KeywordsIntellectual Property Policy
tuition & fees
College of Architecture, Planning & Landscape Architecture Dean Search
Make It Stick
Center for University Education Scholarship
College of Medicine-Phoenix
Liaison Committee of Medical Education
Major General Charles Frank Bolden, Jr
Open Education Month
Academic Unit Implementation
Department of Public & Applied Humanites in the College of Humanities
University Career Architecture Project
Grades & Grading System Policy amendment
K grades in 900 level courses
Public Access working group
ABOR intellectual Property Policy
UA Intellectual Property Policy
MetadataShow full item record
Showing items related by title, author, creator and subject.
A policy approach to federalism : cases of public lands and water policyBradley, Dorotha Myers.; Ingram, Helen; Gregg, Frank; Crow, John; Kenski, Henry (The University of Arizona., 1986)This study considers the relationship of federalism to public lands and water policy, challenging the prevailing wisdom that federalism is irrelevant and questioning the eagerness with which structural solutions are embraced. It argues that a more thorough understanding of how federalism works in public lands and water policy is a necessary first step toward understanding federal-state relations and is more useful than either discarding the concept or further redefining it. Seeking identifiable patterns of politics, this study reviews the voluminous federalism literature and applies the theories of dual and cooperative federalism to the history of public lands and water policy, and to five contemporary controversies. These include the Sagebrush Rebellion, the Aravaipa Canyon, Arizona Strip, and Bisti, De-na-zin, and Ah-shi-sle-pah wilderness designation cases, and the El Paso v. Reynolds water case. Lowi's and Salisbury's policy typologies, which point to the effect on policy outcomes of the interaction of decision structure with demands, were useful in explaining why federalism theories and structural remedies are unsatisfactory. A policy perspective on federalism was developed which adds levels of government to discussions of arenas and policy types. It finds that federal-level decision makers are more willing to make policy when policies can potentially reflect federal-level advantages such as broad geographic jurisdiction, general rule-making capability, constitutional powers or opportunities to offer divisible benefits. State-level decision makers will resist federal policies when they disagree with policy goals or methods, lack necessary resources, or perceive unfair burdens. Thus, the state role includes states acting as claimants in distributive politics, as conduits in self-regulatory politics, as platforms for disadvantaged interests in regulatory politics, or as supplicants in redistributive politics. Further, shifts from one policy type to another serve to signal major structural shifts. Finally, accepting the political scientist's role as contributing to policy learning, this study offers five lessons: (1) much federal state conflict is inter-state conflict; (2) federal projects and lands are federal in name only; (3) multiple interests use the federal system in bargaining; (4) federal government decisions involve costs to recipients and the federal treasury; and (5) federalism is best considered within the context of substantive public policy.
PUBLIC POLICY FOR EDUCATION: AN ANALYSIS OF PRIORITIES ESTABLISHED BY TASK FORCES ON EDUCATION AND ARIZONA STATE POLICY MAKERS.Cool, Brent A.; TARRY, DANIELLE IRENE.; Grant; Blake (The University of Arizona., 1985)The purpose of this study was to compare the activities of four policy actors in Arizona with common recommendations of eight task force studies on K-12 public education in an effort to determine changes in policy priorities for education in Arizona from 1981 through 1984. The policy actors investigated were the Arizona State Board of Education, the Arizona Legislature, Arizona Governor Bruce Babbitt, and the lobby efforts of the Arizona Education Association. Activities of these four policy actors were compared with common recommendations from The Paideia Proposal--An Educational Manifesto, A Nation at Risk: The Imperative for Educational Reform, Making the Grade, Action for Excellence--A Comprehensive Plan to Improve Our Nation's Schools, A Place Called School-Prospects for the Future (national reports), Education in Arizona: Popular Concerns Unpopular Choices, A Statewide Report Concerning Public Education, and A Call to Excellence--A Plan for the Renewal of Arizona Public Schools (state reports). A comparative documentary analysis was made of the quantitative and qualitative data gathered. It was found that 17 recommendations were common (consensus of four or more) among the five national and three state reports under consideration: (1) establishing a K-12 core curriculum; (2) upgrading textbooks; (3) increasing the amount of homework required; (4) lengthening the number of days in the school year; (5) providing extra programs for slow learners and gifted students; (6) lengthening the school day; (7) establishing codes of student conduct; (8) improving the use of school time; (9) increasing preschool and kindergarten programs; (10) removing tasks from teachers; (11) improving student attendance; (12) improving teacher preparation programs; (13) increasing teachers' salaries; (14) providing 11-12 month teacher contracts; (15) rewarding superior teachers; (16) evaluating teachers; and (17) defining the principal's role as instructional leader. Using the 17 common recommendations for education policy as a screening device, it was determined that the majority of new education policy in Arizona emanated from the State Legislature from 1981 through 1984. The Arizona State Board of Education seemed second in the amount of influence generated. Governor Bruce Babbitt and the Arizona Education Association played lesser roles as far as successful completion of their respective recommended policies were concerned.
A policy design analysis of federal forest policyCortner, Hanna J.; Burke, Sabrina, 1970- (The University of Arizona., 1995)The intent of this thesis is to apply policy design analysis to federal forest policy in the United States. This thesis describes alternative policy analysis frameworks and argues that a policy design approach is the most useful for analyzing federal forest policy and for understanding the intense social conflict which surrounds forest policy today. This paper will argue that present conflicts stem from the inability of past forest policy designs to simultaneously pursue the important social goals of economic development, ecological sustainability and social democracy. What is needed is an approach to forest policy which can address and ameliorate these conflicts. This will require several changes in the underlying assumptions of natural resource management. Ecosystem management, as an alternative approach to forest policy, will be discussed and analyzed in order to identify in what ways forest policy may change and to speculate about the implications of these changes.