Resources
Journal Issue.
David Brooks discusses On Thinking Institutionally in a recent column. Read it here! David Brooks Column A brilliant look at institutions as popular as professional sports and as austere as the Supreme Court, all through the lens of what it means to "think institutionally." The twenty-first-century mind deeply distrusts the authority of institutions. It has taken several centuries for advocates of "critical" thinking to convince Western culture that to be rational, liberated, authentic, and modern means to be anti-institutional. In this mold-breaking book, Hugh Heclo moves beyond the abstract academic realm of thinking "about" institutions to the more personal significance and larger social meaning of what it is to "think institutionally." His account ranges from "respect for the game" of baseball to Greek philosophy, from twenty-first-century corporate and political scandals to Christian theology and the concept of "office" and "professionalism." Think what you will about one institution or another, but after Heclo, no reader will be left in doubt about why it matters to think and act institutionally. What do these things have in common? (From the Publisher)
From the Publisher This 30 minute video introduces five recent seminary graduates, some of the financial challenges they faced and decisions they made. Two experienced seminary administrators also offer advice on how to manage finances while in school. The video, along with accompanying resources, including Financial Planning worksheets, can be used by schools to help students plan for how they will pay for their theological education. All materials, including this video, are free and can be downloaded. Students as well as school administrators are welcome to use the material provided on this site.
An investigation of how the contemporary university should develop and the form of pedagogy used. (From the Publisher)
Women professors of educational administration share their personal stories of being female firsts. (From the Publisher)
Challenges an autonomous model of literacy instruction in favor of one that recognizes and builds on students' facility in navigating other rhetorical contexts. (From the Publisher)
This book provides a provocative look at the issues and controversies surrounding grade inflation, and, more generally, grading practices in American higher education. The contributors confront the issues from a number of different disciplines and varying points of view. Topics explored include empirical evidence for and against the claim that there is a general upward trend in grading, whether grade inflation (if it exists) is a problem, which ethical considerations are relevant to grading, and whether heavy reliance on anonymous student evaluations of teaching excellence has a distorting effect on grading practices. Finally, the contributors offer contrasting perspectives on the prospects for reform. "As state and federal agencies begin to talk about accountability for universities, the topic of grade inflation could become even more politicized. This timely book addresses a topic of significant public interest and does it well. The fact that the contributors disagree, take different approaches, and address different aspects of grade inflation is a virtue." - Kenneth A. Strike, author of Ethical Leadership in Schools: Creating Community in an Environment of Accountability "This book encourages academic communities to engage in constructive debate over their professional responsibilities as evaluators of student academic work. Its greatest strength is that it presents disparate perspectives on the complex topics of grading and grade inflation. The contributors are in a real sense engaged in a discussion on the subject, which makes the book refreshing and intellectually stimulating." - Matthew Hartley, University of Pennsylvania Contributors include CliffordAdelman, David T. Beito, Mary Biggs, Harry Brighouse, Lester H. Hunt, Richard Kamber, Alfie Kohn, Charles W. Nuckolls, Francis K. Schrag, and John D. Wiley. (From the Publisher)
A fresh look at study abroad programs on American college and university campuses. (From the Publisher)
Journal Issue.
A Grinnell College (Iowa) study investigated whether students (n=200) felt that balanced discussion of racial/diversity issues was possible and why they did or did not want to discuss the issues. Most thought balanced discussion was impossible, feared a single viewpoint would dominate, and feared reprisal for speaking against the dominant perspective. Further findings and implications are discussed.