{"title":"President Elwood Wheeler's Retrenchment Plan","authors":"John B. Honey","doi":"10.2307/40225002","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2307/40225002","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":87494,"journal":{"name":"AAUP bulletin : quarterly publication of the American Association of University Professors","volume":"63 1","pages":"17"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"1977-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.2307/40225002","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"69761413","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}
NOTE: To the charge that these speculations lack supporting data, the author, an irascible fifty-year-old Professor of English, pleads innocent by reason of sanity, for no sane man would spend time doing research on the behavior of academic officials when he could be studying Don Quixote or Huckleberry Finn. To the charge that in view of the subjects they deal with these speculations are shockingly lacking in profanity, he pleads, like Spiro Agnew, nolo contendere.
{"title":"We've Got a Problem: Impolite Speculations on Higher Education.","authors":"Edward L. Galligan","doi":"10.2307/40225014","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2307/40225014","url":null,"abstract":"NOTE: To the charge that these speculations lack supporting data, the author, an irascible fifty-year-old Professor of English, pleads innocent by reason of sanity, for no sane man would spend time doing research on the behavior of academic officials when he could be studying Don Quixote or Huckleberry Finn. To the charge that in view of the subjects they deal with these speculations are shockingly lacking in profanity, he pleads, like Spiro Agnew, nolo contendere.","PeriodicalId":87494,"journal":{"name":"AAUP bulletin : quarterly publication of the American Association of University Professors","volume":"63 1","pages":"50"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"1977-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.2307/40225014","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"69761937","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}
Most professors and administrators are aware that academic freedom is in danger of being brushed aside by a public that has little understanding of what is at stake. They may be only marginally aware that the defense of academic freedom is endangered by certain confusions concerning the nature of academic freedom, the criteria for its violation, and the structure of an adequate justification for claims to it. These confusions were enshrined in some of the central documents on the subject, including the 1940 Statement on Academic Freedom and Tenure, agreed upon by the American Association of University Professors and the Association of American Colleges and endorsed by many professional organizations. Careful analysis of them will not do away with debate; it will bring the debate into focus, so that attacks on academic freedom can be appraised as near or far away from the center of the target and can then be appropriately answered. Nearly all the contemporary writing on academic freedom consists of attack or defense. The Concept of Academic Freedom is the first book to deal exclusively with fundamental conceptual issues underlying the battle. In the discussion of these issues, certain philosophical positions crystallize: radical versus liberal conceptions of the status and function of university teachers, specific versus general theories of academic freedom, consequential versus nonconsequential theories of justification. Partisans (and enemies) of academic freedom would do well to decide on which side of these divisions they stand, or how they would mediate between sides. Otherwise many questions will remain unclear: What is under discussion-a special right peculiar to academics or a general right that is especially important to academics? Is justification of that right possible? Can the right be derived from other rights, or from the theory of justice or of democratic society? Or is the argument for academic freedom one that more properly turns on the consequences for society as a whole if that freedom is not protected? The essays in this book explore these and other problems concerning the defense of academic freedom by radicals, the justification for disruption on campus, and the control of research. Contributors to the volume include Hugo Adam Bedau, Bertram H. Davis, Milton Fisk, Graham Hughes, Alan Pasch, Hardy E. Jones, Alexander Ritchie, Amelie Oksenberg Rorty, Rolf Sartorius, T. M. Scanlon, Richard Schmitt, John R. Searle, Judith Jarvis Thomson, and William Van Alstyne. All are outstanding in their fields. Many have had practical experience in the legal profession or with the American Association of University Professors on the issue of academic freedom.
{"title":"The concept of academic freedom","authors":"D. Fellman, Edmund L. Pincoffs","doi":"10.2307/40225056","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2307/40225056","url":null,"abstract":"Most professors and administrators are aware that academic freedom is in danger of being brushed aside by a public that has little understanding of what is at stake. They may be only marginally aware that the defense of academic freedom is endangered by certain confusions concerning the nature of academic freedom, the criteria for its violation, and the structure of an adequate justification for claims to it. These confusions were enshrined in some of the central documents on the subject, including the 1940 Statement on Academic Freedom and Tenure, agreed upon by the American Association of University Professors and the Association of American Colleges and endorsed by many professional organizations. Careful analysis of them will not do away with debate; it will bring the debate into focus, so that attacks on academic freedom can be appraised as near or far away from the center of the target and can then be appropriately answered. Nearly all the contemporary writing on academic freedom consists of attack or defense. The Concept of Academic Freedom is the first book to deal exclusively with fundamental conceptual issues underlying the battle. In the discussion of these issues, certain philosophical positions crystallize: radical versus liberal conceptions of the status and function of university teachers, specific versus general theories of academic freedom, consequential versus nonconsequential theories of justification. Partisans (and enemies) of academic freedom would do well to decide on which side of these divisions they stand, or how they would mediate between sides. Otherwise many questions will remain unclear: What is under discussion-a special right peculiar to academics or a general right that is especially important to academics? Is justification of that right possible? Can the right be derived from other rights, or from the theory of justice or of democratic society? Or is the argument for academic freedom one that more properly turns on the consequences for society as a whole if that freedom is not protected? The essays in this book explore these and other problems concerning the defense of academic freedom by radicals, the justification for disruption on campus, and the control of research. Contributors to the volume include Hugo Adam Bedau, Bertram H. Davis, Milton Fisk, Graham Hughes, Alan Pasch, Hardy E. Jones, Alexander Ritchie, Amelie Oksenberg Rorty, Rolf Sartorius, T. M. Scanlon, Richard Schmitt, John R. Searle, Judith Jarvis Thomson, and William Van Alstyne. All are outstanding in their fields. Many have had practical experience in the legal profession or with the American Association of University Professors on the issue of academic freedom.","PeriodicalId":87494,"journal":{"name":"AAUP bulletin : quarterly publication of the American Association of University Professors","volume":"63 1","pages":"323"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"1977-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.2307/40225056","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"69762594","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}
{"title":"New Directions for Institutional Research: Evaluating Statewide Boards","authors":"C. Hickman, R. Berdahl, Eugene C. Lee, F. Bowen","doi":"10.2307/40225059","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2307/40225059","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":87494,"journal":{"name":"AAUP bulletin : quarterly publication of the American Association of University Professors","volume":"63 1","pages":"328"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"1977-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.2307/40225059","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"69762606","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}
A. Dress, D. Netzer, Henry H. H. Remak, Gunter N. Franz, C. Landauer
{"title":"More on Academic Freedom in the Federal Republic of Germany","authors":"A. Dress, D. Netzer, Henry H. H. Remak, Gunter N. Franz, C. Landauer","doi":"10.2307/40225045","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2307/40225045","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":87494,"journal":{"name":"AAUP bulletin : quarterly publication of the American Association of University Professors","volume":"63 1","pages":"293"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"1977-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.2307/40225045","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"69761904","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}
{"title":"More on College Grades.","authors":"Michael E. Arrington","doi":"10.2307/40225015","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2307/40225015","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":87494,"journal":{"name":"AAUP bulletin : quarterly publication of the American Association of University Professors","volume":"63 1","pages":"53"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"1977-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.2307/40225015","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"69762001","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}
C. Stern, W. J. Kilgore, David M. Rabban, Abraham D. Sofaer
{"title":"On Processing Complaints of Discrimination on the Basis of Sex","authors":"C. Stern, W. J. Kilgore, David M. Rabban, Abraham D. Sofaer","doi":"10.2307/40225034","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2307/40225034","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":87494,"journal":{"name":"AAUP bulletin : quarterly publication of the American Association of University Professors","volume":"63 1","pages":"231-236"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"1977-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.2307/40225034","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"69761817","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}
Transition from rapid growth to the stationary state in universities and colleges is fraught with dangers. The one most often discussed is "tenuring in," whereby one department after another quickly becomes frozen in with its present faculty. The perils are particularly grave for those institutions born in the sixties, which recruited a young faculty from the pool of fresh Ph.D.'s simultaneously produced in our graduate schools. But the problem of institutional ossification is compounded by an additional response to slow growth or retrenchment. The stagnation of enrollments in an institution usually signifies retrenchment for some departments, and continued expansion for others. Institutions then face the dismal situation of internecine struggles over faculty-line reallocations, a problem which further aggravates and compounds the dilemma posed by "tenuring in." Everyone keeps a close watch over the barometer of the student-to-faculty ratio, and professors have to increase their offerings of large courses while temporarily abandoning their more specialized or innovative ones, or dropping them altogether. In a recent issue of this Bulletin, John B. Haney, under the guise of a piece of dark humor, has opened up a vista on what professors can expect to happen to them in the future when their universities are completely "tenured in."1 What is offered here is a suggestion which could make virtue out of necessity by favoring institutional and departmental flexibility and rehabilitating interdisciplinary studies and curricular experiments in an environment that is inimical to them. In almost every area of scholarship, the great achievement of American universities in the 1960's was the development of interdisciplinary studies. This was the area of the frontiers of research, where revolutionary ideas have been germinated by cross-fertilization, where Nobel prizes were won, and where American university research took the lead over the much more compartmentalized research work carried on in older European universities. In many cases the teaching of interdisciplinary subjects has been made possible by tenuous interdepartmental agreements. These agreements over the sharing of professors, students, and courses in interdepartmental and cross-disciplinary ventures are now being jeopardized, in a period of retrenchment, by the normal practice of departmental accounting of student-to-faculty ratios. When departments' overall enrollments do not look good, they begin to reconsider such pre-existing arrangements, and they become resistant to the development of new ones, because the student-to-faculty ratio becomes the only ar-
高校从高速增长到停滞状态的转变充满了危险。最常被讨论的是“终身聘用”，即一个又一个院系很快就会被现有的教员冻结在一起。对于那些诞生于60年代的机构来说，风险尤其严重，因为它们从研究生院同时培养出来的新鲜博士中招募了年轻的教员。但是，对经济增长缓慢或紧缩的额外反应，加剧了体制僵化的问题。一所学校的入学人数停滞不前通常意味着某些院系的缩减，而另一些院系的继续扩张。然后，各院校面临着在教员队伍重新分配问题上自相残杀的惨淡局面，这一问题进一步加剧并加剧了“终身聘用”带来的困境。每个人都密切关注着学生与教师比例的晴雨表，教授们不得不增加大课的开设，同时暂时放弃更专业或更创新的课程，或者干脆放弃这些课程。在最近一期的《简报》中，约翰·b·哈尼(John B. Haney)以一段黑色幽默为幌子，展望了当大学完全实行“终身教授制”时，教授们的未来会发生什么。我在这里提出的建议是，通过支持机构和部门的灵活性，在不利于跨学科研究和课程实验的环境中恢复跨学科研究和课程实验，使美德脱离必要性。在几乎每一个学术领域，美国大学在20世纪60年代的伟大成就都是跨学科研究的发展。这是研究的前沿领域，在这里，革命性的思想通过交叉受精萌发，诺贝尔奖在这里获得，在这里，美国大学的研究领先于老牌欧洲大学进行的更加分门别类的研究工作。在许多情况下，跨学科学科的教学是通过脆弱的部门间协议实现的。这些关于跨部门和跨学科项目中教授、学生和课程分配的协议，现在正因部门会计的学生与教师比例的正常做法而受到损害。当院系的总体招生情况不佳时，他们就会开始重新考虑现有的安排，并抵制新安排的发展，因为学生与教师的比例成了唯一的选择
{"title":"Flexibility in an Age of Zero Growth: A New Type of Faculty Appointment.","authors":"F. Mendels","doi":"10.2307/40225048","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2307/40225048","url":null,"abstract":"Transition from rapid growth to the stationary state in universities and colleges is fraught with dangers. The one most often discussed is \"tenuring in,\" whereby one department after another quickly becomes frozen in with its present faculty. The perils are particularly grave for those institutions born in the sixties, which recruited a young faculty from the pool of fresh Ph.D.'s simultaneously produced in our graduate schools. But the problem of institutional ossification is compounded by an additional response to slow growth or retrenchment. The stagnation of enrollments in an institution usually signifies retrenchment for some departments, and continued expansion for others. Institutions then face the dismal situation of internecine struggles over faculty-line reallocations, a problem which further aggravates and compounds the dilemma posed by \"tenuring in.\" Everyone keeps a close watch over the barometer of the student-to-faculty ratio, and professors have to increase their offerings of large courses while temporarily abandoning their more specialized or innovative ones, or dropping them altogether. In a recent issue of this Bulletin, John B. Haney, under the guise of a piece of dark humor, has opened up a vista on what professors can expect to happen to them in the future when their universities are completely \"tenured in.\"1 What is offered here is a suggestion which could make virtue out of necessity by favoring institutional and departmental flexibility and rehabilitating interdisciplinary studies and curricular experiments in an environment that is inimical to them. In almost every area of scholarship, the great achievement of American universities in the 1960's was the development of interdisciplinary studies. This was the area of the frontiers of research, where revolutionary ideas have been germinated by cross-fertilization, where Nobel prizes were won, and where American university research took the lead over the much more compartmentalized research work carried on in older European universities. In many cases the teaching of interdisciplinary subjects has been made possible by tenuous interdepartmental agreements. These agreements over the sharing of professors, students, and courses in interdepartmental and cross-disciplinary ventures are now being jeopardized, in a period of retrenchment, by the normal practice of departmental accounting of student-to-faculty ratios. When departments' overall enrollments do not look good, they begin to reconsider such pre-existing arrangements, and they become resistant to the development of new ones, because the student-to-faculty ratio becomes the only ar-","PeriodicalId":87494,"journal":{"name":"AAUP bulletin : quarterly publication of the American Association of University Professors","volume":"21 1","pages":"303"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"1977-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.2307/40225048","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"69761985","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}
{"title":"Correspondence: Faculty Changing Departments","authors":"H. Gesund","doi":"10.2307/40225009","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2307/40225009","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":87494,"journal":{"name":"AAUP bulletin : quarterly publication of the American Association of University Professors","volume":"122 1","pages":"39"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"1977-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.2307/40225009","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"69761622","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}
{"title":"Correspondence: Higher Education and Moral Development","authors":"G. W. Morgan","doi":"10.2307/40225006","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2307/40225006","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":87494,"journal":{"name":"AAUP bulletin : quarterly publication of the American Association of University Professors","volume":"7 1","pages":"37"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"1977-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.2307/40225006","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"69761556","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}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：