ethanporcaro/eric-fulltext-meta huggingface dataset:
Agricultural Equipment Technician: Apprenticeship Course Outline. Apprenticeship and Industry Training. 3212
Author: Alberta Advanced Education and Technology
Date: 2012-00-00
Type: Guides - Classroom - Learner
Subjects: Postsecondary Education,Engines,Paraprofessional Personnel,Apprenticeships,Industry,Course Descriptions,Vocational Education,Foreign Countries,Industrial Education,Equipment Maintenance,Agricultural Engineering,Safety Education,Certification

The graduate of the Agricultural Equipment Technician apprenticeship program is a certified journeyperson who will be able to: (1) repair, diagnose and maintain by skill and knowledge gained through training and experience any of the working parts of diesel engines as well as the various components of mobile farm machinery; (2) use, competently, both hand and power tools in order to carry out repairs according to manufacturer's specifications; (3) read and understand work orders, prepare estimates, and interpret technical manuals; (4) write service reports, diagnose the cause of failures and keep service analysis records; (5) utilize the knowledge and may advance to service representatives or supervisory positions; (6) be familiar with the work in related trades such as Heavy Equipment Technician, Machinist and Welder; and (7) perform assigned tasks in accordance with quality and production standards required by industry. Advanced Education and Technology has prepared this course outline in partnership with the Agricultural Equipment Technician Provincial Apprenticeship Committee. This course outline contains the following sections: (1) First Period Technical Training; (2) Second Period Technical Training; (3) Third Period Technical Training; and (4) Fourth Period Technical Training.
Alberta Post-Secondary Graduate Outcomes Survey: 2005-06 Transfer Graduates
Author: Alberta Advanced Education and Technology
Date: 2008-09-00
Type: Numerical/Quantitative Data
Subjects: Higher Education,Foreign Countries,College Outcomes Assessment,Graduate Surveys,Transfer Students,Participant Satisfaction,Employment Potential,Research Reports,Demography,Transfer Programs,Financial Support,Bayesian Statistics,Comparative Analysis,Employment Qualifications,Student Loan Programs,Grants,Scholarship,Educational Benefits,Cost Effectiveness,Individual Characteristics,Student Characteristics

In November of 2007, Alberta Advanced Education and Technology contracted Insightrix Research, Inc. to conduct a survey of individuals who graduated from post-secondary institutions in Alberta in the fall of 2005 or the spring of 2006 (excluding apprenticeship graduates, who are surveyed through a separate initiative). The purpose of the survey is to determine graduate satisfaction with their post-secondary experiences and graduate employment outcomes approximately two years after graduation. Key results are compared with two previous waves of research, the first conducted in 2004 of the 2001-02 graduating class and a second conducted in 2006 of the 2003-04 graduates. A total of 17,164 graduates responded to the survey, resulting in an overall valid response rate of 48%. The margin of error at 95% confidence is plus or minus 0.5 percentage points. This paper presents key findings of the research with regards to transfer graduates. Appended are: (1) Participating Institutions; and (2) Survey Instrument. (Contains 39 figures, 54 tables and 1 footnote.) [This paper was compiled with Insightrix Research Inc.]
Alberta Post-Secondary Graduate Outcomes Survey: Class of 2005-06
Author: Alberta Advanced Education and Technology
Date: 2008-09-00
Type: Numerical/Quantitative Data
Subjects: Higher Education,Foreign Countries,Postsecondary Education,Graduate Surveys,College Outcomes Assessment,Participant Satisfaction,Demography,Articulation (Education),Financial Support,Education Work Relationship,Salary Wage Differentials,Employment Qualifications,Majors (Students),Information Sources,Student Loan Programs,Grants,Scholarships,Cost Effectiveness,Educational Quality,Educational Benefits,Individual Characteristics,Student Characteristics,Bayesian Statistics

In November of 2007, Alberta Advanced Education and Technology contracted Insightrix Research, Inc. to conduct a survey of individuals who graduated from post-secondary institutions in Alberta in the fall of 2005 or the spring of 2006 (excluding apprenticeship graduates, who are surveyed through a separate initiative). The purpose of the survey is to determine graduate satisfaction with their post-secondary experiences and graduate employment outcomes approximately two years after graduation. Key results are compared with two previous waves of research, the first conducted in 2004 of the 2001-02 graduating class and a second conducted in 2006 of the 2003-04 graduates. A total of 17,164 graduates responded to the survey, resulting in an overall valid response rate of 48%. In all, 17,059 are graduates of a parchment program and 105 are graduates of a non-credit program. The margin of error at 95% confidence is plus or minus 0.5 percentage points. This paper offers the key findings of the research. Survey Instrument is appended. (Contains 33 figures, 179 tables and 3 footnotes.)
FIRE's Guide to Due Process and Fair Procedure on Campus. FIRE's Guides to Student Rights on Campus
Author: Silverglate, Harvey A.
Date: 2003-00-00
Type: Guides - Non-Classroom
Subjects: Student Rights,Civil Rights,Moral Values,On Campus Students,Court Litigation,Childrens Rights,Legal Responsibility,Guides,Discipline,Equal Education,Federal Legislation,Suspension,Expulsion,School Policy,Private Colleges,Freedom of Speech,Sexual Harassment,Public Colleges,Crime,Confidentiality,College Students,Investigations,Sanctions,Student Organizations,Rape,Student Records,Lawyers

Students should know their rights and liberties, and they need to be better informed and better equipped about how to assert and defend these precious things. The protectors of students' rights and liberties--those faculty, administrators, parents, alumni, friends, citizens, advisors, and attorneys who care about such vital matters--should understand the threats to freedom and legal equality on campuses, the moral and legal means of combating those threats, and the acquired experience of recent years. To that end, the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (FIRE) offers this "Guide to Due Process and Fair Procedure on Campus," part of a series of such guides designed to restore individual rights and the values of a free society to the nation's colleges and universities. These guides also should remind those who write, revise, and enforce campus policies of the legal and moral constraints that restrict their authority. The sooner that colleges and universities understand their legal and moral obligations to a free and decent society, the less need there will be for guides such as these. Appended are: (1) The First, Fifth, and Fourteenth Amendments; and (2) Cases.
FIRE's Guide to Free Speech on Campus. Second Edition. FIRE's Guides to Student Rights on Campus
Author: Silverglate, Harvey A.
Date: 2012-00-00
Type: Guides - Non-Classroom
Subjects: Student Rights,Freedom of Speech,Campuses,College Students,Civil Rights,School Policy,Guides,Court Litigation,Educational Philosophy,United States History,Federal Legislation,Slavery,War,Censorship,Bullying,Computer Mediated Communication,High Schools,High School Students,Colleges,Political Issues,College Faculty,Academic Freedom,Internet,Fraternities,Sororities,Web Sites,Libel and Slander

Since its first publication in 2005, the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (FIRE) has distributed more than 138,000 print and online copies of its &quot;Guide to Free Speech on Campus.&quot; In that time, FIRE's commitment to advocating on behalf of the essential rights discussed in the pages that follow has remained unwavering; however, threats to free speech on campus have evolved sufficiently over the past six years to necessitate a new, revised edition of this &quot;Guide.&quot; Campuses have changed, too--in many cases, for the better, as students educated by this book have worked with FIRE to fight for student rights by reforming unconstitutional and illiberal speech codes and ending myriad abuses of student liberties. In addition to its more than 200 public victories and many more private ones, FIRE has impacted the legal landscape as well; several of the new cases cited in this &quot;Guide&quot; are the result of FIRE's coordinated challenges to illiberal and illegal restrictions on student speech. However, despite FIRE's sustained success, more work remains to be done. Too many campuses still silence students who dare exercise their right to free expression. It is FIRE's sincere hope, therefore, that this second edition of its &quot;Guide to Free Speech&quot; reaches every student who needs it--and it is its foremost goal to see that it does. Precise Legal Citations of cases discussed are appended. [Additional funding for this paper was provided by the Aequus Institute, The Atlas Economic Research Foundation, Pierre F. and the Enid Goodrich Foundation, and The Joseph Harrison Jackson Foundation.]
Spotlight on Speech Codes 2006: The State of Free Speech on Our Nation's Campuses
Author: Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (FIRE)
Date: 2006-12-06
Type: Reports - Research
Subjects: Freedom of Speech,Constitutional Law,Public Colleges,Private Colleges,Geographic Regions,School Policy,Antisocial Behavior,Behavior Standards,Civil Rights,Court Litigation

This year, the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (FIRE) conducted an expansive study of just how pervasive and how onerous restrictions on speech are at America's colleges and universities. Between September 2005 and September 2006, FIRE surveyed over 330 schools and found that an overwhelming majority of them explicitly prohibit speech that, outside the borders of campus, is protected by the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. Highlights from FIRE's research include: (1) Davidson College in North Carolina prohibits &quot;comments or inquiries about dating,&quot; &quot;patronizing remarks,&quot; &quot;innuendoes,&quot; and &quot;dismissive comments&quot;; (2) At Jacksonville State University in Alabama, students can be punished if they &quot;offend&quot; anyone &quot;on university owned or operated property&quot;; and (3) At the University of Mississippi, &quot;offensive language is not to be used&quot; over the telephone. This report is intended to serve as a brief guide to the status of the free speech rights of students and faculty at colleges and universities and to the ways in which universities are violating these rights. It is FIRE's hope that by exposing the extent of the problem, it will draw increased public attention to the sad state of free speech on American campuses. Public scrutiny is perhaps the greatest weapon against these abuses. States by Geographical Region are appended. (Contains 7 figures and 8 footnotes.)
Spotlight on Speech Codes 2007: The State of Free Speech on Our Nation's Campuses
Author: Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (FIRE)
Date: 2007-00-00
Type: Reports - Research
Subjects: Freedom of Speech,Constitutional Law,Public Colleges,Private Colleges,Geographic Regions,Enrollment,School Policy,Antisocial Behavior,Behavior Standards,Civil Rights,Court Litigation

Last year, the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (FIRE) conducted its first-ever comprehensive study of restrictions on speech at America's colleges and universities, &quot;Spotlight on Speech Codes 2006: The State of Free Speech on our Nation's Campuses.&quot; In light of the essentiality of free expression to a truly liberal education, its findings were deeply disappointing. Between September 2005 and September 2006, FIRE surveyed over 330 schools and found that over 68 percent of those schools explicitly prohibited speech that, outside the borders of campus, is protected by the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. This year, FIRE is proud to present its second annual report on the state of speech codes on America's college campuses. This year's report contains data on additional public universities; it also added enrollment data to the information it collected on colleges and universities to give a clearer idea of the sheer number of students affected by restrictive speech codes. Some highlights from this year's research include: (1) Northeastern University in Boston prohibits students from using the university's information systems to &quot;[t]ransmit or make accessible material, which in the sole judgment of the University is offensive...&quot;; (2) Florida Gulf Coast University prohibits &quot;expressions deemed inappropriate&quot;; and (3) At The Ohio State University, students in the residence halls are instructed: &quot;Do not joke about differences related to race, ethnicity, sexual orientation, gender, ability, socioeconomic background, etc.&quot; This report is intended to serve as a brief guide to the status of the free speech rights of students and faculty at colleges and universities and to the ways in which universities are violating these rights. It is FIRE's hope that by exposing the magnitude of the problem, it will draw increased public attention to the sad state of free speech on American campuses. Public scrutiny is perhaps the greatest weapon against these abuses. Appended are: (1) States by Geographic Region; and (2) Schools by Rating. (Contains 8 figures and 8 footnotes.) [For the 2006 edition of this report, see ED536995.]
Spotlight on Speech Codes 2009: The State of Free Speech on Our Nation's Campuses
Author: Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (FIRE)
Date: 2009-00-00
Type: Reports - Research
Subjects: Freedom of Speech,Constitutional Law,Public Colleges,Private Colleges,Geographic Regions,Enrollment,School Policy,Antisocial Behavior,Behavior Standards,Social Bias,Civil Rights,Court Litigation,Language Usage,Self Expression,Political Attitudes

Each year, the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (FIRE) conducts a wide, detailed survey of restrictions on speech at America's colleges and universities. The survey and resulting report explore the extent to which schools are meeting their obligations to uphold students' and faculty members' rights to freedom of speech, freedom of expression, and private conscience. This year's report examines the restrictions on speech in force at a large sample of American colleges and universities and identifies emergent trends within the data. The report also addresses recent developments regarding free speech in the university setting, drawing from FIRE's research on university policies and from cases that FIRE has handled over the past academic year. Some highlights from this year's research include: (1) Jackson State University in Mississippi prohibits speech &quot;which degrades, insult [sic], taunt [sic], or challenges another person by any means of communication, verbal [sic], so as to provoke a violent response, communication of threat, defamation of character, use of profanity, verbal assaults, derogatory comments or remarks, sexist remarks, racists [sic] remarks or any behavior that places another member of the University community in a state of fear or anxiety&quot;; (2) Penn State University requires its students to agree that they &quot;will not engage in any behaviors that compromise or demean the dignity of individuals or groups,&quot; including any &quot;taunting,&quot; &quot;ridiculing,&quot; or &quot;insulting&quot;; and (3) Clark University prohibits &quot;any act or attempted act by any person against another person, group, or property that has the intent of hostility towards the victim.&quot; FIRE hopes that by exposing the magnitude of the threat to free speech on the American college campus, it will draw increased public attention to the problem and inspire solutions. After all, public scrutiny is perhaps the greatest weapon against these abuses. Appended are: (1) States by Geographic Region; and (2) Schools by Rating. (Contains 8 figures and 55 footnotes.) [For the 2007 edition of this report, see ED536996.]
Spotlight on Speech Codes 2010: The State of Free Speech on Our Nation's Campuses
Author: Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (FIRE)
Date: 2010-00-00
Type: Reports - Research
Subjects: Freedom of Speech,Constitutional Law,Public Colleges,Private Colleges,Geographic Regions,Enrollment,School Policy,Antisocial Behavior,Behavior Standards,Social Bias,Civil Rights,Court Litigation,Language Usage,School Security,Fees,Internet,Administrative Policy

Each year, the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (FIRE) conducts a rigorous survey of restrictions on speech at America's colleges and universities. The survey and resulting report explore the extent to which schools are meeting their legal and moral obligations to uphold students' and faculty members' rights to freedom of speech, freedom of expression, and private conscience. This year's report examines the restrictions on speech that are in force at a large sample of American colleges and universities and identifies emergent trends within the data. The report also addresses recent developments regarding free speech in the university setting, drawing from FIRE's research on university policies and from cases that FIRE has handled over the past academic year. Some highlights from this year's research include: (1) New York University prohibits &quot;insulting, teasing, mocking, degrading or ridiculing another person or group&quot;; (2) Keene State College in New Hampshire prohibits any &quot;language that is sexist and promotes negative stereotypes and demeans members of the community&quot;; and (3) Southwest Minnesota State University vaguely prohibits speech &quot;which attempts to demean or devalue a person's inherent worth and human dignity.&quot; FIRE hopes that by exposing the magnitude of the threat to free speech on the American college campus, it will draw increased public attention to the problem and inspire solutions. After all, public scrutiny is perhaps the greatest weapon against these abuses. Appended are: (1) States by Geographic Region; and (2) Schools by Rating. (Contains 8 figures and 50 footnotes.) [For the 2009 edition of this report, see ED536997.]
Spotlight on Speech Codes 2011: The State of Free Speech on Our Nation's Campuses
Author: Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (FIRE)
Date: 2011-00-00
Type: Reports - Research
Subjects: Freedom of Speech,Constitutional Law,Public Colleges,Private Colleges,Geographic Regions,Enrollment,School Policy,Civil Rights,Court Litigation,Antisocial Behavior,Language Usage,Behavior Standards,Bullying,Social Bias,Internet,Administrative Policy,School Security,Fees

Each year, the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (FIRE) conducts a rigorous survey of restrictions on speech at America's colleges and universities. The survey and accompanying report explore the extent to which schools are meeting their legal and moral obligations to uphold students' and faculty members' rights to freedom of speech, freedom of expression, and private conscience. This year's report examines the restrictions on speech in force at a large sample of American colleges and universities and identifies emergent trends within the data. The report also addresses recent developments regarding free speech in the university setting, drawing from FIRE's research on university policies and from cases that FIRE has handled over the past academic year. Highlights from this year's research include: (1) Grambling State University's e-mail policy prohibits &quot;the creation or distribution of any disruptive or offensive messages, including offensive comments about race, gender, hair color, disabilities, age, sexual orientation, pornography, religious beliefs and practice, political beliefs, or national origin&quot;; (2) University of Massachusetts Amherst has a policy about &quot;controversial rallies&quot; requiring that if a rally is deemed controversial, it may only take place between 12 and 1 pm and must be held on the Student Union steps, and the sponsoring student group must designate at least six of its own members to act as a security team; and (3) College of the Holy Cross vaguely prohibits speech &quot;causing emotional injury through careless or reckless behavior.&quot; By bringing speech codes to the public's attention, FIRE hopes to keep the number of schools prohibiting protected speech in decline. After all, public scrutiny is perhaps the greatest defense against these abuses. Appended are: (1) States by Geographic Region; and (2) Schools by Rating. (Contains 9 figures and 59 footnotes.) [For the 2010 edition of this report, see ED536998.]
Spotlight on Speech Codes 2012: The State of Free Speech on Our Nation's Campuses
Author: Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (FIRE)
Date: 2012-00-00
Type: Reports - Research
Subjects: Freedom of Speech,Constitutional Law,Public Colleges,Private Colleges,School Policy,Civil Rights,Court Litigation,Antisocial Behavior,Language Usage,Behavior Standards,Bullying,Social Bias,Internet,Administrative Policy,School Security,Fees,Public Agencies

The U.S. Supreme Court has called America's colleges and universities &quot;vital centers for the Nation's intellectual life,&quot; but the reality today is that many of these institutions severely restrict free speech and open debate. Speech codes--policies prohibiting student and faculty speech that would, outside the bounds of campus, be protected by the First Amendment--have repeatedly been struck down by federal and state courts. Yet they persist, even in the very jurisdictions where they have been ruled unconstitutional; the majority of American colleges and universities have speech codes. FIRE surveyed 392 schools for this report and found that 65% maintain severely restrictive speech codes--policies that clearly and substantially prohibit protected speech. That this figure is so large is deeply troubling, but there is a small silver lining: It represents a decline in the percentage of schools maintaining such policies for the fourth year in a row. In another encouraging trend, several schools eliminated all of their restrictive speech codes this year, earning FIRE's highest, &quot;green light&quot; rating. Despite the clear trend towards fewer speech codes on campus over the past several years, there is reason to be profoundly concerned about new waves of campus censorship potentially facilitated by federal agencies and state and federal legislators. Appended are: (1) Schools by Rating; (2) Rating Changes, 2010-2011 Academic Year; (3) State-by-State Information (Minimum Five Institutions Ranked); and (4) Percentage of Red Light Institutions of Total Institutions Ranked. (Contains 4 figures and 45 footnotes.) [For the 2011 edition of this report, see ED536999.]