Planning for higher education最新文献

A Question of Numbers 数字问题

Planning for higher education

Pub Date : 2019-06-10 DOI: 10.4324/9780429301742-1

A. O. Pfnister

引用次数: 0

The Curriculum: Transformation or Tinkering? 课程:转型还是修补?

Planning for higher education

Pub Date : 2019-06-10 DOI: 10.4324/9780429301742-4

A. O. Pfnister

引用次数: 0

Financing the Program: Clearing Ahead or Continuing Storms? 项目融资:扫清障碍还是继续风暴?

Planning for higher education

Pub Date : 2019-06-10 DOI: 10.4324/9780429301742-5

A. O. Pfnister

引用次数: 0

Students in the Seventies: A New Breed? 70年代的学生:新一代?

Planning for higher education

Pub Date : 2019-06-10 DOI: 10.4324/9780429301742-2

A. O. Pfnister

引用次数: 0

Governance of the University: Systems Under Attack 大学治理:受到攻击的系统

Planning for higher education

Pub Date : 2019-06-10 DOI: 10.4324/9780429301742-3

A. O. Pfnister

引用次数: 0

Precipice or Crossroads?: Where America's Great Public Universities Stand and Where They Are Going Midway through Their Second Century 悬崖还是十字路口?:美国优秀的公立大学的地位以及它们在第二个世纪中期的去向

Planning for higher education

Pub Date : 2013-04-01 DOI: 10.1353/book16468

M. Haggans

Precipice or Crossroads?: Where America's Great Public Universities Stand and Where They are Going Midway Through Their Second Century by Daniel Mark Fogel and Elizabeth Malson-Huddle, eds.SUNY Press 2012 362 pages ISBN: 978-1-4384-4494-9 [ILLUSTRATION OMITTED] ON THE 150TH ANNIVERSARY of the Morrill Act's land-grant legislation, a group of current and former university presidents and their colleagues was organized to consider the history and the future of the resulting land-grant institutions. A path forward will not be found in this book. Except for former University of Michigan President James J. Duderstadt, none of the writers attempts a diagnosis of current challenges, much less suggests a prescription concerning the future. Most of the book is an excellent recounting of the history and traditions that have gotten these institutions this far. What's next? According to most of the writers, it is more of the same; not a precipice at all, just another crossroads. This confidence about the future derives from a remarkable past. It is almost impossible to imagine American higher education without the land-grant institutions spawned by the Morrill Act of 1862. Their influence and prestige have been so great that even the most humble institution in the United States wishes to include at least one of them in its peer group. What began as the relatively modest but strategically important intention of improving agricultural sciences in the United States has produced by the beginning of the 21st century a large group of world-class institutions. Related congressional acts also led to the creation of many of the nation's historically Black institutions and laid the foundations for scores of engineering departments (originally industrial arts). A century and a half later, many of these schools are considered to be among the best in undergraduate education, research, and medical science. So vast are their current missions that many are part of global networks promoting economic and educational development. Some have established international operations to maximize their global influence and capacity. In the book's first section, Coy F. Cross II provides the 18th century context for the founding of institutions that have thrived into the first part of the 21th century. Other writers document the historically important role that these institutions have played in the development of our democracy and in promoting racial, ethnic, gender, and economic equality. Daniel Mark Fogel completes the volume with an argument for the enduring value of the liberal arts education to society. David E. Shulenburger provides a sobering account of the decades-long pattern of declining public funding of higher education. This reality has led to unprecedented increases in tuition and has placed public institutions at a disadvantage in student and faculty recruitment. This is the first hint of concern in this largely triumphalist work. If Shulenburger's analysis is correct, even

悬崖还是十字路口?《美国伟大的公立大学在哪里，以及它们在第二个世纪中期的去向》，丹尼尔·马克·福格尔和伊丽莎白·马尔森-哈德尔主编。在《莫里尔法案》土地授予立法150周年之际，一群现任和前任大学校长及其同事被组织起来考虑由此产生的土地授予机构的历史和未来。在这本书中找不到前进的道路。除了密歇根大学(University of Michigan)前校长詹姆斯·j·杜德施塔特(James J. Duderstadt)之外，没有哪位作者试图对当前的挑战做出诊断，更不用说对未来开出处方了。这本书的大部分内容都是对这些机构发展到今天的历史和传统的精彩叙述。接下来是什么?根据大多数作者的说法，情况大同小异;根本不是悬崖，只是另一个十字路口。这种对未来的信心来自非凡的过去。几乎无法想象，如果没有1862年《莫里尔法案》(Morrill Act)催生的赠地机构，美国的高等教育将是什么样子。他们的影响力和声望是如此之大，以至于美国最不起眼的机构也希望至少吸纳他们中的一位。在21世纪初，改善美国农业科学这一相对温和但具有重要战略意义的意图产生了一大批世界级的机构。相关的国会法案也促成了许多历史上由黑人创立的机构的建立，并为数十个工程系(最初是工业艺术)奠定了基础。一个半世纪后，这些学校中的许多被认为在本科教育、研究和医学科学方面名列前茅。他们目前的使命是如此的宏大，以至于许多人都是促进经济和教育发展的全球网络的一部分。一些国家建立了国际业务，以最大限度地发挥其全球影响力和能力。在书的第一部分，Coy F. Cross II提供了18世纪的背景下建立的机构已经蓬勃发展到21世纪的第一部分。其他作家记录了这些机构在我们的民主发展和促进种族、民族、性别和经济平等方面所发挥的重要历史作用。丹尼尔·马克·福格尔以论述文科教育对社会的持久价值来完成本书。大卫·e·舒伦伯格(David E. Shulenburger)对数十年来高等教育公共资金不断减少的模式进行了发人深省的描述。这一现实导致了前所未有的学费上涨，并使公共机构在招收学生和教师方面处于不利地位。这是在这部主要是必胜主义的作品中第一次暗示出关注。如果舒伦伯格的分析是正确的，那么即使是这些强大的机构，在国内和国际上也正在失去实力。由于系统的资源限制，他们招募和留住最优秀、最聪明的学生和教师的能力正在下降。因此，这些机构的核心可能会被削弱。Michael M. Crow和William B. Dabars关注高等教育和赠地机构对改变世界的研究贡献。没有比美国的赠地大学更强大的科学发展引擎了。．..

{"title":"Precipice or Crossroads?: Where America's Great Public Universities Stand and Where They Are Going Midway through Their Second Century","authors":"M. Haggans","doi":"10.1353/book16468","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1353/book16468","url":null,"abstract":"Precipice or Crossroads?: Where America's Great Public Universities Stand and Where They are Going Midway Through Their Second Century by Daniel Mark Fogel and Elizabeth Malson-Huddle, eds.SUNY Press 2012 362 pages ISBN: 978-1-4384-4494-9 [ILLUSTRATION OMITTED] ON THE 150TH ANNIVERSARY of the Morrill Act's land-grant legislation, a group of current and former university presidents and their colleagues was organized to consider the history and the future of the resulting land-grant institutions. A path forward will not be found in this book. Except for former University of Michigan President James J. Duderstadt, none of the writers attempts a diagnosis of current challenges, much less suggests a prescription concerning the future. Most of the book is an excellent recounting of the history and traditions that have gotten these institutions this far. What's next? According to most of the writers, it is more of the same; not a precipice at all, just another crossroads. This confidence about the future derives from a remarkable past. It is almost impossible to imagine American higher education without the land-grant institutions spawned by the Morrill Act of 1862. Their influence and prestige have been so great that even the most humble institution in the United States wishes to include at least one of them in its peer group. What began as the relatively modest but strategically important intention of improving agricultural sciences in the United States has produced by the beginning of the 21st century a large group of world-class institutions. Related congressional acts also led to the creation of many of the nation's historically Black institutions and laid the foundations for scores of engineering departments (originally industrial arts). A century and a half later, many of these schools are considered to be among the best in undergraduate education, research, and medical science. So vast are their current missions that many are part of global networks promoting economic and educational development. Some have established international operations to maximize their global influence and capacity. In the book's first section, Coy F. Cross II provides the 18th century context for the founding of institutions that have thrived into the first part of the 21th century. Other writers document the historically important role that these institutions have played in the development of our democracy and in promoting racial, ethnic, gender, and economic equality. Daniel Mark Fogel completes the volume with an argument for the enduring value of the liberal arts education to society. David E. Shulenburger provides a sobering account of the decades-long pattern of declining public funding of higher education. This reality has led to unprecedented increases in tuition and has placed public institutions at a disadvantage in student and faculty recruitment. This is the first hint of concern in this largely triumphalist work. If Shulenburger's analysis is correct, even ","PeriodicalId":294866,"journal":{"name":"Planning for higher education","volume":"15 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2013-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"127538950","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 14

Planning for Environmental Sustainability : Learning from LEED and the USGBC 环境可持续性规划:向LEED和USGBC学习

Planning for higher education

Pub Date : 2012-10-01 DOI: 10.21427/D7GS5C

S. Chance

The author analyzes the relationship between the US Green Building Council and higher education by examining campus use of LEED credits over time, and also suggests that the USGBC provides a model for large-scale learning organizations. Since its founding in 1993, the U.S. Green Building Council (USGBC) has made noteworthy strides toward its stated goal of transforming the nation's construction industry. The Washington, DC-based nonprofit organization created the LEED[R] Green Building Rating system to support environmentally sustainable construction. The system spurs demand for green knowledge and green technologies in an overarching effort to grow the nation's capacity to produce green buildings. In this quest, LEED also provides building owners with an incentive for participating and for providing "Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design." A critical aspect of LEED is that it uses principles of encouragement rather than enforcement (McDonough and Braungart 2002). Participation in LEED is voluntary and carries a level of social prestige. LEED also uses an incremental approach that grows out of what we already know how to do. As innovative techniques are tested and then integrated into mainstream practice, the USGBC raises the bar by requiring new registrants to seek more rigorous standards and higher point thresholds. The LEED system engages interested parties in providing the resources of time, money, research, and development that are necessary to foster innovation. Thus, those who elect to participate help carry the up-front cost of innovation. These investments help make new approaches viable for widespread use. The cost of constructing to a higher standard makes good sense on college campuses, where buildings need to last 60 years or more and operating costs are notoriously high (Palmese 2009). Today the USGBC offers an ever-expanding range of programs tailored to specific user groups, including higher education. As one of LEED's largest user groups, higher education has helped the system evolve (Fedrizzi 2009). However, there is ample room to expand higher education's contribution to the green construction knowledge base. Addressing pressing social issues is a core purpose of academe, and this issue warrants increased and immediate attention (Kerr 1995; Levin 2003; Rhodes 2001). Higher education's role in LEED has concentrated on two main areas: using LEED in the construction of campus buildings and serving as USGBC members. Members of the USGBC (2009a) represent all segments of the construction industry, and their various forms of engagement help refine the system. Changes are "consensus-based and market-driven" (USGBC 2009a, p. xi). Together, the USGBC's members define targets, goals, and agendas for the organization to meet. Members volunteer time, effort, and expertise to help establish and cultivate LEED programs. Gauging how well LEED works for members and for users of the system is critical to protecting the investments they

作者分析了美国绿色建筑委员会与高等教育之间的关系，通过调查校园对LEED学分的使用情况，并建议USGBC为大型学习型组织提供一个模型。自1993年成立以来，美国绿色建筑委员会(USGBC)在实现其改变美国建筑业的既定目标方面取得了显著的进步。总部位于华盛顿特区的非营利组织创建了LEED绿色建筑评级系统，以支持环境可持续建筑。该系统刺激了对绿色知识和绿色技术的需求，从而全面提高了国家生产绿色建筑的能力。在这个过程中，LEED还为建筑业主提供了参与和提供“能源与环境设计领导”的激励。LEED的一个关键方面是它采用鼓励原则而不是强制原则(McDonough and Braungart 2002)。参与LEED是自愿的，具有一定的社会威望。LEED还使用了一种增量方法，这种方法是从我们已经知道如何做的事情中发展出来的。随着创新技术被测试并融入主流实践，USGBC要求新注册者寻求更严格的标准和更高的积分门槛，从而提高了门槛。LEED系统让利益相关方参与进来，为促进创新提供必要的时间、金钱、研究和开发资源。因此，那些选择参与的人帮助承担了创新的前期成本。这些投资有助于使新方法能够广泛使用。在大学校园里，建造更高标准的建筑的成本是有道理的，因为大学校园里的建筑需要持续60年或更长时间，而且运营成本是出了名的高(Palmese 2009)。今天，USGBC为包括高等教育在内的特定用户群体提供了范围不断扩大的项目。作为LEED最大的用户群体之一，高等教育促进了该体系的发展(Fedrizzi 2009)。然而，高等教育对绿色建筑知识库的贡献还有很大的空间。解决紧迫的社会问题是学术的核心目的，这个问题需要增加和立即关注(Kerr 1995;莱文2003;罗兹2001)。高等教育在LEED中的作用主要集中在两个方面:在校园建筑的建设中使用LEED，并成为USGBC的成员。USGBC (2009a)的成员代表了建筑行业的各个部门，他们以各种形式参与，帮助完善该体系。变化是“基于共识和市场驱动的”(USGBC 2009a, p. xi)。USGBC的成员共同确定组织要实现的目标、目标和议程。会员自愿奉献时间、精力和专业知识来帮助建立和培养LEED项目。衡量LEED对会员和系统用户的效果如何，对于保护他们正在进行的投资至关重要。本文调查了该系统在大学中的受欢迎程度，探讨了优势、劣势和成本问题，并确定了大学使用LEED的趋势。了解该系统的优点和缺点可以帮助LEED用户和USGBC完善该系统并对其进行使用。此外，由于USGBC代表了一个成功的“学习型组织”，它为转型变革提供了一个有效的规划模型(Birnbaum 1988;戈尔曼2009)。大学将其作为一个先例而受益。美国绿色建筑委员会的变革实践统计分析表明，随着时间的推移，大学的LEED评级和积分总数有所增加(Chance 2010b)。他们还指出，“能源和大气”这一类别在决定大学所取得的评级方面是最重要的。这些发现表明，这个排名系统是名副其实的(通过奖励对“能源和环境设计”的关注)，并且有一定程度的组织学习正在发生。…

{"title":"Planning for Environmental Sustainability : Learning from LEED and the USGBC","authors":"S. Chance","doi":"10.21427/D7GS5C","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21427/D7GS5C","url":null,"abstract":"The author analyzes the relationship between the US Green Building Council and higher education by examining campus use of LEED credits over time, and also suggests that the USGBC provides a model for large-scale learning organizations. Since its founding in 1993, the U.S. Green Building Council (USGBC) has made noteworthy strides toward its stated goal of transforming the nation's construction industry. The Washington, DC-based nonprofit organization created the LEED[R] Green Building Rating system to support environmentally sustainable construction. The system spurs demand for green knowledge and green technologies in an overarching effort to grow the nation's capacity to produce green buildings. In this quest, LEED also provides building owners with an incentive for participating and for providing \"Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design.\" A critical aspect of LEED is that it uses principles of encouragement rather than enforcement (McDonough and Braungart 2002). Participation in LEED is voluntary and carries a level of social prestige. LEED also uses an incremental approach that grows out of what we already know how to do. As innovative techniques are tested and then integrated into mainstream practice, the USGBC raises the bar by requiring new registrants to seek more rigorous standards and higher point thresholds. The LEED system engages interested parties in providing the resources of time, money, research, and development that are necessary to foster innovation. Thus, those who elect to participate help carry the up-front cost of innovation. These investments help make new approaches viable for widespread use. The cost of constructing to a higher standard makes good sense on college campuses, where buildings need to last 60 years or more and operating costs are notoriously high (Palmese 2009). Today the USGBC offers an ever-expanding range of programs tailored to specific user groups, including higher education. As one of LEED's largest user groups, higher education has helped the system evolve (Fedrizzi 2009). However, there is ample room to expand higher education's contribution to the green construction knowledge base. Addressing pressing social issues is a core purpose of academe, and this issue warrants increased and immediate attention (Kerr 1995; Levin 2003; Rhodes 2001). Higher education's role in LEED has concentrated on two main areas: using LEED in the construction of campus buildings and serving as USGBC members. Members of the USGBC (2009a) represent all segments of the construction industry, and their various forms of engagement help refine the system. Changes are \"consensus-based and market-driven\" (USGBC 2009a, p. xi). Together, the USGBC's members define targets, goals, and agendas for the organization to meet. Members volunteer time, effort, and expertise to help establish and cultivate LEED programs. Gauging how well LEED works for members and for users of the system is critical to protecting the investments they ","PeriodicalId":294866,"journal":{"name":"Planning for higher education","volume":"42 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2012-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"115351403","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 16

The American College Town 美国大学城

Planning for higher education

Pub Date : 2009-10-01 DOI: 10.5860/choice.47-1043

Blake Gumprecht

The American College Town by Blake Gumpreoht University of Massachusetts Press 2008 438 pages ISBN: 978-1-55849-671-2 Reviewed by M. Perry Chapman In the preface to his book The American College Town, Blake Gumprecht asserts that he was compelled to write it after he discovered that no book specifically dedicated to college towns had ever been published. Those of us who have a fascination with college towns should be glad that he gave in to that compulsion. Gumprecht adeptly draws from the factors that make college towns such unique places among American communities. His unabashedly personal take on the college town is seasoned by his own experience in several such communities - as a youngster, an undergraduate, a Ph.D. candidate, a reporter, a university librarian, and, currently, an associate professor and chair of a university geography department. He has experienced college towns from almost every angle. The book is an illuminating read for anyone drawn to a good yarn about what makes college towns the idiosyncratic places that they invariably turn out to be. Moreover, Gumprecht's reportorial instincts bring life to the history, social patterns, personalities, and politics that define the localities he has chosen to discuss. His role as a geography scholar gives dimension to what college towns mean in the larger fabric of American places and, importantly, to the colleges and universities around which they have grown. This combination of perspectives plays out in the organization of the book. The caveat at the beginning is that the book focuses on "towns where colleges are clearly dominant" (p. 1). Thematic case studies concentrate on small cities that host large, complex universities with undergraduate enrollments that are "at least 20 percent of a town's population" (p. 2). The story lines are built around the powerful, and sometimes overwhelming, impact that large universities and their populations and policies have on the small to mid-sized towns around them. He avoids large cities where the influence of the colleges in their midst is diluted by the scale and multiplicity of forces at play. Still, Gumprecht's chosen model makes enormous headway in dissecting the college town and its complicated relationship with the institution in its midst. The introductory chapter, "Defining the College Town," is an overview filled with history, observations, and facts describing the general characteristics of college towns in the United States. Readers of this journal will find information they intuitively recognize: college towns tend to be more liberal, cosmopolitan, and eccentric than the larger regions in which they are located; they have more youthful, better educated, and more affluent white-collar populations than most "regular" towns; they have more transient resident populations and more economic disparities within those populations. A sobering statistic is that nearly a quarter of the residents of the college towns studied live below the feder

《美国大学城》作者:布莱克·甘普雷希特马萨诸塞大学出版社2008年438页ISBN: 978-1-55849-671-2书评作者:M.佩里·查普曼在《美国大学城》一书的序言中，布莱克·甘普雷希特声称，在他发现没有专门针对大学城的书出版后，他被迫写了这本书。我们这些对大学城着迷的人应该为他屈服于这种冲动而感到高兴。冈普雷希特巧妙地借鉴了使大学城在美国社区中如此独特的因素。他对大学城毫不掩饰的个人看法是通过他自己在几个这样的社区的经历来丰富的——作为一个年轻人，一个本科生，一个博士候选人，一个记者，一个大学图书管理员，现在是一个大学地理系的副教授和主席。他几乎从各个角度体验过大学城。对于那些被大学城的独特之处吸引的人来说，这本书是一本启发性的读物。此外，冈普雷希特的报道本能为他选择讨论的地方的历史、社会模式、人物和政治带来了生命。作为一名地理学者，他为大学城在美国更大范围内的意义提供了维度，更重要的是，他也为大学城赖以成长的学院和大学提供了维度。这种观点的结合在这本书的组织中发挥了作用。开头的警告是，这本书关注的是“大学明显占主导地位的城镇”(第1页)。主题案例研究集中在拥有大型复杂大学的小城市，这些大学的本科生人数“至少占城镇人口的20%”(第2页)。故事情节围绕着大型大学及其人口和政策对周围中小城镇的强大，有时甚至是压倒性的影响展开。他避开大城市，因为在大城市中，大学的影响力被各种力量的规模和多样性所稀释。尽管如此，冈普雷希特选择的模型在剖析大学城及其与大学之间的复杂关系方面取得了巨大进展。引言一章“定义大学城”是一个充满历史、观察和事实的概述，描述了美国大学城的一般特征。这本杂志的读者会发现他们直觉上认识到的信息:大学城往往比他们所在的更大的地区更自由、更国际化、更古怪;与大多数“普通”城镇相比，它们拥有更多年轻、受过更好教育、更富裕的白领人口;他们有更多的暂住人口，这些人口之间的经济差距也更大。一项发人深省的统计数据显示，在所研究的大学城中，近四分之一的居民生活在联邦贫困线以下，是全国贫困线的两倍。我们被提醒，大学城拥有与其规模不成比例的文化生活质量，但当拥有旺盛学生群体的庞大机构与寻求平静公民生活的常住人口发生冲突时，紧张局势不可避免地会出现。冈普雷希特指出，当代大学城中有70%的学院是在南北战争和第二次世界大战之间建立的，在美国地理和社会经济发展最强劲的时期之一，学术团体成为美国公民结构不可分割的一部分。尽管大学城是独一无二的，正如冈普雷希特多次重申的那样，它对美国人的生活产生了与其数量不成比例的根本性影响。《美国大学城》以八个主题章节为中心，每个章节都有一个关于特定城镇及其大学的案例讨论，冈普雷希特认为这是本章主题的原型。…

{"title":"The American College Town","authors":"Blake Gumprecht","doi":"10.5860/choice.47-1043","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5860/choice.47-1043","url":null,"abstract":"The American College Town by Blake Gumpreoht University of Massachusetts Press 2008 438 pages ISBN: 978-1-55849-671-2 Reviewed by M. Perry Chapman In the preface to his book The American College Town, Blake Gumprecht asserts that he was compelled to write it after he discovered that no book specifically dedicated to college towns had ever been published. Those of us who have a fascination with college towns should be glad that he gave in to that compulsion. Gumprecht adeptly draws from the factors that make college towns such unique places among American communities. His unabashedly personal take on the college town is seasoned by his own experience in several such communities - as a youngster, an undergraduate, a Ph.D. candidate, a reporter, a university librarian, and, currently, an associate professor and chair of a university geography department. He has experienced college towns from almost every angle. The book is an illuminating read for anyone drawn to a good yarn about what makes college towns the idiosyncratic places that they invariably turn out to be. Moreover, Gumprecht's reportorial instincts bring life to the history, social patterns, personalities, and politics that define the localities he has chosen to discuss. His role as a geography scholar gives dimension to what college towns mean in the larger fabric of American places and, importantly, to the colleges and universities around which they have grown. This combination of perspectives plays out in the organization of the book. The caveat at the beginning is that the book focuses on \"towns where colleges are clearly dominant\" (p. 1). Thematic case studies concentrate on small cities that host large, complex universities with undergraduate enrollments that are \"at least 20 percent of a town's population\" (p. 2). The story lines are built around the powerful, and sometimes overwhelming, impact that large universities and their populations and policies have on the small to mid-sized towns around them. He avoids large cities where the influence of the colleges in their midst is diluted by the scale and multiplicity of forces at play. Still, Gumprecht's chosen model makes enormous headway in dissecting the college town and its complicated relationship with the institution in its midst. The introductory chapter, \"Defining the College Town,\" is an overview filled with history, observations, and facts describing the general characteristics of college towns in the United States. Readers of this journal will find information they intuitively recognize: college towns tend to be more liberal, cosmopolitan, and eccentric than the larger regions in which they are located; they have more youthful, better educated, and more affluent white-collar populations than most \"regular\" towns; they have more transient resident populations and more economic disparities within those populations. A sobering statistic is that nearly a quarter of the residents of the college towns studied live below the feder","PeriodicalId":294866,"journal":{"name":"Planning for higher education","volume":"40 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2009-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"133908690","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 98

Higher Education and the New Society 高等教育与新社会

Planning for higher education

Pub Date : 2009-07-01 DOI: 10.1353/book.3345

Thomas C. Longin

Higher Education and the New Society by George Keller Johns Hopkins University Press 2008 188 pages ISBN: 978-0-8018-9031-4 Reviewed by Thomas C. Longin George Keller needs no introduction to Society of College and University Planning (SCUP) members or readers of Planning for Higher Education (PHE). Most of us knew him as the father of "academic planning;" the author of Academic Strategy (Keller 1983), likely the most influential book ever in the field; and the founding and long-time editor of PHE. And yet, it is important to keep in mind who George was and all that he accomplished in the realm of academic planning as one ventures into this, his last book. Certainly not his greatest literary accomplishment, this book must still be counted as a monumental attainment - monumentala its call for radical structural change in American higher education and monumental because it was written while George carried on a valiant struggle with leukemia. The book, not published until shortly after his death, is superbly written and intentionally provocative; it manifests George's passion for and dedication to higher education as well as his willingness to offer radical solutions for difficult challenges. For those who had the privilege of hearing George Keller present at SCUP annual meetings in his later years, the landscape of this book really an extended essay - will be familiar. Fascinated as he was with educa donai change, in this little book he is sharply focused on the breadth, magnitude, and pace of contemporary social change. He had earlier concluded that American higher education needed to recognize "that the society has been going through revolutionary changes and that new, outside forces require educators to rethink and redesign some of their operations" (p. xi). Here, while defending American higher education against charges that it has persistently resisted change - he clearly delineates numerous significant changes - he nonetheless chides his colleagues about the kind of change initiated in contrast to the kind needed: "Change in higher education can no longer be incremental. It must be fundamental and structural" (p. xii). After lamenting the fact that most historical analyses of American higher education have been "remarkably insular" (p. 3) - that is, detached from their full social and historical context Keller identifies two kinds of social transformation with which American higher education needs to deal: (1 ) the movement away from a more agrarian, small town, local, and self-reliant society toward a more urban, corporate, educated, liberated, and international social life with greater emphasis on "equality of gender, race, and ethnicity, dependence on numerous entitlement programs, lessened moral taboos, and e-mail and Web pages" (p. 5) and (2) a more recent "collection of fundamental shifts, new conditions, technological innovations, and changing behaviors" (p. 6). Keller devotes nearly half of the book to cataloguing and chronicling a pl

高等教育和新社会由乔治·凯勒约翰·霍普金斯大学出版社2008年188页ISBN: 978-0-8018-9031-4评论由托马斯·c·朗金乔治·凯勒不需要介绍学院和大学规划协会(SCUP)的成员或读者规划高等教育(PHE)。我们大多数人都知道他是“学术规划”之父;他是学术战略(academic Strategy, Keller 1983)的作者，这可能是该领域有史以来最有影响力的书;也是PHE的创始人和长期编辑。然而，重要的是要记住乔治是谁，以及他在学术规划领域所取得的成就，就像我们冒险进入他的最后一本书一样。这本书当然不是他最伟大的文学成就，但它仍然被认为是一项不朽的成就——不朽的原因在于它呼吁美国高等教育进行根本性的结构性变革，不朽的原因在于它是在乔治与白血病勇敢斗争的时候写成的。这本书，直到他死后不久才出版，写得非常好，故意挑衅;它体现了乔治对高等教育的热情和奉献，以及他愿意为困难的挑战提供激进的解决方案。对于那些有幸在George Keller晚年出席SCUP年度会议的人来说，这本书的景观——一篇延伸的文章——将会很熟悉。在这本小书中，他对当代社会变革的广度、幅度和速度十分关注。他早些时候得出的结论是，美国高等教育需要认识到“社会正在经历革命性的变化，新的外部力量要求教育工作者重新思考和重新设计他们的一些业务”(第11页)。在为美国高等教育抵制变革的指责辩护的同时——他清楚地描述了许多重要的变革——他仍然指责他的同事们，这种变革是主动发起的，而不是需要的:“高等教育的变革不能再是渐进式的。它必须是根本性的和结构性的”(第十二页)。在哀叹大多数对美国高等教育的历史分析都是“非常孤立的”(第三页)——也就是说，脱离了它们完整的社会和历史背景之后，凯勒确定了美国高等教育需要应对的两种社会转型:(1)从一个更加农业化、小城镇化、地方性和自力更生的社会转向一个更加都市化、企业化、受教育化、解放化和国际化的社会生活，更加强调“性别、种族和民族的平等，对众多权利计划的依赖，道德禁忌的减少，以及电子邮件和网页的依赖”(第5页);(2)更近期的“一系列基本转变、新条件、技术创新、和行为的改变”(第6页)。凯勒用了将近一半的篇幅来编目和记录在他看来正在侵蚀美国社会结构的大量社会变化。人口结构的变化比比皆是:从发达国家生育率的下降到许多国家人口“不可阻挡的老龄化”(第10页)，到美国迅速增长的(几乎不受控制的)移民，再到核心家庭的“崩溃”(第19页)和传统家庭生活的衰落，所有这些都带来了难以计数的可怕后果。变革的第二个驱动因素是技术，或者在凯勒看来，是20世纪的通信(数字)革命，它对高等教育的研究和教学产生了无处不在的影响。凯勒认为，经济变革被广泛认为是社会变革的第三个驱动力，并指出“近几十年来美国经济的增长是一部惊人成功的编年史”(第41页)。他特别关注了20世纪70年代——他认为这是自工业主义在美国展开以来发生的最大变革的十年——他列举了全球竞争和国际恐怖主义的兴起;过多的“错误、失误和失败”(p. ...)

{"title":"Higher Education and the New Society","authors":"Thomas C. Longin","doi":"10.1353/book.3345","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1353/book.3345","url":null,"abstract":"Higher Education and the New Society by George Keller Johns Hopkins University Press 2008 188 pages ISBN: 978-0-8018-9031-4 Reviewed by Thomas C. Longin George Keller needs no introduction to Society of College and University Planning (SCUP) members or readers of Planning for Higher Education (PHE). Most of us knew him as the father of \"academic planning;\" the author of Academic Strategy (Keller 1983), likely the most influential book ever in the field; and the founding and long-time editor of PHE. And yet, it is important to keep in mind who George was and all that he accomplished in the realm of academic planning as one ventures into this, his last book. Certainly not his greatest literary accomplishment, this book must still be counted as a monumental attainment - monumentala its call for radical structural change in American higher education and monumental because it was written while George carried on a valiant struggle with leukemia. The book, not published until shortly after his death, is superbly written and intentionally provocative; it manifests George's passion for and dedication to higher education as well as his willingness to offer radical solutions for difficult challenges. For those who had the privilege of hearing George Keller present at SCUP annual meetings in his later years, the landscape of this book really an extended essay - will be familiar. Fascinated as he was with educa donai change, in this little book he is sharply focused on the breadth, magnitude, and pace of contemporary social change. He had earlier concluded that American higher education needed to recognize \"that the society has been going through revolutionary changes and that new, outside forces require educators to rethink and redesign some of their operations\" (p. xi). Here, while defending American higher education against charges that it has persistently resisted change - he clearly delineates numerous significant changes - he nonetheless chides his colleagues about the kind of change initiated in contrast to the kind needed: \"Change in higher education can no longer be incremental. It must be fundamental and structural\" (p. xii). After lamenting the fact that most historical analyses of American higher education have been \"remarkably insular\" (p. 3) - that is, detached from their full social and historical context Keller identifies two kinds of social transformation with which American higher education needs to deal: (1 ) the movement away from a more agrarian, small town, local, and self-reliant society toward a more urban, corporate, educated, liberated, and international social life with greater emphasis on \"equality of gender, race, and ethnicity, dependence on numerous entitlement programs, lessened moral taboos, and e-mail and Web pages\" (p. 5) and (2) a more recent \"collection of fundamental shifts, new conditions, technological innovations, and changing behaviors\" (p. 6). Keller devotes nearly half of the book to cataloguing and chronicling a pl","PeriodicalId":294866,"journal":{"name":"Planning for higher education","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2009-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"122513358","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 27

University-Community Relationships. 大学的人际关系。

Planning for higher education

Pub Date : 1900-01-01 DOI: 10.4135/9781483346427.n568

I. Fink

引用次数: 2