Endogenous technical advance and the stochastic trend in output: A neoclassical approach

In the recent endogenous growth literature, the trend in output is stochastic, while investment in scientific knowledge is treated as analogous to a capital stock. This paper models both research and development (R&D) and disembodied technical advance using neo-classical equations, which specify the equilibrium stocks as a function of prices and output. The elasticity of R&D in the production function, estimated using factor shares, is time-varying and increasing. Returns to scale are increasing in all factors. The most important aspect of the model is that the equilibrium rate of technical advance is not cyclically invariant, but co-moves with output at business cycle frequencies. This allows the production function to behave as a stochastic trend. Growth accounting demonstrates that long-term variations in the rate of productivity growth have been associated mainly with low-frequency fluctuations in the rate of disembodied technical advance, with secondary effects from the stocks of R&D and physical capital. During the high productivity period 1948–1972, technical advance contributed 1.48 percentage points per year to output, with 0.98 accounted for by R&D. The productivity slowdown of the mid-1970s was accounted by a gradual decline in the effect of R&D, and a more abrupt collapse in disembodied technology. The subsequent productivity revival was associated with two accelerations in disembodied technical advance, the first beginning in the early 1980s, and the second in the mid-1990s. The production function is simulated in a small econometric model. Model simulations find that exogenous shocks to the inflation rate generate significant variations in growth by inducing fluctuations in disembodied technology.     

Beyond an “Either–Or” approach to home- and center-based child care: Comparing children and families who combine care types with those who use just one

Most research focuses on preschoolers’ primary non-parental child care arrangement despite evidence that multiple arrangements are relatively common. Using the nationally-representative Early Childhood Longitudinal Study, Birth Cohort, we compare characteristics and outcomes of families whose 4-year olds attend both home- and center-based child care with those who attend either home- or center-based care exclusively or receive no non-parental care at all. We find that about one fifth of 4-year olds attend both home- and center-based child care. Mothers’ priorities for care (getting their child ready for school, matching their families’ cultural background) and perceptions of good local care options predict their combining home- and center-based care. Preschoolers score higher on reading and math assessments, on average, when they attend centers, alone or in combination with home-based child care, than when they are cared for only in homes, either by their parents or by others. Preschoolers’ average socioemotional outcomes generally do not differ between families who do and who do not combine care types. Implications for research and policy are discussed.     

On the Dangers of Antiquarian Investigations: Nietzsche,the Excesses of History,and the Power of Forgetting

Drawing on Nietzsche’s insights as well as those of his critics, this article explores the dangers and limitations of the antiquarian type of historical investigations. The author begins his analysis by closely examining Nietzsche’s conception of antiquarian history and explaining why he finds this mode of historical investigation so troubling. Next he shows that the problem that Nietzsche associates with the antiquarian type of historicizing can be seen in a contemporary genealogical investigation: Daniel Mendelsohn’s book The Lost. Returning to Nietzsche, he then analyzes the meaning and value of his notion of the ‘power of forgetting’ and argues that it can serve as an antidote to some of the dangers of antiquarian history. In the final part of this article the author examines how the power of forgetting might be educationally valuable.     

Ratings by Counselors Without Teaching Experience And Their Principals Regarding Performance of Guidance Functions

This study compared principal and self ratings of performance of guidance functions for practicing counselors who did not have teaching experience. The sample consisted of 43 counselors and their principals from throughout the United States. The ratings indicate better-than-average initial counselor acceptance by administrators, teachers, students, and parents with the degree of acceptance being greater after they had counseled for a while. Principal and self ratings differed significantly on initial acceptance by students and present acceptance by other counselors. Ratings of acceptance by both school psychologists and social workers were below average. There was no significant difference in counselor and principal ratings of counselor understanding of various school procedures and policies or of their ability to perform basic guidance activities. A majority of the principals who had worked with the counselors with non-teaching backgrounds indicated they would recommend the hiring of such a person to their school board.     

How Family and Informal Supporters Appraise Service Quality

Within the field of intellectual disability, progressive policy thinking in Wales has led to an emphasis on the tailoring of services to individual needs and wants of service users, especially through individual planning processes and the creation of service packages. Using an adapted structure‐process‐outcome evaluation model, research is reported about how informal supporters appraise service quality. Based on a survey of 752 families, the first phase of the research reported here has been concerned with charting relationships between personal characteristics of users, service process factors and appraisals by informal supporters of service quality. The findings suggest the importance of key service process factors to an understanding of dimensions of service quality.     

The cultural authority of science: public trust and acceptance of organized science

Using the National Science Foundation's 2006 Science Indicators Survey, this study explores three distinct explanations of public attitudes. First, the knowledge-attitudes model refers to a well tested relationship between public knowledge of science and more favorable attitudes toward science. Second, the alienation model hypothesizes that public disassociation with science is a symptom of a general disenchantment with late modernity, mainly, the limitations associated with codified expertise, rational bureaucracy, and institutional authority. A third approach emphasizes the cultural meaning of science: how various public beliefs about "what science is" relate to acceptance or reservations about science. The Science Indicators Survey shows that US adults view science (what it is or should be) in three distinct ways: (1) in terms of having a systematic method, (2) in terms of social location (i.e., takes place in a university or a laboratory), and (3) in terms of knowledge that should accord with commonsense and tradition. The findings in this study indicate that the knowledge-attitudes, alienation, and cultural meanings models are all valuable for understanding the cultural authority of science. However, the strength of these explanations depends on the type of attitude analyzed.