National Capacity in Language and Area Studies, Post 9/11

National Capacity in Language and Area Studies, Post 9/11

An Evaluation of the Impact of Title VI/Fulbright-Hays of the Higher Education Act

Purpose of the Study

This report is not designed to provide a general evaluation of all Title VI/F-H programs. Rather, the intent here is to lay the foundation of such assessments in the future and to model the application of the GPRA to federal programs that are involved with education and research in general. This will be accomplished by demonstrating just how the EELIAS (Evaluation of Exchange, Language, and International Area Studies) system, developed in 1997, can be used to this end. Therefore, this report comprises the following:

  1. the historical context and purpose of the current study;
  2. a brief overview of the Government Performance and Results Act (GPRA) requirements and a review of the methodology used in the development of EELIAS;
  3. a description of Project EELIAS and its two principal deliverables: the goals, objectives, and indicators of Title VI/F-H overall and of each of its fourteen constituent programs; and the EELIAS database;
  4. a demonstration of the application of EELIAS to evaluate the impact of VI/F-H on the language situation in the U.S. This part of the study is essentially an update of our 2000 study on language and national security and Title VI/F-H, but with the addition of a “propensity model” that is intended to mitigate the illicit tendency, inherent in competitive grant programs, to attribute to the program gains that are more appropriately attributable to the institutions winning the grants;
  5. a selective demonstration of the application of the EELIAS system beyond language, exemplifying (to the extent possible) as many of the 14 constituent programs as possible; the differences made in the GPRA in terms of output, outcomes, and impact; the need for and availability of outside baseline studies or data sources; and indicators for which external and EELIAS system data are already available to make evaluation both possible and feasible; and
  6. recommendations for better integrating Title VI/F-H into current initiatives and improving their evaluation according to Title VI/F-H goals.
People Involved
William P. Rivers
Richard D. Brecht
Betsy Hart
Ewa M. Golonka
Publication Year
2007