GSED - Global Studies in Education Digest

Our regular blog posting will be interrupted until December 6 in order to solve some technical problems [i.e. I need to buy a new computer  :(  ]

This is a list of publications and reports on Literature publish by the National Endowment for the Arts. Their latest report: “To Read or Not To Read: A Question of National Consequence“ was publish last Monday, it is an interesting and disturbing report on American reading today. P. Kaufman posted at Scholarly Communication some interesting comments about the results of this report:

Gathering and collating available data, it reports that the data are simple, consistent, and alarming. Although there has been measurable progress in recent years in reading ability at the elementary school level, all progress seems to stop as children enter their teens. There is a general decline in reading among teenagers and adults and both reading ability and the habit of regular reading have greatly declined among college graduates.

The report reaches three conclusions:
* Americans are spending less time reading.
* Reading comprehension skills are eroding
* These declines have serious civic, social, cultural, and economic implications.

These conclusions are, as the report notes, “unsettling.” Clearly, more research is needed to explore factors that might contribute to this trend and to weigh the relative effectiveness and costs and benefits of programs to foster lifelong reading and skills development.

From National Endowment for the Arts:

	To Read or Not To Read: A Question of National Consequence This report is a new and comprehensive analysis of reading patterns of children, teenagers, and adults in the United States. To Read or Not To Read assembled data on reading trends from more than 40 sources, including federal agencies, universities, foundations, and associations. The compendium expands the investigation of the NEA’s landmark 2004 report, Reading at Risk, and reveals recent declines in voluntary reading and test scores alike, exposing trends that have severe consequences for American society. November 2007. 100 pp. [Download pdf]
	To Read or Not To Read: A Question of National Consequence Executive Summary 20 pp. [Download pdf]
	Big Read Catalog This publication provides information on the first 21 books to be featured in the NEA’s Big Read initiative, including brief book and author descriptions and information on themes, film adaptations, performance possibilities, and accessability materials. Information on how to apply to the program is also included. June 2007. 28 pp. [Download pdf]
	NEA Literature Fellowships: 40 Years of Supporting American Writers The publication includes a list of all the writers and translators who have received the award, as well as a brief history of the fellowship program, sidebars highlighting some of the NEA Literature Fellows, and a section on NEA Literature Fellows who have received other national awards and honors. March 2006. 60 pp. [Download pdf]
	Reading at Risk: A Survey of Literary Reading in America This report presents the results from the literature segment of the Survey of Public Participation in the Arts, conducted by the Census Bureau in 2002 at the NEA’s request. The survey asked more than 17,000 adults if during the previous 12 months they had read any novels, short stories, poetry or plays in their leisure time, that were not required for work or school. The report extrapolates and interprets data on literary reading and compares them with results from similar surveys carried out in 1982 and 1992. July 2004. 60 pp. <!– [8/2/04: We are currently out of hard copies of Reading at Risk. A second printing will be available in late August. Orders will be filled as soon as we receive new copies.] Order Hard Copy –> [Download pdf]
	Reading at Risk: A Survey of Literary Reading in America Executive Summary 6 pp. [Download pdf]
	Operation Homecoming Booklet The Operation Homecoming booklet will be distributed free to the troops participating in the writing workshops. It includes biographies of the writers visiting bases and those reading on the audio CD. The booklet also includes the Operation Homecoming anthology submission guidelines. NEA 2004. 28 pp. [Download pdf]
	Operation Homecoming CD The Operation Homecoming audio CD features the literature of war, read in the voices of ten of America’s most esteemed writers. Narrated by NEA Chairman Dana Gioia, the CD presents fiction, poetry, letters, and memoirs from the Civil War, World War I and II, the Korean War, and the Vietnam War. NEA 2004. 24 tracks. Order CD
	Writing America A literary anthology of 50 poets and writers who have received NEA Creative Writing Fellowships providing a glimpse of the tremendous vitality and diversity of contemporary American literature. NEA 1997, revised 1999. 112pp. [Download pdf]

An interesting post by John Daly at the  UNESCO in the Spotlight: Science and Communications blog point out some of the findings of a recent report about  the contributions by member’s states to UNESCO . It is important to remember, that against conventional knowledge, the contributions of US to development follow the same pattern, U.S. contributions  development aid  were in 2005  about 0.1 percent of GDP.

From UNESCO in the Spotlight: Science and Communications blog:

UNESCO has the responsibility of leading the United Nations system efforts in education, natural sciences, social and human sciences, culture and communication and information. Its mission of building the defenses of peace in the minds of men remains critically important, and requires ever more diligent and extensive efforts. The 193 member nations of the organization each year add more programs and responsibilities to the organization. Yet its resources are very limited.
UNESCO’s budget is a complex affair. There are assessed dues for the member states, but there are also voluntary contributions. In addition, many of the centers, university chairs, and other entities attached to UNESCO receive contributions outside of UNESCO’s budget. Then or course, UNESCO operates with many partners who bring their own resources to the joint efforts. Still, the U.S. representatives to UNESCO have been concerned that its resources do not stretch to enable UNESCO to do everything it is asked to do well.

The UNESCO Secretariat presented a report to the recent meeting of the General Conference titled “COLLECTION OF MEMBER STATES’ CONTRIBUTIONS“. It notes that as at 30 June 2007 the United States which was assessed $66.1 million for 2007 (22 percent of the total assessed dues due to the size of our economy as compared to that of the rest of the world) was US$87.36 million in arrears.

At the end of May, according to the United Nations Association of the USA:

On May 25th, President Bush signed a $120 billion emergency supplemental spending bill for the current fiscal year that includes funding for war costs, veterans care, hurricane relief, and agricultural assistance, as well as $283 million for assessed contributions to UN peacekeeping. In addition, the bill (H.R. 2206; Public Law 110-2 provides $50 million for the budgetary account that funds US membership dues to international organizations, including the United Nations.

In other words, the government was not proposing to pay up its back dues to UNESCO in the near future. Until the Congress passes appropriations legislation for this fiscal year (which began October 10, the United States is limited to making payments on a month by month basis. As you can imagine, the shortfall is causing significant administrative problems for the Secretariat.

The problem of the arrears in assessments to UNESCO is of course a small part of a bigger problem of debt to the United Nations system as a whole. According to the Global Policy Forum:

The United Nations and all its agencies and funds spend about $20 billion each year, or about $3 for each of the world’s inhabitants. This is a very small sum compared to most government budgets and it is just a tiny fraction of the world’s military spending. Yet for nearly two decades, the UN has faced a financial difficulties and it has been forced to cut back on important programs in all areas. Many member states have not paid their full dues and have cut their donations to the UN’s voluntary funds. As of March 31, 2007, members’ arrears to the Regular Budget topped $1,355 million, of which the United States alone owed $785 million (58% of the regular budget arrears).

If you agree that the United States should pay its dues to UNESCO for education, science, culture and communications and the promotion of peace, and indeed that we should pay up our back dues to the United Nations system, tell your Congressmen and Senators!

From Unesco:

© All rights reserved
Peter Paul Rubens, self-portrait with Justus Lipsius, Philip Rubens, and Jan Wowerius, known as The Four Philosophers

Over more than a decade, “The UNESCO Courier” spoke with some of the world’s leading thinkers and collected their views about the major issues we must contend with today. Here is a selection of their insights:

Edgar Morin, January 2004
The challenges of communication in today’s complex world are explored in a conversation with this French sociologist and philosopher. Read online.

Fernando Savater, July-August 2001
The Spanish Basque philosopher speaks out against minorities whose violent ideology is fragmenting humanity and undermining the rule of law. Read online.

Michael Walzer, January 2000
How can multiculturalism encourage social equality? One of the United States’ most renowned philosophers offers some answers to the quest for social justice. Read online.

Alain de Libera, February 1997
The French historian reminds us of the important contribution of Arab-Islamic thinkers to the development of medieval European philosophy. Read online. (PDF - 8.9 MB)

Umberto Eco, June 1993
Writing since the 1950s, the Italian author rose to world fame when his 1980 novel The Name of the Rose was translated into 22 languages. In this interview, he talks about his other major interest, semiotics. Read online. (PDF - 802 KB)

Eight philosophers contributed to this issue of the UNESCO Courier, focusing on the role of philosophy today. Different approaches, varied concerns, but one certainty: philosophy can’t stay in its ivory tower. It provides a weapon against dogma and manipulation. And, to cite one of Jostein Gaarder’s ideas, philosophers have a cosmic responsibility. (More)

UNESCO Courier, Number 9, 2007

The last report by the OECD assessing the contributions that migration is making to receiving and sending countries.

From OECD -Development Centre:

Migration can benefit all parties involved: migrant-sending countries, migrant-receiving countries and the migrants themselves. This is the major finding of an OECD report on Gaining from Migration: Towards a New Mobility System, which the Secretary General of the OECD, Mr. Angel Gurría, presented at the EU High Level Conference on Legal Immigration.

The study shows that policies can influence, but do not entirely control, migration flows. New instruments and approaches to establish an international labour mobility system will increase the gains from migration when:

• high skilled migration flows are framed within partnerships between sending and receiving countries, encouraging the repatriation of skills and knowledge (brain circulation);
• host countries integrate low-skilled migrants well into their economies and societies; and
• policies harness the energies of diaspora networks, commercial banks and other businesses.

More specifically, the effect of emigration of the highly-skilled (brain drain) is not always negative, as is usually believed (Fig. 1). In fact, insufficient infrastructure in sending countries often discourages people from working in the sectors for which they have been trained: nurses that leave a poor country, for example, often do not work in the health sector prior to their departure. By migrating to another country, the highly-skilled thus receive further skills and experiences which may prove useful if this know-how can be returned to the sending countries.

Fig. 1: Brain Drain – A World Overview*

* The depiction and use of boundaries shown on maps do not

imply official endorsement or acceptance by the OECD.

Comparing emigration rates of the highly educated — the share of a country’s nationals with a university education who live in the OECD — reveals that low-income countries suffer disproportionately from the brain drain (indicated by darker shading). However, developing countries could even benefit from high-skill migration if partnerships between sending and receiving countries encourage a repatriation of skills and knowledge (brain circulation).

Source: OECD Development Centre and Directorate for Employment, Labour and Social Affairs (2007).

Similarly, low-skilled migrants are not a threat to host economies as these people usually do not compete for jobs with the domestic population. Rather, low-skill migrants can actually fill positions which would otherwise remain vacant, increasing the overall productivity of a country. What is more, low-skill migrants contribute disproportionately to poverty reduction in their home countries as they generally migrate without their families and support them with financial transfers from abroad (remittances).

Finally, the report recognises the limited influence of governments. Non-state actors such as diaspora networks, commercial banks and other businesses play an important role: the former in providing a link between the sending and receiving countries, which could be used for a future transfer of goods and know-how; the latter two in providing a framework for commercial transfers which make a crucial contribution to the development process in migrant-sending countries.

Related documents:

• Migration at the Development Centre (English)
• DEV Centre Policy Brief No 28: Migration, Aid and Trade: Policy coherence for development (English)
• DEV Centre Policy Brief No 30: Policies for Migration and Development: A European perspective (English)
• DEV Centre WP 249: Migration Policy and its Interactions with Aid, Trade, and Foreign Direct Investment Policies: A Background Paper (English)
• DEV Centre WP 250: Effects of Migration on Sending Countries: What Do We Know? (English)
• DEV Centre Policy Insight No. 29: Migration: a Negative or a Positive Driver for Development? (English)

The OECD’s newly published Latin American Economic Outlook indicates that Latin American countries need to invest more public funds in health, education services, infrastructure and innovation, but to afford this they will have to make major changes in the way their tax systems operate (go figures, who would imagine a different recommendation from OECD?).

From OECD:

What are Latin America’s most important economic challenges in a globalized world? Which policies should be implemented in order to maximize the opportunities offered in the current global context?

The Latin American Economic Outlook 2008 (LEO), the first volume in an annual series by the OECD Development Centre, provides recommendations in four key areas for Latin America’s development: fiscal policy, pension fund reform, private investments in telecommunications, and the impact of Asia’s emerging economies. LEO 2008 was launched by OECD Secretary-General Angel Gurría in Santiago de Chile on 7 November.

Read: Introduction and Overview of the Latin American Economic Outlook 2008

Related Publications & Downloads

• Foreword by Angel Gurria, Secretary General of the OECD
• Preface by Javier Santiso, Chief economist of the OECD Development Centre
• Introduction and Overview of the Latin American Economic Outlook 2008
• Has Pension Reform Failed Latin America? (pdf)
• Telecommunications in Latin America: can multinationals fill the gaps? (pdf)
• Latin America’s Asian Opportunity (pdf)

An article by Jonathan Wolff, last week describing the obsession of the top universities with attracting “the best” researchers, and with a reflection over the correspondence of research and quality education in modern universities. 

Tuesday November 6, 2007
The Guardian

I was once told that when he was having a spot of bother with the church, Galileo received an offer from Harvard. Harvard was founded in 1636, Galileo died in 1642, so it is just barely possible. Still, it is rather like hearing that the University of Notre Dame came in for Adam and Eve when they were denied tenure in the Garden of Eden.Whatever the custom in the 17th century, over recent decades US universities have been engaged in frantic bidding wars for elite researchers. Some are traded like sports stars, moving every few years as better offers come along.

The top universities are obsessed with attracting “the best”. Before making an offer, they will write to half a dozen experts, asking them for the names of the leaders in their field. If their target person doesn’t appear at the top of these lists often enough, then the offer is never made and the department’s rapacious attention is turned elsewhere. The same sometimes happens with tenure decisions and, consequently, some departments are notorious for almost never granting tenure.

It took a while for the UK to catch up, but the dreaded Research Assessment Exercise (RAE) has created financial incentives for universities to have a good number of very highly regarded researchers. As a result, salaries for the chosen few have soared, just as often for retention as for recruitment.

In the UK, the transfer market is an understandable response to market incentives. Serious amounts of money are distributed on the basis of the RAE. One or two new stars added to an already strong submission can reap significant financial dividends. Hence a realistic business plan can sometimes justify the relatively (and note I write “relatively”) bloated salaries on offer, at least in the short term. In the US, where the practice is long-established and even more cut-throat, it is harder to fathom. In some areas stars bring in grants to pay their salaries and more, but in many subjects grant funding is an irrelevance.

I used to think it worked like this. In the best US universities most of the undergraduate teaching is done by graduate students, who are paid a modest salary. A very good cohort of graduate students, therefore, is needed to make sure that instruction is of high quality, in order to attract undergraduates who pay high fees. And graduate students will go wherever the research stars are. Hence there is a virtuous circle, in which good undergraduates will go to where the good graduates are, and the good graduates go to where the stars are. There is a need to recruit and retain the stars to keep the system together.

I now think that if this is true, it is so by accident. Just as in the UK, US students make their decisions largely according to the prestige of the institution and its location. If they want high-quality instruction, they don’t go to the big research universities, but to small liberal arts colleges without PhD programmes. Here they will be taught directly by the professors, who are often very smart but devote themselves primarily to teaching. In fact, sometimes publication is discouraged.

Why, then, do the top US universities spend so much money recruiting star academics? Partly, I suppose, simply because they can. But also because it is noticed. The US had league tables well before we did, and position is strongly influenced by research strength indicators. Having a few Nobel prize winners doesn’t do any harm, either. US league tables don’t directly generate money, but they do indirectly. After all, we have to remember that many US universities have at least one king-size foot in the charitable sector.

The son of major charitable donors told me that what his parents and their friends loved most was hearing the words “I read about one of your charities in the Times last week”. In the case of universities, the higher the league table position, the more the publicity, and the more the money flows. No doubt there is a study to be done - probably one has been done - about the relation between academic league table position in the US and donor receipts. It is probably the second-most-important factor. What is the most important? Here is a clue. The football coach is often the highest-paid of all.

· Professor Jonathan Wolff is head of philosophy at University College London. His column appears monthly

The New Zealand government and National Library of New Zealand have launched the Kiwi Research Information Service (KRIS) Website.  This website is a gateway to the open-access research documents produced at universities, polytechnics, and other research institutions throughout New Zealand.

From   Kiwi Research Information Service:

 This website is provided and run by the National Library of New Zealand Te Puna Mātauranga o Aotearoa. The goal of nzresearch.org.nz is to connect research users from around the world to research documents produced in New Zealand institutions.

The nzresearch.org.nz harvester gathers information about documents stored in research repositories from around New Zealand, and assembles them in one database. The original documents are all held at the originating institutions, this website only stores information like the title, authors, URL, and subject. Once the metadata is harvested, the real work of nzresearch.org.nz begins: pushing the metadata out into the wider research community through RSS feeds, OAI-PMH re-export, SRU searches, and other novel channels.

Data by Subject:

• 210000: Science-General
• 220000: Social Sciences, Humanities and Arts-General
• 230000: Mathematical Sciences
• 240000: Physical Sciences
• 250000: Chemical Sciences
• 260000: Earth Sciences
• 270000: Biological Sciences
• 280000: Information, Computing and Communication Sciences
• 290000: Engineering and Technology
• 300000: Agricultural, Veterinary and Environmental Sciences
• 310000: Architecture, Urban Environment and Building
• 320000: Medical and Health Sciences
• 330000: Education
• 340000: Economics
• 350000: Commerce, Management, Tourism and Services
• 360000: Policy and Political Science
• 370000: Studies in Human Society
• 380000: Behavioural and Cognitive Sciences
• 390000: Law, Justice and Law Enforcement
• 410000: The Arts
• 420000: Language and Culture
• 430000: History and Archaeology
• 440000: Philosophy and Religion

Posted at Open Access News:

Michael J. Hemment, OpenSocial Scholarship, ResearchForward, November 12, 2007. Excerpt:

Google’s recent announcement that it is providing a common set of APIs for social applications across multiple websites (their OpenSocial initiative), has potentially grand implications for scholars. Using simple JavaScript and HTML, academic Web developers will now be able to create subject-specific research apps that can be shared across multiple social networks.

Here is Google’s You Tube video describing the OpenSocial standard

Imagine if a group of molecular biologists decided to create their own version of MySpace or to simply form a research group or virtual community within an existing social network like Orkut. The purpose of the group would be to connect experts in their field, share ideas, exchange data, create a repository of research papers, etc. OpenSocial would not only allow them to customize apps to meet the needs of their professional community, but also to share these same apps across other social networking sites that support the OpenSocial standard. A common set of APIs means that the potential size of their virtual research community, as well as the resources they share, are no longer limited by the social networking platform they happen to be using.

The real excitement will begin when academic technologists devise ways to seamlessly interconnect these “scholarly social networks” with one another, as well as with key resources like the growing number of open access repositories at major universities. A common development standard marks a very important step in this direction.