DOCSLIB.ORG

History of School of Economic, Political, and Policy Sciences, University of Texas, Dallas

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
History of School of Economic, Political, and Policy Sciences, University of Texas, Dallas History of School of Economic, Political, and Policy Sciences, University of Texas, Dallas. The history of the school cannot be separated from the history of university as whole, or indeed from that of the U T System and the state of Texas as a whole, so we will have to move back and forth between developments at the various levels over time. The Texas Legislature passed the act accepting the Southwest Center for Advanced Study, renaming it UTD, and making it a part of the U of Texas system in 1969. In fact, they passed it and then re-passed, with some changes. The act sought to affirm the legislature’s support for SCAS’s research program and for enhancing the technological potential of the area, and of Texas, but at the same contained important safeguards to assure schools already in the area that UTD would not compete with them. UTD was authorized to begin undergraduate programs in the social sciences from the Fall of 1975. The first President was Bryce Jordan. Jordan had a Ph. D. in music and had served as Vice President for Academic Affairs at U T Austin in the very difficult times of campus upheaval attending the Viet Nam war. He was installed as President July 1, 1971, having been vetted and approved by a faculty committee of scientists who had been part of SCAS. Lee J. Smith joined UTD a month later to serve as Dean of the Faculties. According to informal accounts, his task had been to assure that UTD had the most up to date computer assisted operational infrastructure then available, from the admissions process through the library. But when he suddenly left (with his secretary) in June, 1974, to become President of TSU at San Marcos, nothing had been put in place. Alexander Clark was hired from the LBJ School to replace him and serve as Academic Vice President. He also served as Acting Dean of the School of Social Sciences for a few months over the summer of 1975. The library did what it could under Edward Walters, its first director, and our registrar borrowed software from U T Arlington. The new programs were divided through four schools: Social Sciences, Arts and Humanities, Interdisciplinary Studies (also sometimes called Individual Studies). The schools of Natural Sciences and Mathematics, and Management already existed. Natural Sciences and Mathematics was formed by relabeling the programs of the Southwest Center for Advanced Study (more often referred to as SCAS). The school of Management had been formed in 1972. The internal policies and organization of the university were strongly influenced by outside constraints. Texas has no constitutional firewall between the legislature and the universities; the legislature can require anything and, in principle, the universities have to do. By the same token, the governor can exercise a line-item veto. The legislature appropriates the budget for each campus in the UT System separately, but if the governor dislikes an item, he can remove it, which Governor Clements did for a new university mainframe computer for UTD in about 1980. For UTD, the most important of these legislative constraints was what amounted to a “non--compete” understanding 1 with the higher education institutions in the area that already existed. The enabling legislation required that our admissions standards would be no lower than those of U T Austin, which necessarily meant that the would be substantially higher than any other institution in the Dallas-Fort Worth area, and the Coordinating Board assured that our graduate programs would not duplicate any already in the area, which why we lacked convention programs in Arts and Humanities as well in the social sciences. Our status as an upper level institution, taking only Juniors and Seniors (and hence not competing with the Community Colleges) was also a part of this, although this has been a practice in Texas for many new campuses, until they build up. For those recruiting new faculty, the required academic standards were a selling point, and for at least many of those who were recruited it was an attraction. The undergraduate programs in the School of Social Sciences were Anthropology, Geography, Economics, Geography, Government, and Sociology. Only one graduate program was authorized: Political Economy. The overall orientation of the new programs was articulated primarily by a group of new faculty from the humanities and social sciences Regina Kyle, Robert Plant Armstrong, Carolyne Galerstein, Alexander Clark, President Jordan, and others. There were two main watchwords: “interdisciplinarity” and a specific kind of “relevance” that included practicality and saliency. The advertisements for faculty positions in the social sciences also emphasized an interest in “phenomenology.” This primarily reflected the interests of Robert Armstrong, although Regina Kyle was probably also sympathetic to the orientation. Armstrong had previously been editor of the University of Arizona Press, which he made a major publisher in this tradition. The advertisements certainly conveyed the impression that something interesting and unexpected was happening in North Texas. Interdisciplinarity was the more widely prominent theme in our hiring advertisements and represented a stronger bond of common thinking between the pre-existing programs in the sciences and business, but did not have an agreed upon meaning in any but a negative sense. We would not have the conventional departments, isolated and self-contained, catering to equally isolated and self-contained groups of students. By the same token, we would not have the conventional courses in the conventional sequences, although what we would have was not at all agreed upon. “Relevance” was meant to designate the alternative. Courses would be on important topics, whether they fell with one discipline or across several, and curricula would be designed by combining courses around such topics whether or not they fell within one program or across several. Initial hiring for the social sciences was done mainly by Robert Armstrong and Alexander Clark. Armstrong had a PhD in Anthropology and was Professor of Anthropology. His area of expertise was African art, and he had a notable collection of Benin heads. Alex Clark had a PhD in Sociology and strength in the sociology of law. Alex once said that the search involved interviewing over two hundred prospective 2 faculty; both Clark and Armstrong traveled widely meeting candidates in various cities. For Armstrong this involved overcoming a very strong antipathy to flying, which he had acquired in the course of surviving the crash of passenger plane in south-east Asia. 1974-75 was a very bad year for faculty jobs nation-wide, although of course it would have varied by discipline. There must have been very large numbers of initial applications for every person interviewed. Most faculty hired were non-tenured, and Alex Clark has said they hired with the expectation that there would be substantial attrition in the first few years. Tenured faculty were brought to campus for interviews by a faculty committee drawn from the Natural Sciences and Mathematics. The committee included Polycarp Kush and Ivor Robinson. Dr. Kusch had shared the 1955 Nobel Prize in Physics, and had come to UTD a few years before from being the equivalent of Academic Vice President at Columbia, and finding that he preferred not to continue to confront student protests associated with the Viet Nam war and that University's policies regarding cooperation with the United States’ government in that connection. Total faculty in the University in the Fall of 1975 was about 217. Social Sciences began with 24 tenure track and tenured faculty. Since he was a Sociologist, Alex Clark should be regarded as the first social scientist hired with tenure. The second was Armstrong, both at the rank of Professor. Associate professors were Murray Leaf (Anthropology), John W. Sommer (Geography), Robert Firestine (Political Economy), Lawrence Redlinger (Sociology) and Stephen Weismann (Political Science). Weisman was hired without tenure. According to the 1976-77 catalog, the Assistant Professors were Geoffrey Alpert (Sociology), Marvin Cohen (Political Science), Francis J. Cummings (Political Science), Francine Daner (Anthropology), Rockwell Gray (Philosophy, but housed on the ground floor of Green), Donald Hicks (Sociology), Leanne Hinton (Linguistics and Music), Richard Hula (Political Science), Wayne Ruhter (Economics), Peter Skafte (Anthropology), Alex Stepick III (Anthropology), and Bernard Weinstein (Political Economy). Instructors (who had not completed their PhD’s at the time they began teaching here) were David Craigie (Sociology), Ronald Lah (Anthropology), Robert Norton (Economics), Paul Peretz (Political Science), David Raddock (Political Science, transferred from the Business school), and John Rees (Geography). In addition to beginning its undergraduate programs in its first two years, UTD also had to conduct a self-study for accreditation. We had been accredited by the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools, but only for the graduate programs. The self- study began in October 1974, with Daniel Harris, Professor of Chemistry, as its Executive Director and Chairman of the Self-Study Steering Committee. Unfortunately Dr. Harris became seriously ill in Spring of 1975, was hospitalized, and died in the summer of the same year. A basic organization had been agreed on, but nothing had actually been compiled. Vice President Clark appointed Murray Leaf to be the Executive Director, and Dimitri Lang and Wolfgang Rindler as co-chairs of the Steering Committee, all effective October 1, 1975. Professor Lang was the university electron microscopist, and Professor Rindler is a mathematical physicist. The Steering Committee was made up entirely of faculty, mainly from the former SCAS and the 3 Callier Center for Speech and Communication, which had also become part of the new university. The arrangement had an oddly useful effect; discussions of issues that came up in the self-study organization often led to the resolution of problems and issues that were emerging and creating difficulties in the emerging academic organization.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • What Are Kinship Terminologies, and Why Do We Care?: a Computational Approach To
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by Kent Academic Repository What are Kinship Terminologies, and Why do we Care?: A Computational Approach to Analysing Symbolic Domains Dwight Read, UCLA Murray Leaf, University of Texas, Dallas Michael Fischer, University of Kent, Canterbury, Corresponding Author, [email protected] Abstract Kinship is a fundamental feature and basis of human societies. We describe a set of computat ional tools and services, the Kinship Algebra Modeler, and the logic that underlies these. Thes e were developed to improve how we understand both the fundamental facts of kinship, and h ow people use kinship as a resource in their lives. Mathematical formalism applied to cultural concepts is more than an exercise in model building, as it provides a way to represent and exp lore logical consistency and implications. The logic underlying kinship is explored here thro ugh the kin term computations made by users of a terminology when computing the kinship r elation one person has to another by referring to a third person for whom each has a kin term relationship. Kinship Algebra Modeler provides a set of tools, services and an architecture to explore kinship terminologies and their properties in an accessible manner. Keywords Kinship, Algebra, Semantic Domains, Kinship Terminology, Theory Building 1 1. Introduction The Kinship Algebra Modeller (KAM) is a suite of open source software tools and services u nder development to support the elicitation and analysis of kinship terminologies, building al gebraic models of the relations structuring terminologies, and instantiating these models in lar ger contexts to better understand how people pragmatically interpret and employ the logic of kinship relations as a resource in their individual and collective lives.
    [Show full text]
  • Mathematical Modeling and Anthropology: Its Rationale, Past Successes and Future Directions
    Mathematical Modeling and Anthropology: Its Rationale, Past Successes and Future Directions Dwight Read, Organizer European Meeting on Cybernetics and System Research 2002 (EMCSR 2002) April 2 - 5, 2002, University of Vienna http://www.ai.univie.ac.at/emcsr/ Abstract When anthropologists talk about their discipline as a holistic study of human societies, particularly non-western societies, mathematics and mathematical modeling does not immediately come to mind, either to persons outside of anthropology and even to most anthropologists. What does mathematics have to do with the study of religious beliefs, ideologies, rituals, kinship and the like? Or more generally, What does mathematical modeling have to do with culture? The application of statistical methods usually makes sense to the questioner when it is explained that these methods relate to the study of human societies through examining patterns in empirical data on how people behave. What is less evident, though, is how mathematical thinking can be part of the way anthropologists reason about human societies and attempt to make sense of not just behavioral patterns, but the underlying cultural framework within which these behaviors are embedded. What is not widely recognized is the way theory in cultural anthropology and mathematical theory have been brought together, thereby constructing a dynamic interplay that helps elucidate what is meant by culture, its relationship to behavior and how the notion of culture relates to concepts and theories developed not only in anthropology but in related disciplines. The interplay is complex and its justification stems from the kind of logical inquiry that is the basis of mathematical reasoning.
    [Show full text]
  • Sample Chapter [PDF]
    SPECIAL ISSUE: CULTURAL EXPERT WITNESSING STUDIES IN LAW, POLITICS, AND SOCIETY Series Editors: Austin Sarat Recent Volumes: Volumes 1–2 : Edited by Rita J. Simon Volume 3: Edited by Steven Spitzer Volumes 4–9 : Edited by Steven Spitzer and Andrew S. Scull Volumes 10–16: Edited by Susan S. Sibey and Austin Sarat Volumes 17–33: Edited by Austin Sarat and Patricia Ewick Volumes 34–74: Edited by Austin Sarat STUDIES IN LAW, POLITICS, AND SOCIETY VOLUME 74 SPECIAL ISSUE: CULTURAL EXPERT WITNESSING EDITED BY AUSTIN SARAT Department of Law, Jurisprudence & Social Thought and Political Science, Amherst College, USA SPECIAL ISSUE EDITOR LEILA RODRIGUEZ Department of Anthropology, University of Cincinnati, USA United Kingdom – North America – Japan India – Malaysia – China Emerald Publishing Limited Howard House, Wagon Lane, Bingley BD16 1WA, UK First edition 2018 Copyright © 2018 Emerald Publishing Limited Reprints and permissions service Contact: [email protected] No part of this book may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, transmitted in any form or by any means electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise without either the prior written permission of the publisher or a licence permitting restricted copying issued in the UK by The Copyright Licensing Agency and in the USA by The Copyright Clearance Center. Any opinions expressed in the chapters are those of the authors. Whilst Emerald makes every effort to ensure the quality and accuracy of its content, Emerald makes no representation implied or otherwise, as to the chapters’ suitability and application and disclaims any warranties, express or implied, to their use. British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library ISBN: 978-1-78743-764-7 (Print) ISBN: 978-1-78743-763-0 (Online) ISBN: 978-1-78743-970-2 (Epub) ISSN: 1059-4337 (Series) In this latest edition of this highly successful research series, chapters explore expert witnessing in legal cases that invoke culture.
    [Show full text]
  • The Foundations of Mao Zedong's Political Thought 1917–1935
    The Foundations of Mao Zedong’s Political Thought The Foundations of Mao Zedong’s Political Thought 1917–1935 BRANTLY WOMACK The University Press of Hawaii ● Honolulu Open Access edition funded by the National Endowment for the Humanities / Andrew W. Mellon Foundation Humanities Open Book Program. Licensed under the terms of Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 In- ternational (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0), which permits readers to freely download and share the work in print or electronic format for non-commercial purposes, so long as credit is given to the author. Derivative works and commercial uses require per- mission from the publisher. For details, see https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/. The Cre- ative Commons license described above does not apply to any material that is separately copyrighted. Open Access ISBNs: 9780824879204 (PDF) 9780824879211 (EPUB) This version created: 17 May, 2019 Please visit www.hawaiiopen.org for more Open Access works from University of Hawai‘i Press. COPYRIGHT © 1982 BY THE UNIVERSITY PRESS OF HAWAII ALL RIGHTS RESERVED For Tang and Yi-chuang, and Ann, David, and Sarah Contents Dedication iv Acknowledgments vi Introduction vii 1 Mao before Marxism 1 2 Mao, the Party, and the National Revolution: 1923–1927 32 3 Rural Revolution: 1927–1931 83 4 Governing the Chinese Soviet Republic: 1931–1934 143 5 The Foundations of Mao Zedong’s Political Thought 186 Notes 203 v Acknowledgments The most pleasant task of a scholar is acknowledging the various sine quae non of one’s research. Two in particular stand out. First, the guidance of Tang Tsou, who has been my mentor since I began to study China at the University of Chicago.
    [Show full text]
  • Program Committee
    Welcome to Albuquerque, New Mexico Bienvenidos a Albuquerque, Nuevo Mexico SCCR 39th ANNUAL CONFERENCE of the SOCIETY for CROSS-CULTURAL RESEARCH SASci 6TH ANNUAL CONFERENCE of the SOCIETY for ANTHROPOLOGICAL SCIENCES AAACIG 1ST ANNUAL CONFERENCE of the AMERICAN ANTHROPOLOGICAL ASSOCIATION CHILDREN and CHILDHOOD INTEREST GROUP ALBUQUERQUE MARRIOTT HOTEL, 2101 Louisiana Boulevard NE Albuquerque, New Mexico, U.S.A. FEBRUARY 17-20, 2010 ww.sccr.org www.anthrosciences.org www.aaacig.org TABLE OF CONTENTS APPRECIATION …………………………………………………. P. 1 WELCOME …………………………………………..……. P. 2 DESCRIPTIONS OF SCCR, SASci, AND AAACIG ……… P. 4 MEETING FLOOR PLAN …………………………………………. P. 7 SPECIAL EVENTS AT A GLANCE ……………………………. P. 8 SCHEDULE OF EVENTS ………………………………………... P. 10 KEYNOTE SPEAKERS …………………………………………. P. 41 LIST OF SCCR/SASci/AAACIG REGISTRANTS ………….. P. 43 WELCOME LETTERS FROM OFFICIALS ……………….. P. 53 SCCR MEMBERSHIP …………………………………………. P. 57 SASci MEMBERSHIP …………………………………….…… P. 58 AAACIG MEMBERSHIP …………………………………………. P. 58 BLANK PAGES FOR NOTES ………………………………… P. 59 1 THANK YOU COFFEE HOUR/RECEPTION SPONSORSHIPS Provost Office, University of New Mexico Dean Office, College of Education, UNM Albuquerque Hispano Chamber of Commerce BOOKS FOR EXHIBIT/BENEFIT University of Chicago Press Left Coast Press Routledge Press LOCAL ORGANIZING COMMITTEE Jan Armstrong (Educational Psychology, UNM) (Committee Chair) Hadeel Al-Essa (Family Studies, UNM) David Atencio (Early Childhood Multicultural Education, UNM) Kate Fitzpatrick (Family Studies, UNM) Terri Flowerday (Educational
    [Show full text]
  • Focality and Extension in Kinship Essays in Memory of Harold W
    FOCALITY AND EXTENSION IN KINSHIP ESSAYS IN MEMORY OF HAROLD W. SCHEFFLER FOCALITY AND EXTENSION IN KINSHIP ESSAYS IN MEMORY OF HAROLD W. SCHEFFLER EDITED BY WARREN SHAPIRO Published by ANU Press The Australian National University Acton ACT 2601, Australia Email: [email protected] This title is also available online at press.anu.edu.au A catalogue record for this book is available from the National Library of Australia ISBN(s): 9781760461812 (print) 9781760461829 (eBook) This title is published under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial- NoDerivatives 4.0 International (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0). The full licence terms are available at creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ legalcode Cover design and layout by ANU Press. Cover photograph of Hal Scheffler by Ray Kelly. This edition © 2018 ANU Press To the memory of Harold Walter Scheffler, a compassionate man of the highest scholarly standards Contents List of Figures and Tables . ix Acknowledgements . xiii Contributors . xv Part I. Introduction: Hal Scheffler’s Extensionism in Historical Perspective and its Relevance to Current Controversies . 3 Warren Shapiro and Dwight Read Part II. The Battle Joined 1 . Hal Scheffler Versus David Schneider and His Admirers, in the Light of What We Now Know About Trobriand Kinship . 31 Warren Shapiro 2 . Extension Problem: Resolution Through an Unexpected Source . 59 Dwight Read Part III. Ethnographic Explorations of Extensionist Theory 3 . Action, Metaphor and Extensions in Kinship . 119 Andrew Strathern and Pamela J. Stewart 4 . Should I Stay or Should I Go? Hunter-Gatherer Networking Through Bilateral Kin . 133 Russell D. Greaves and Karen L.
    [Show full text]
  • Miskitu Kinship Terminological Fluidity and Idea Systems
    Persistent Cultures: Miskitu Kinship Terminological Fluidity and Idea Systems Stephen Lyon, Mark A. Jamieson and Michael D. Fischer 1 Abstract Kinship is understood dynamically and processually but kinship terminologies are remarkably stable idea systems. They provide cultural continuity over time and are more resistant to modification than many types of cultural instantiations. Miskitu speakers in Nicaragua, however, have adopted new kin terms that appear to have fundamentally changed the idea system used to generate their kin terms historically. The shape of the changes that have occurred in Miskitu kin terminologies over time are the result of powerful economic, political and social forces introduced, in part, as a consequence of the geography of Mosquito Coast economies, migrations and political processes. We argue that the current use of kin terms is atypically hybrid and is not the result of a single, algebraically derivable idea system. Rather than negating the validity of mathematical approaches to kinship terminologies, the case of Miskitu kinship terminology suggests that core idea systems, although subject to change over time, move between informationally economical forms adapted to socioeconomic changes. 2 Introduction Miskitu kinship terminologies provide a useful entry into several distinct anthropological questions. They indicate important social, economic and political ruptures in the organization of Miskitu speaking peoples of Nicaragua. These ruptures, in turn, reveal something important about the constraints on human knowledge production and organization. Jamieson’s (1998) careful reproduction of historical Miskitu kinship terms reveals shifts not only in terms used, but also in associated conceptual relationships. We do not deal extensively with the first issue, though such concerns are of course worthy of investigation and explanation.
    [Show full text]
  • THE UNIVERSITY of TEXAS at DALLAS, CHAPTER 316 Spring
    Spring 2013 THE UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS AT DALLAS, CHAPTER 316 CONTACTS Spring 2013 Graduates Chapter President Initiated Mr. Rafael O. Martín Vice-President Chapter 316 conducted its graduate student induction Dr. Cy Cantrell ceremony on Tuesday, April 9 in the McDermott Suite. PKP chapter members attended the event in full regalia as per Past-President Dr. Denise Paquette Boots tradition. Forty-eight graduates were inducted into the Society this academic year. Dr. Murray John Leaf, Professor of Treasurer Anthropology and Political Economy in the School of Dr. Edward J. Harpham Economic, Political and Policy Sciences, was also inducted as a faculty member of the Society. Dr. Leaf gave the keynote VP Scholarships and Awards address at the event. Other speakers included chapter president Dr. Douglas C. Dow Rafael Martín, president-elect Dr. Cy Cantrell and PKP student Secretary vice-president Blair Flicker. Dr. Edward Harpham, chapter Ms. Andrea D. Stigdon treasurer, announced each candidate by school while Mr. Martín and Dr. Wildenthal presented each inductee with their VP Alumni Relations certificate, honor cord and pin. Provost and PKP member Dr. Dr. Susan W. Jerger Hobson Wildenthal provided the closing remarks. VP Initiations & Traditions Congratulations to our newest members! Dr. Abby R. Kratz VP Student Outreach Dr. Anthony Champagne VP Community Service Dr. Karen J. Prager VP Programming & Special Events Dr. Mary Jo Venetis Dr. Murray Leaf – Faculty Induction The spring 2013 graduate induction His articles cover a wide range of topics ceremony included one UTD professor. Dr. including the meaning of marriage ceremonies, Murray Leaf received his Bachelor of Arts in the language issue in South Asia, household Philosophy from Reed College before economics, the relationship between irrigation moving on to the University of Chicago, and social organization, law and legal decision- where he received a Ph.D.
    [Show full text]
  • Kinship in Mind: Three Approaches Doug Jones
    11 Kinship in Mind: Three Approaches Doug Jones Social anthropologists mostly study kinship as a principle of social organisation. But there is also a psychological and cognitive side to human kinship, involving questions like: How do people recognise others as kin of one sort or another? What do kin categories mean and how are they related to one another? What, if anything, distinguishes thinking about kinship from other varieties of social cognition? Different schools of anthropology offer very different answers to these questions. Here I review three approaches to the psychology of kinship. One has its roots in evolutionary theory and human/nonhuman comparisons. The second is concerned with symbolism, culture, and the natives’ explicit theories of procreation and kinship. These approaches are likely to be familiar to students of evolution and human behaviour, and cultural anthropology, respectively. The third approach stems from recent developments in cognitive science, especially in the study of specialised domains of cognition. This approach is newest, and probably least familiar to most anthropologists and even to most cognitive scientists, so it receives most attention here. I argue that human beings have a specialised cognitive system—which can be called ‘kinship core cognition’ or ‘kinship conceptual structure’—comprising a set of universal building blocks for organising knowledge of kin and kin categories in an abstract kinship space. Much of the success of formal methods in the study of kin 343 FOCALITy AND ExTENSION IN KINSHIP categorisation, as carried out by authors like Floyd Lounsbury (1964), Ward Goodenough (1965), Harold Scheffler (1978), Dwight Read (2010), Murray Leaf (Leaf and Read 2012) and others, depends on these building blocks.
    [Show full text]
  • Annual Report 08-09
    ANNUAL REPORT 08-09 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page Director’s Statement 3 I. Organization and Administration A. Administration 5 B. Executive Committee 5 II. Research A. Current Research Programs 5 B. Publications 6 C. Public Talks and Colloquia 6 D. Summaries of Significant Findings 6 E. Research Seminars and Activities 16 III. Graduate Training A. Ph.D. and MA Students 21 B. Graduate Advisory Council 22 C. Undergraduate Training 24 IV. Communication A. Conferences 24 B. Conferences/Seminars Organized by IMBS Members 27 C. Future Conferences 28 D. Visitors 28 E. Colloquia Series 29 V. Budget A. Appropriations and Expenditures 34 B. Extramural Funding Activity 35 VI. Appendices A. Current Faculty Members 39 B. Scientific Publications 45 C. IMBS Technical Reports 61 D. Colloquia and Conferences of IMBS Members 62 E. Faculty Awards/Achievements 75 F. Graduate Students Affiliated with the IMBS 79 G. Visitor Letters 81 2 Director’s Statement Dear IMBS Colleagues and appropriate administrators, It is time to again review the activities of our IMBS members, and the IMBS, over the past academic year. A crude measure of the activity over the year is that IMBS members were on grants (some multiyear and multi-participants) involving over $78,000,000. During the year our members published over 180 papers (which includes some books), and they gave over 175 invited presentations. (For more specific information about individual activities, please see the Appendices of this report.) Clearly, this has been, again, an active year! The strength of the IMBS derives directly from our members and their contributions. As such, let me recommend that in reading this report you start in Section II-D, Summaries of Significant Findings, which provides a sample of wide variety of results that have been discovered over the last year by our colleagues.
    [Show full text]
  • Program Organizers
    2007 Meeting of the Society for Cross-Cultural Research The 36th Annual Meeting Society for Cross-Cultural Research (SCCR) jointly with Third General Scholarly Meeting of the Society for Anthropological Sciences (SASci) San Antonio, Texas February 21-24, 2007 Program Organizers SCCR Douglas Caulkins, Chair and President-elect Sondi Burnell, Program Assistant, Grinnell College Mary Powell & Bristol Ivy, Registration Assistants, Grinnell College Sincere appreciation is expressed to Bill Divale, Past President of SCCR, for his invaluable assistance in organizing this annual meeting. SASci Giovanni Bennardo, Program Chair SCCR President SCCR President-Elect Juris G. Draguns D.Douglas Caulkins Psychology Department Anthropology Department Pennsylvania State University Grinnell College 410 Moore Bldg. Goodnow Hall University Park, PA 16802 Grinnell, IA 50112 Tel. (814) 863-1735 Tel (641) 269-4942 FAX (814) 863-7002 FAX (641) 269-4330 [email protected] [email protected] Past-President Secretary/Treasurer Lewis Aptekar David E. Cournoyer Department of Counselor Education University of Connecticut School of Social Work San Jose State University 1798 Asylum Avenue, West Hartford, CT 06117 One Washington Square San Jose, CA 95192-0073 Mail all correspondence to: TEL: 408-924-3662 43 O’Connell Road FAX: 408-924-4137 Colchester, CT 06415 [email protected] Tel:(860)570-9155 (Office) Tel:(860)537-3733 (Home) Fax: (860) 570-9404 Area Representatives [email protected], [email protected] Psychology (2/2006-2/2009) Parliamentarian and Archivist Doug Vakoch Herbert Barry [email protected] 552 N. Neville St. #83 Pittsburgh, PA 15213-2830 Social Science (2/2006-2/2009) Tel: 412-648-8563 Lisa Oliver Fax: 412-648-8219 [email protected] [email protected] Anthropology (2/2004-2/2007) Webmaster Robert Manlove William K.
    [Show full text]
  • The Implications of Merleau-Ponty for the Human Sciences
    University of Rhode Island DigitalCommons@URI Senior Honors Projects Honors Program at the University of Rhode Island 2011 The mplicI ations of Merleau-Ponty for the Human Sciences Ryan Marcotte University of Rhode Island, [email protected] Creative Commons License This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License. Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.uri.edu/srhonorsprog Part of the Biological and Physical Anthropology Commons, Continental Philosophy Commons, Epistemology Commons, Ethics and Political Philosophy Commons, History of Philosophy Commons, History of Science, Technology, and Medicine Commons, Metaphysics Commons, Philosophy of Language Commons, Philosophy of Mind Commons, Philosophy of Science Commons, Social and Cultural Anthropology Commons, and the Sociology Commons Recommended Citation Marcotte, Ryan, "The mpI lications of Merleau-Ponty for the Human Sciences" (2011). Senior Honors Projects. Paper 212. http://digitalcommons.uri.edu/srhonorsprog/212http://digitalcommons.uri.edu/srhonorsprog/212 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Honors Program at the University of Rhode Island at DigitalCommons@URI. It has been accepted for inclusion in Senior Honors Projects by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@URI. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Science and Society: Phenomenology and Its Relevance to Social Inquiry Marcotte 1 Preface In 1959, C.P. Snow (1905-1980) addressed a growing problem in the academic world. Even though many intellectuals in his time came from similar social backgrounds, were comparable in intelligence, and made roughly the same incomes, he noted a schism between the two groups of intellectuals. There was, on one hand, a community of scientists and, on the other hand, a community of literary intellectuals.
    [Show full text]