國立高雄大學圖資館 |

登入

回首頁

Analysis of the application of First Amendment jurisprudence to university student fees policies.

紀錄類型:	書目-電子資源 : Monograph/item
正題名/作者:	Analysis of the application of First Amendment jurisprudence to university student fees policies.
作者:	Chairsell, Christine.
面頁冊數:	214 p.
附註:	Chair: Gerald C. Kops.
附註:	Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 62-06, Section: A, page: 2043.
Contained By:	Dissertation Abstracts International62-06A.
標題:	Education, Higher.
電子資源:	http://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoapp/servlet/advanced?query=3016346
ISBN:	0493268804

Analysis of the application of First Amendment jurisprudence to university student fees policies.
Chairsell, Christine.

Analysis of the application of First Amendment jurisprudence to university student fees policies.[electronic resource] - 214 p.

Chair: Gerald C. Kops.

Thesis (Ed.D.)--University of Nevada, Las Vegas, 2001.

In order to accomplish this, the following research questions are addressed by this study: (1) How did the U.S. Supreme Court resolve the conflict between the circuits regarding allocable mandatory student fee programs in <italic> Southworth</italic>? (2) What were the major arguments in the judicial process that influenced the U.S. Supreme Court's decision? (3) What areas were left in doubt? (4) Were there continuing disagreements? (5) Are there questions left unanswered? (6) What, if any, new questions or issues emerged from this decision? (7) What is the impact on mandatory student fees policies of specific, major state universities in the Ninth Circuit as a result of the <italic>Southworth</italic> decision? (8) What should administrators do to come into compliance with the <italic>Southworth</italic> decision/precedent? Because this endeavor constitutes legal research, the writing style contained in this dissertation was a combination of APA and Harvard Blue Book.

ISBN: 0493268804Subjects--Topical Terms:

179613
Education, Higher.

Analysis of the application of First Amendment jurisprudence to university student fees policies.
LDR:03401nmm 2200325 450 001 154923
005 20021105151516.5
008 230530s2001 ||||||||||||||||| ||eng d
020 $a 0493268804
035 $a 00087448
035 $a 154923
040 $a UnM $c UnM
100 0 $a Chairsell, Christine. $3 212450
245 1 0 $a Analysis of the application of First Amendment jurisprudence to university student fees policies. $h [electronic resource]
300 $a 214 p.
500 $a Chair: Gerald C. Kops.
500 $a Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 62-06, Section: A, page: 2043.
502 $a Thesis (Ed.D.)--University of Nevada, Las Vegas, 2001.
520 # $a In order to accomplish this, the following research questions are addressed by this study: (1) How did the U.S. Supreme Court resolve the conflict between the circuits regarding allocable mandatory student fee programs in <italic> Southworth</italic>? (2) What were the major arguments in the judicial process that influenced the U.S. Supreme Court's decision? (3) What areas were left in doubt? (4) Were there continuing disagreements? (5) Are there questions left unanswered? (6) What, if any, new questions or issues emerged from this decision? (7) What is the impact on mandatory student fees policies of specific, major state universities in the Ninth Circuit as a result of the <italic>Southworth</italic> decision? (8) What should administrators do to come into compliance with the <italic>Southworth</italic> decision/precedent? Because this endeavor constitutes legal research, the writing style contained in this dissertation was a combination of APA and Harvard Blue Book.
520 # $a The allocable student activity fee represents a fee imposed by the university administration and is paid at the time that tuition is paid. The administration or the elected student government body representatives disperse these collected fees to groups that have made application for funding and have passed the review process. Sometimes students object to their mandatory activities fees being diverted to certain groups because they are either political or advocate opinions with which the students disagree. Thus, the controversy becomes a free speech challenge.
520 # $a The purpose of this study was to provide a historical case study about the legal controversies over mandatory student fees. It explores the application of First Amendment jurisprudence of student fees and assesses the impact of the U.S. Supreme Court's <italic>Regents of the Univ. of Wis. Sys. et. al. v. Southworth, et. al.</italic>, 120 S. Ct. 1346 (2000) on select public universities' mandatory student fees programs in the Ninth Circuit. Guidelines are offered to administrators on how to rigorously review and modify their respective policies concerning student fee collections and disbursements in order to comply with the First Amendment rights associated with the <italic>Southworth </italic> decision.
590 $a School code: 0506.
650 # 0 $a Education, Higher. $3 179613
650 # 0 $a Education, Administration. $3 212439
650 # 0 $a Law. $3 207600
650 # 0 $a Education, Finance. $3 212451
690 $a 0277
690 $a 0398
690 $a 0514
690 $a 0745
710 0 # $a University of Nevada, Las Vegas. $3 212395
773 0 # $g 62-06A. $t Dissertation Abstracts International
790 $a 0506
790 1 0 $a Kops, Gerald C., $e advisor
791 $a Ed.D.
792 $a 2001
856 4 0 $u http://libsw.nuk.edu.tw/login?url=http://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoapp/servlet/advanced?query=3016346 $z http://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoapp/servlet/advanced?query=3016346