Downloads & Free Reading Options - Results

The Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA; P.L. 114-95) amended the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) to add a new Part E to Title I entitled "Flexibility for Equitable Per-Pupil Spending." Under Title I-E, the Secretary of Education (the Secretary) has the authority to provide local educational agencies (LEAs) with flexibility to consolidate eligible federal funds with state and local funding to create a "single school funding system based on weighted per-pupil allocations for low-income and otherwise disadvantaged students." The ESEA Title I-E authority is applicable to LEAs that are using or agree to implement "weighted student funding" systems to establish budgets for, and allocate funds to, individual public schools. These funding systems base school funding on the number of pupils in each school in specified categories. Under these funding systems, weights are assigned to a variety of pupil characteristics that are deemed to be related to the costs of educating such pupils--such as being from a low-income family, being an English Learner (EL), or having a disability. Weights are also assigned on the basis of students' educational program (grade level, career-technical education, gifted and talented, or others). School budgets are based on these weighted pupil counts, in contrast to treating all pupils in the same manner. To provide context for the Title I-E authority, this report begins with a brief discussion of how public elementary and secondary education is financed at the state and local levels. It focuses on the primary types of state school finance programs and school finance "equalization," including an overview of weighted student funding systems. Building on this background, the remainder of the report focuses on the Title I-E authority. First, there is an examination of the Title I-E statutory authority and related non-regulatory guidance provided by U.S. Department of Education (ED). This is followed by a discussion of current Title I-E implementation issues. The next section considers possible interactions between the Title I-E authority and other ESEA programs, particularly Title I-A. The report concludes with discussion of some issues that may arise related to the Title I-E authority.

The Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA; P.L. 114-95) amended the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) to add a new Part E to Title I entitled "Flexibility for Equitable Per-Pupil Spending." Under Title I-E, the Secretary of Education (the Secretary) has the authority to provide local educational agencies (LEAs) with flexibility to consolidate eligible federal funds with state and local funding to create a "single school funding system based on weighted per-pupil allocations for low-income and otherwise disadvantaged students." The ESEA Title I-E authority is applicable to LEAs that are using or agree to implement "weighted student funding" systems to establish budgets for, and allocate funds to, individual public schools. These funding systems base school funding on the number of pupils in each school in specified categories. Under these funding systems, weights are assigned to a variety of pupil characteristics that are deemed to be related to the costs of educating such pupils--such as being from a low-income family, being an English Learner (EL), or having a disability. Weights are also assigned on the basis of students' educational program (grade level, career-technical education, gifted and talented, or others). School budgets are based on these weighted pupil counts, in contrast to treating all pupils in the same manner. To provide context for the Title I-E authority, this report begins with a brief discussion of how public elementary and secondary education is financed at the state and local levels. It focuses on the primary types of state school finance programs and school finance "equalization," including an overview of weighted student funding systems. Building on this background, the remainder of the report focuses on the Title I-E authority. First, there is an examination of the Title I-E statutory authority and related non-regulatory guidance provided by U.S. Department of Education (ED). This is followed by a discussion of current Title I-E implementation issues. The next section considers possible interactions between the Title I-E authority and other ESEA programs, particularly Title I-A. The report concludes with discussion of some issues that may arise related to the Title I-E authority.

xxiii, 677 p. ; 24 cm

xxiii, 677 p. ; 24 cm

1History of New Brunswick

By Peter Fisher

Originally published in 1825 under the title: Sketches of New Brunswick : containing an account of the first settlement of the province, with a brief description of the country, climate, productions, inhabitants, government, rivers, towns, settlements, public institutions, trade, revenue, population, &c., by an inhabitant of the province. The value of this history is in the fact that it was written when the Province was still in its infancy. Although there had been a few small settlements established in New Brunswick prior to 1783, the main influx of settlers were Loyalists who chose to remove to the area from the United States following the American Revolution. (Summary from text with additions by Roger Melin)

2Chronicles of America Volume 08 - The Quaker Colonies

By Sydney Fisher

The Quaker Colonies describes the Quaker emigration to the colonies in the sixteen and seventeen hundreds and at the same time its involvement in the evolution of Pennsylvania, Delaware and New Jersey. Throughout, the author investigates the various interactions--religious, cultural, and political--between the racial and national groups: the Indians, the French (albeit briefly), the English (Quaker, Catholic, and Anglican), the Dutch, and the Swedes.

The gospel method of sanctification, as well as of justification, lies so far out of the understanding of natural reason, that if all the rationalists in the world, philosophers and divines, had consulted together to lay down a plan, for repairing the lost image of God in man, they had never hit upon that which the divine wisdom had pitched upon, viz., That sinners should be sanctified in Christ Jesus, 1 Cor. 1:2, by faith in him, Acts 26:18. Nay, being laid before them, they would have rejected it with disdain as foolishness, 1 Cor. 1:23. <br><br> In all views which fallen man has, towards the means of his own recovery, the natural bent is to the way of the covenant of works. This is evident in the case of the vast multitudes throughout the world. All these agree in this one principle, "That it is by doing men must live," though they hugely differ as to the things to be done for life.<br><br> The book is in Dialogue form, and is divided into two parts. In the first, which deals with the covenant of works and the covenant of grace, the dialogue is conducted by Evangelista, a Minister of the Gospel; Nomista, a Legalist; Antinomista, an Antinomian; and Neophytus, a young Christian. The second part, touching the most plain, pithy, and spiritual exposition of the Ten Commandments, is carried on by Evangelista and Neophytus together with Nomologista, a prattler about the Law.<br><br> The writer, who gives his own views through Evangelista, was said to be an Oxford graduate of good social position but no ecclesiastical standing, who lived the life of a recluse among his books, and had won a reputation for Patristic lore and skill in Hebrew and New Testament Greek. Those who disliked the book and its teaching, and desired to suppress it, attempted to raise a feeling of prejudice against it by representing the author as a tool in the hands of the Independents against Presbyterianism, and a person of mean origin and occupation to wit, a barber, who, dissatisfied with the position in which Providence had placed him, aspired to that of an Independent minister.<br><br> Hervey calls it "a book designed to guard equally against Antinomian licentiousness and legal bondage. The thoughts are just and striking ; the arguments solid and convincing ; the diction is familiar yet perspicuous; and the doctrine exceedingly comfortable because truly evangelical. . . . Perhaps I may venture to say that this little treatise pours as much light upon the gospel and grace of Christ and . . . affords as many important distinctions in divinity as any book of its size whatever." - Summary by Thomas Boston in the Preface and Henry F Henderson in <i>The Religious Controversies of Scotland</i><br><br> <b>Cast list:</b><br> Antinomista: <a href="https://librivox.org/reader/8677">KHand</a><br>Evangelista: <a href="https://librivox.org/reader/14684">InTheDesert</a><br>Neophitus: <a href="https://librivox.org/reader/8425">Larry Wilson</a><br>Nomista & Nomologista: <a href="https://librivox.org/reader/3157">TriciaG</a>

Fisher’s treatment of the history of Finland, in the context of its relations with Russia, was released in 1899—at the start of the first attempted wave of Russification. At this time, it seems, many Finns regarded it as a misunderstanding. A mistake. Not a contrivance of Nicholas II, but a villainy emanating instead, fen-sucked, from the sinister Russian state machinery—the fief of a myopic and obdurate cadre of supremacists and absolutists. Men like the rabid anti-semite Konstantin Pobedonostsev who, by the camera's harsh testimony, seems to have died long before he stopped coming in to work, and like Ivan Goremykin who in an ironic twist of fate would not so very much later – after 1906 – have to stretch his mind to try to contend with the obscenity of constitutional monarchy at home. Men who all nursed a bitter grudge at the perceived slight to their omnipotence called Finland. The long-standing arrangements and understandings between Finland and the Tsars had up to this time, for the better part of a century, served both parties very well. And would undoubtedly have stood Russia in good stead into the twentieth century. Every Tsar reaffirmed a solemn pledge to maintain the Fundamental Laws underpinning the constitutional order, to uphold Alexander I's promise to respect "their religion, their laws, their liberties and their rights." Every Tsar honored it—until Nicholas II. In return, Finland turned its back on Sweden to stand at Russia's side bringing with it a domain which was loyal, orderly and industrious and soon enough became highly educated and prosperous too. Regardless of the shocks and reversals the Empire encountered, the Grand Duchy was unwavering so far as imperial internal security went, producing never "...a conspirator or an agitator against Russia. It provided instead generals for her armies and admirals for her fleet." Subversion and coercion efforts against the Finnish state would be abruptly halted in the immediate aftermath of the bitter defeat meted out by Japan in 1905; Saint Petersburg had unrest aplenty across its vast and ethnically diverse extent without manufacturing more. These efforts would resume. Finland would be driven to, at the first opportunity, declare independence in 1917. The events of the twentieth century would be profoundly influenced by the collapse of Russo-Finnish cooperation, by the Winter War and by Finland’s politics and diplomatic efforts during the Cold War. While the impact of some of these developments may be seen as broadly beneficial to Europe, much of it was to the critical detriment of the prevailing political orders in Russia. (Summary by Alister)

This collection celebrates the marigold in verse from the 17th through the 20th centuries. - Summary by Newgatenovelist