8700 research outputs found
Sort by
Falling Through the Cracks of Education: A Comparative Analysis of Canada’s and The United States’ Use of Standardized Testing Within the Realm of Public Education
Get PDFThe education system is foundational to society. Public education is based on the concept of equal educational opportunities for all. Although the purpose of standardized testing is the elimination of bias to prevent certain segments of society’s students from receiving unfair academic advantages, there is little empirical verification that suggests that standardized testing actually achieves its intended purpose. In fact, the evidence indicates that standardized testing negatively impacts low-income, marginalized, and English-learning students, as achievement gaps for these groups have remained the same or have even grown with the increased use of such tests. This article will discuss the intended goals of standardized testing and their direct implications on the United States’ and Canada’s public education systems. Moreover, the article will compare the United States’ implementation of both President George W. Bush’s No Child Left Behind Act and President Barack Obama’s Every Student Succeeds Act to Ontario’s creation of the Education Quality and Accountability Office and Alberta’s implementation of Student Learning Assessments. Lastly, this article will argue that an education system that relies heavily on standardized testing to measure student achievement is conditioning students to become less creative and more automated, ultimately stagnating the development of young students’ critical thinking skills
Does the Lack of Binding Precedent in International Arbitration Affect Transparency in Arbitral Proceedings?
Get PDFThis note explores how the lack of binding precedent in both international commercial and investment arbitration affects transparency in arbitral proceedings. As arbitration increases in popularity, its deficiencies have become more apparent. The lack of binding precedent in arbitration is convenient in some ways, but problematic as it leaves arbitrators an immense amount of discretion when deciding cases. With many decisions unpublished to maintain confidentiality and those decisions that are published sometimes lack reasoning to support the award, transparency in arbitral proceedings is practically nonexistent. In recent years, there is a trend toward more transparency in certain types of arbitral disputes. In this Note, I argue that while the lack of binding precedent in international arbitration encourages arbitrators to decide cases too freely, which contributes to the lack of transparency in arbitration, there are also many other factors that contribute to this problematic feature of international arbitration
Pandemics and International Law: The Need to Strengthen International Legal Frameworks after the COVID-19 Global Health Pandemic [Sierra Leone]
Get PDF
The Dawn of a Judicial Takings Doctrine: \u3cem\u3eStop the Beach Renourishment, Inc. v. Florida Department of Environmental Protection\u3c/em\u3e
Get PDFIn Stop the Beach Renourishment v. Florida Department of Environmental Protection, 130 S. Ct. 2592 (2010), the U.S. Supreme Court granted certiorari to determine whether the Florida Supreme Court had violated a group of littoral property owners’ Fifth Amendment rights—or committed a “judicial taking”—by upholding the state of Florida’s Beach and Shore Preservation Act. Under the Act, the State is entitled to ownership of previously submerged land it restores as beach; this is true even though the normal private/state property line, the mean-high water line, is moved seaward, and the affected littoral owner(s) lose their right to have their property about the water. Although a four-justice plurality led by Justice Scalia held that that the Florida Supreme Court did not violate the Fifth Amendment in this instance, the plurality recognized that it is unconstitutional for any branch of state government to declare that what was once an established private property right no longer exists without providing just compensation. In so doing, the plurality appears to endorse a judicial taking doctrine. This Article explores the institutional and policy ramifications of such a doctrine—ultimately concluding that the due process analysis advocated by Justice Kennedy in concurrence is a better doctrinal mechanism to corral wayward judges. After exploring the procedural and federalism concerns raised by a judicial takings doctrine, the Article hypothesizes the viewpoints of several famous deceased takings scholars. The Article then evaluates the position of living taking scholars Eduardo M. Penalver and Lihor Strahilevitz, whom propose a flexible approach that considers Takings Clause and due process analysis on a case-by-case basis
The Hottest Employee Benefit Of 2020: Employers Offer to Repay Employees’ Student Loan Debt
Get PDFThe Student Loans Crisis has spread like wildfire reaching a whopping $1.56 trillion worth of debt. What started off as the Federal government’s initiative to encourage Americans to invest in their future through obtaining secondary education, has turned into a systemic crisis that burns just as hot as global warming. Lobbyists are currently petitioning Congress to enact meaningful legislation to extinguish the flames of the growing student loan debt. Most notably, the private sector is proposing congressional reform to amend the tax code to enable employers to offer employees student loan repayment assistance tax-free. This article delves into this proposal while evaluating its level of difficulty, equity, and scope of impact within the larger context of what is currently available to student loan debtors. If Congress is forthcoming, employers may offer the most optimal and realistic solution for the millions of student loan borrowers and the nation’s economy. The explosive flames of the student loan crisis may finally be extinguished
