetary payments, and the proscription against deception, and compare them to experimental practices in psychology, primarily in the area of behavioral decision making. Whereas economists bring a precisely defined "script" to experiments for participants to enact, psychologists often do not provide such a script, leaving participants to infer what choices the situation affords. By often using repeated experimental trials, economists allow participants to learn about the task and the environment; psychologists typically do not. Economists generally pay participants on the basis of clearly defined performance criteria; psychologists usually pay a flat fee or grant a fixed amount of course credit. Economists virtually never deceive participants; psychologists, especially in some areas of inquiry, often do. We argue that experimental standards in economics are regulatory in that they allow for little variation between the experimental practices of individual researchers. The experimental standards in psychology, by contrast, are comparatively laissez-faire. We believe that the wider range of experimental practices in psychology reflects a lack of Procedural Regularity that may contribute to the variability of empirical findings in the research fields under consideration. We conclude with a call for more research on the consequences of methodological preferences, such as the use on monetary payments, and propose a "do-it-both-ways" rule regarding the enactment of scripts, repetition of trials, and performance-based monetary payments. We also argue, on pragmatic grounds, that the default practice should be not to deceive participants.