Author(s): |
Porwancher, Andrew |
Source: |
Paedagogica Historica: International Journal of the History of Education, v49 n2 p273-292 2013 |
|
Pub Date: |
2013-00-00 |
Pub Type(s): |
Journal Articles; Reports - Evaluative |
Peer Reviewed: |
Yes |
|
|
|
Descriptors:
Academic Freedom; College Faculty; Gender Discrimination; Anthropology; Tenure; Equal Opportunities (Jobs); Females; Court Litigation; Inquiry; Institutional Autonomy; Departments; Educational History; Universities
Abstract:
In 1974, Brown University's Department of Anthropology denied tenure to assistant professor Louise Lamphere. Convinced that her dismissal was the product of sex discrimination, Lamphere filed suit against Brown. Lamphere and three other female scholars who joined her suit successfully pressed Brown into an out-of-court settlement in 1977. Significantly, the settlement required Brown not only to provide redress to the plaintiffs but also to take sweeping action in rectifying its faculty's inequitable gender ratio. While Lamphere's case marked a rare victory for academic women in the male preserve of the Ivy League, this study concerns the bearing of the lawsuit on academic freedom. It argues that academic freedom entails two interlocking principles: freedom of inquiry and departmental autonomy. Lamphere emphasised the former while Brown advocated the latter. Ultimately, the Lamphere case illustrates how academic freedom loses its efficacy when freedom of inquiry and departmental autonomy are decoupled. (Contains 97 footnotes.)
Note:The following two links
are not-applicable for text-based browsers or screen-reading software.
Show
Hide
Full Abstract
Related Items: Show Related Items
Full-Text Availability Options:
More Info:
Help |
Tutorial
Help Finding Full Text
|
More Info:
Help
Find in a Library
|
Publisher's website
|
|
|
Pub Date: |
2013-01-00 |
Pub Type(s): |
Journal Articles; Reports - Descriptive |
Peer Reviewed: |
Yes |
|
|
|
Descriptors:
Liberal Arts; Biblical Literature; Teaching Methods; Conferences (Gatherings); Clergy; Undergraduate Students; College Faculty; Theological Education; Discussion; Teacher Attitudes
Abstract:
This discussion of the goals and methods of teaching biblical literature is an edited transcription of a panel recorded at the 2010 Society for Biblical Literature conference. The panelists were asked to reflect on William Placher's recently published theological commentary on Mark as an example or test case of how one might use a biblical commentary as a classroom resource. Karl Barth wrote that insofar as their usefulness to pastors goes, most modern commentaries are "no commentary at all, but merely the first step toward a commentary." What value might commentaries have for our students, whether future pastors or undergraduates in the liberal arts? While the panel consisted of teachers of undergraduates as well as theological students, the emphasis of the presentations and subsequent discussion focused mostly on theological formation.
Note:The following two links
are not-applicable for text-based browsers or screen-reading software.
Show
Hide
Full Abstract
Related Items: Show Related Items
Full-Text Availability Options:
More Info:
Help |
Tutorial
Help Finding Full Text
|
More Info:
Help
Find in a Library
|
Publisher's website
|
|
|
Pub Date: |
2013-01-00 |
Pub Type(s): |
Journal Articles; Reports - Research |
Peer Reviewed: |
Yes |
|
|
|
Descriptors:
Higher Education; Well Being; Physical Health; Foreign Countries; Job Satisfaction; Stress Variables; Employees; Least Squares Statistics; Measures (Individuals); College Faculty; Mental Health
Abstract:
Extensive change is evident in higher education in the People's Republic of China but there have been few studies of the effect of work stress on wellbeing in the higher education sector. The main aim of this study is to test and refine the ASSET ("An Organizational Stress Screening Tool") model of occupational stress in a sample of 150 academic and non-academic employees in a Chinese higher education institute. Using partial least squares modelling, the findings showed that job stressors predicted job dissatisfaction but, surprisingly, did not predict perceived commitment. Employees who reported job dissatisfaction tended to perceive that their organisation was less committed towards them and report less commitment towards the organisation. Job stressors resulted in poorer psychological wellbeing. Greater psychological wellbeing was associated with greater physical wellbeing. The findings suggest that university management should introduce strategies aimed at minimising job stressors as these would result in higher level of job satisfaction, higher level of commitment and ultimately resulted in an improvement in physical health. (Contains 3 tables, 3 figures, and 1 note.)
Note:The following two links
are not-applicable for text-based browsers or screen-reading software.
Show
Hide
Full Abstract
Related Items: Show Related Items
Full-Text Availability Options:
More Info:
Help |
Tutorial
Help Finding Full Text
|
More Info:
Help
Find in a Library
|
Publisher's website
|
Author(s): |
Kyvik, Svein |
Source: |
Higher Education Quarterly, v67 n1 p2-14 Jan 2013 |
|
Pub Date: |
2013-01-00 |
Pub Type(s): |
Journal Articles; Reports - Research |
Peer Reviewed: |
Yes |
|
|
|
Descriptors:
Working Hours; Mail Surveys; College Faculty; Faculty Workload; Higher Education; Perception; Comparative Analysis; Foreign Countries
Abstract:
The purpose of this article is to examine the validity of perceptions by academic staff about their past and present workload and working hours. Retrospective assessments are compared with time-series data. The data are drawn from four mail surveys among academic staff in Norwegian universities undertaken in the period 1982-2008. The findings show that many academic staff retrospectively perceive that expectations of their work and task performance have increased and hence that they now work longer hours. In contrast, when time-series data are used to measure changes in time use (on an aggregate level) no empirical evidence is found in support of this claim; instead, a slight decline in the average number of weekly working hours can be observed. Two possible reasons for this disparity are discussed. First, that heavier workloads do not necessarily imply that academic staff work longer hours. Second, that younger generations of academic staff may report fewer work hours than previous counterparts. (Contains 2 tables.)
Note:The following two links
are not-applicable for text-based browsers or screen-reading software.
Show
Hide
Full Abstract
Related Items: Show Related Items
Full-Text Availability Options:
More Info:
Help |
Tutorial
Help Finding Full Text
|
More Info:
Help
Find in a Library
|
Publisher's website
|
|
|
Pub Date: |
2013-01-00 |
Pub Type(s): |
Journal Articles; Opinion Papers |
Peer Reviewed: |
Yes |
|
|
|
Descriptors:
College Faculty; Student Attitudes; Colleges; Religion Studies; Institutional Mission; Surveys; Departments; Curriculum; Teacher Attitudes; Guidelines; Educational Change
Abstract:
The purpose of this essay is to offer a survey of religious studies capstones from twenty-nine U.S. colleges and universities, to identify the most common frustrations about the capstone, and to observe how departments resolve such frustrations. I conclude that the most successful capstones--in terms of students' performance and faculty satisfaction--are those that are carefully linked to their department's major curriculum, pedagogies, and staffing, that set out to achieve a reasonable set of objectives, and that are aligned with their institutional mission, culture, and expectations for assessment. Yet, I argue that it is becoming increasingly difficult to design our capstone experiences according to the above principles because of the proliferation of departmental and institutional pressures we presently face. Finally, I offer some guidelines by which we might devise or revise our capstones to alleviate some of the most common pressures. (Contains 3 figures and 16 footnotes.)
Note:The following two links
are not-applicable for text-based browsers or screen-reading software.
Show
Hide
Full Abstract
Related Items: Show Related Items
Full-Text Availability Options:
More Info:
Help |
Tutorial
Help Finding Full Text
|
More Info:
Help
Find in a Library
|
Publisher's website
|
|