Higher Education Opportunity Act: Copyright Provision

The Department of Education has recently revised sections of the Higher Education Opportunity Act (HEOA) specifically under the Program participation Agreement’s Copyright Provision.

Image Courtesy of Google Images

When dealing with copyrighted material and the illegal distribution, the first perpetrators that come to mind are college students. The ED used this knowledge to update the provision to assess this unlawful activity.

This new condition requires institutions to confirm that they have plans and proposals to thwart the possible unauthorized distribution of copyrighted material. Also, these institutions must offer students legal alternatives to downloading and/or file sharing.

Also, a subparagraph requires that institutions make available their policies on copyright infringement and the liabilities that come with each, both civil and criminal, that students may encounter for the illegal file sharing. This includes the prohibition of using the institution’s network to share the files. Such “file sharing” is defined as unauthorized peer-to-peer transfer.

As a way to get universities to comply, the threat is to take away federal funding.

Taking notice of this new condition, are The Daily Caller and university blogs.

The Daily Caller writes of the possibility for funding to diminish, and presents a somewhat objective tone. The author starts by mocking the condition, referring to the dismay computer junkies will feel after it takes effect. He then offers a more serious tone, presenting a quote from a college student, which supports the new ban on illegal file sharing. The author comments that this will make only a small dent in preventing piracy, but is a good stepping-stone.

Attorneys Nelson, Kinder, Mosseau, and Saturley have a non-profit blog that focuses on “items of interest” in higher education. They devoted a post to the new HEOA condition, which outlines the amendments and obligations of universities to students when dealing with copyright infringement. In the post is a transcription of expectations that the DE (Department of Education) will send to universities. It outlines what the university is to inform the students of and what information they are required to disclose.

Colleges have already started making the information available on their websites. The University of North Carolina has a link on it’s university website that provides a summary of the new provision.

Let’s Read. Let’s Move!

On Tuesday, June 29, the Department of Education (Arne Duncan) in combination with Michelle Obama kicked off the summer enrichment series “Let’s Read. Let’s Move.”

The purpose of this initiative is to prevent learning loss and physical inactivity, which many children face during the summer break from school. Often, children in certain locales only read or exercise during the school year. The activities of “Let’s Read. Let’s Move” will promote reading and academia, healthy life and physical choices for children, as well as an overall enrichment.

The kick off event, hosted in Washington, was made up of book readings, writing and arts activities, healthy snacks, and games. Secretary Duncan, Cabinet members, Administration officials, and other public figures were encouraged to participate with the children by reading books and participating in games and fitness.

The ‘Hands On Network’ is a blog/database for volunteer opportunities. For this particular volunteer event, the website chose to promote it. The article lists the facts about the enrichment series such as who in the administration is behind it, what the overarching purpose of the series is, and what the three main goals are.
After the main entry, there are sections of tools and references for people who might be interested in getting involved. Also, the site offers links to share information and continue to get out the word on the program.

The Corporation for National & Community Service promoted the United We Serve: “Let’s Read. Let’s Move” Summer Initiative. This website is sponsored by Serve.gov, the official government website promoting service. The article, listed under “Stories of Service,” includes a description of the events, and testimony from various people who stepped up to the challenge of summer reading and found it rewarding.

The article offers a personal testimony from a woman who claims reading was forced upon her in school and it wasn’t something she chose to do on her own, and that this program has helped her enjoy reading. The woman is also quoted saying her life is better now that she can read.

It is important to note these kinds of testimonials in the article, because it presents this summer enrichment series in a positive light and reinforces its effectiveness. The purpose of the web site is to promote volunteering. It would be hardly effective if the site posted anything about a service opportunity that was not enlightening.

Promoting and supporting this campaign, which is sponsored by Michele Obama and Arne Duncan, subjectively supports the government and our president. When people read this article they will think highly and positively about the administration.

National Forum on Youth Violence Prevention

On October 4, 2010 the President, Department of Justice and Department of Education met with various state representatives to discuss the National Forum on Youth Violence Prevention. In short, this forum was created to establish new policies and strategies to prevent youth in certain violence-plagued cities from succumbing to the pressures of gang life and violence in schools.

Teams from Boston, California, Chicago, Detroit, and Tennessee got together with these federal agencies to work out these proposed strategies and plans, to find out what will work.

Courtesy of Google Images

What they hope will work, is combining the efforts of local law enforcement, educators, health providers, organizations in the communities, and families to work off of each other and stand together in the fight against violence. Arne Duncan says the administration will have to work with communities and schoolteachers to reach a conclusion about the reasons why kids get sucked into crime and gang life, and then find ways to prevent it.

Many news sources provided humbling testimony on the forum and proposed legislation. Many have high hopes for the plans, and are optimistic about it’s future success.

The Boston Globe’s online edition, Boston.com covers this topic and presents it to the public in an unbiased manner, detailing the facts as they unfold. They used quotes from both the Attorney General and the Secretary of Education, which is important because the forum involves the Department of Justice and the Department of Education. Providing a short testimony from officials on the inside presents the issue as more human. A reader being able to hear quotes directly from the source adds to the forum’s credibility and depicts it as an open, translucent proposal, instead of being private and shut off to the public.

Taking a less open stance however, is Dr. Jeffrey Butts, staff to John Jay College of Criminal Justice. In Butts’ blog, there is the basic factual expression of the intention of the forum, with no commentary on the predicted outcome. Dr. Butts and a team will be working to assess the development of the National Forum and also analyze the effects of the participating states and communities involved.

Back to School Tour 2010

AKA, Courage in the Classroom.

In August 2010, Department of Education Secretary Arne Duncan embarked on a tour known as the “Back to School Tour,” sometimes referred to as “Courage in the Classroom.” This is a bus tour that travels through various states and explores the looming first days of school for students around the nation.

The tour went from Arkansas through Louisiana and Mississippi to Alabama, then from New York through Massachusetts and New Hampshire to end in Maine.

The main purpose of the tour was to listen to teachers, parents, and students and get on-sight feedback.  Duncan also discussed the administration’s decisions like No Child Left Behind, now known as the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) and the ARRA, while in these various states.

Big newspapers like the New York Times, Washington Post, and Huffington Post all covered the tour with articles chronicling the progress and the purpose. The only reason I do not site the specific articles from the Washington Post and Huffington Post is because they were purely fact based and offered no opinion or commentary on the tour.

The New York Times, however, offered a more cynical take on the tour. Though not directly stated, the author Trip Gabriel takes on a skeptical stance, commenting that the tour was more of a political campaign than it was an honest outreach by the administration. Gabriel notes that the tour might have been prompted by the recent success of the Race to the Top campaign, and may have a bragging tour.

It is important to note the underlying negative tone of the piece, because it further points out the different political views people have of the tour. Some people think the tour really IS an honest outreach by Duncan, whereas Gabriel claims malice.

One of these outlets that honors Duncan as somewhat of a hero to the Education field, is the Christian Science Monitor. Amanda Paulson and Stacy Teicher Khadaroo wrote an article about Duncan’s rise to the top, from his upbringing at a Brooklyn public school to Harvard University, to Education Secretary. His tale is one of triumph, which places him in a hero category, according to Paulson and Khadaroo. They claim that Duncan is empowering, and has been the most influential secretary.

Another important aspect to focus on is the reaction by other blog sites about this presentation of the Bus Tour from the Christian Science Monitor. Nichole Dobo posted an article on the blog, “Delware Online” remarking on how Duncan told the Christian Science Monitor to visit Delaware and that Delaware’s DSEA President Donohue was a personal hero of his. This short article is nothing to be surprised about, but what IS surprising are the comments from readers about this article. One commentor in particular lashes out and refers to Donohue as a sell-out and that this plan will only weaken the education system and hurt the children.

With such polar opposites being thrust into the media, how are citizens supposed to know whether this Bus Trip is positive or negative?

Do your civic duty and read about it, then draw your own conclusions.

Race to the Top 2010

Race to the Top is a program receiving support under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act. This program will provide extra funding to states to create assessments for students to get them prepared for college and acquire the proper education in highschool. These will be standardized tests that will make sure students have gained the proper knowledge to succeed in college and after college.

This program was authorized April 6, 2010 and states were urged to apply for this extra funding. [click here for detailed information]

The New York Times covered this act in detail here. This act provides substantial financing for various states and the NYT offers an unbiased report and detailed outline of the program. However, after the winners were announced, the coverage shifted from unbiased to slightly suspicious.  This article concentrated not only on the winners, but the fact that the states awarded these grants were all on the east coast. The article goes beyond mere facts and goes a step further to arouse suspicion in the selection process.

Other sources that covered this act and the announcement of the winners were ABC News,  Politico,  and a few blogs including ‘FrumForum’ and ‘Examiner National.’

Liza Weidle, with Examiner National, covered the story with a positive tone, portraying the grants as a great addition to the economy and using quotes from prestigious people in education from the winning states. These quotes were all positive and thankful, and each showed their appreciation and excitement for the awarded grants. She wrote the story with the intent to show that these grants were the right thing to do for the country.

On the other hand, FrumForum covered the issue in a much less biased manner. The text remained unmoved, simply presenting the facts as they were, with the winning states and how much each was rewarded. FrumForum did not provide commentary on whether this act was positive or negative.