DOCSLIB.ORG

Michèle Lamont

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Michèle Lamont MICHÈLE LAMONT Department of Sociology 33 Kirkland Street Harvard University Cambridge, MA 02138 510 William James Hall Phone: (617) 496-0645 E-mail: [email protected] Fax: (617) 496-5794 Webpage : https://scholar.harvard.edu/lamont PERSONAL INFORMATION: Citizenship: Canadian and American EDUCATION: PhD Sociology, Université de Paris, 1983 DEA Sociology, Université de Paris, 1979 MA Political Science, Ottawa University, 1979 BA Political Science, Ottawa University, 1978 AREAS OF RESEARCH: Cultural Sociology Higher Education Inequality Racism and Stigma Race and Immigration Sociology of Knowledge Comparative Sociology Qualitative Methods Social Change Sociological Theory PRIMARY ACADEMIC POSITIONS: 2016-present: Affiliated Faculty, Department of the History of Science, Harvard University 2016-present: Distinguished Fellow, Munk School of Global Affairs, University of Toronto 2006-present: Robert I. Goldman Professor of European Studies, Harvard University 2005-present: Professor of African and African American Studies, Harvard University 2003-present: Professor, Department of Sociology, Harvard University 2015-2021: Director, Weatherhead Center for International Affairs, Harvard University 2002-2019: Project Co-director, Successful Societies Program (with Peter A. Hall, Harvard University), Canadian Institute for Advanced Research Fellow, Canadian Institute for Advanced Research 2014: Acting Director, Weatherhead Center for International Affairs, Harvard University 2009-2010: Senior Advisor on Faculty Development and Diversity, Faculty of Arts and Sciences, Harvard University 2004-2010: Director, European Inequality Network, Multidisciplinary Program in Inequality and Social Policy, John F. Kennedy School of Government, Harvard University 2000-2003: Professor, Department of Sociology, Princeton University 1993-2000: Associate Professor with tenure, Department of Sociology, Princeton University 1987-1993: Assistant Professor, Department of Sociology, Princeton University 1985-1987: Assistant Professor, Department of Sociology, University of Texas-Austin 1983-1985: Post-Doctoral Research Fellow, Department of Sociology, Stanford University 1 AWARDS, FELLOWSHIPS AND HONORARY POSITIONS: 2021: Breakthroughs in Social Sciences and Humanities Award, Falling Walls Foundation 2020: Honorary Doctorate, University of Warwick Honorary Doctorate, University of Uppsala 2019-2021: Fellow, Andrew Carnegie Fellows Program ($200,000) 2019-2020: Residential Fellowship, Russell Sage Foundation 2019: Elected Corresponding Fellow, The British Academy 2017: Erasmus Prize, The Praemium Erasmianum Foundation (€150,000) Honorary Doctorate, University of Ottawa Honorary Doctorate, Université de Bordeaux Honorary Doctorate, University of Amsterdam 2016-2017: 108th President, American Sociological Association (President-elect: 2015-16; Past-president, 2017- 2018) 2015: Elected Member, Royal Society of Canada 2014-2015: Chair, Section on Inequality, Poverty and Mobility, American Sociological Association 2014: Chevalier de l’Ordre des Palmes Académiques, Gouvernement Français Gutenberg Research Award, Johannes Gutenberg University 2010: Master Mentor Award, Office of the Senior Vice Provost for Faculty Development and Diversity, Harvard Everett Mendelsohn Excellence in Mentoring Award, Graduate Students Association, Harvard 2009: Winner, “The Next Big Question Competition,” Canadian Institute for Advanced Studies, Ottawa 2006-2009: Chair, Council for European Studies 2005-2008: Elected Member, Council of the American Sociological Association 2006-2007: Matina Horner Distinguished Visiting Professorship, Radcliffe Institute for Advanced Study 2004-2006: Member, National Research Council Committee on Assessing Behavioral and Social Science Research on Aging 2003-2004: Chair, Theory Section, American Sociological Association 2002-2003: Fellow, Center for Advanced Study in Behavioral Sciences (with the support of the Andrew W. Mellon Foundation, grant no. 29800639) 2001: C. Wright Mills Prize of the Society for the Study of Social Problems for The Dignity of Working Men Mattei Dogan Award for the Best Comparativist Book from the Society for Comparative Research for The Dignity of Working Men 2000: Noteworthy Books in Industrial Relations and Labor Economics of the Industrial Relations Section, Princeton University, The Dignity of Working Men 1998: Elected Member, Society for Comparative Research 1997: Visiting Scholar, School of Social Science, Institute for Advanced Study 1996-2002: Member, Woodrow Wilson Society of Fellows 1996-2001: Elected Member of Steering Committee, Council for European Studies 1996-1997: Fellow, John Simon Guggenheim Memorial Foundation Jean Monnet Fellow, European University Institute, (declined) 2 1996: Fellow, Russell Sage Foundation Elected Member, Sociological Research Association 1995: Le Monde Choice List, La morale et l’argent. La culture des cadres en France et aux Etats-Unis 1994-1995: Chair, Culture Section, American Sociological Association 1993: C. Wright Mills Prize Finalist, Money, Morals, and Manners: The Culture of the French and the American Upper-Middle Class 1992-1993: Fellow, German Marshall Funds of the United States 1982-1984: Post-Doctoral Fellow, Québec Government 1980-1982: Ph.D. Fellowship, Québec Government 1978-1982: Boursier du Gouvernement français SCIENTIFIC BOARD MEMBERSHIP (LAST TEN YEARS): 2018-present: Member, Board of Directors, American Council of Learned Societies (ACLS) Member of Foundation Board, The Graduate Institute of International and Development Studies (IHEID), Geneva, Switzerland 2016-present: Member, Scientific Advisory Board at the Max Planck Institute for the Study of Religious and Ethnic Diversity, Gottingen, Germany Member, Advisory Board, Nordic Centre for Research on Gender Equality in Research and Innovation (NORDICORE) 2016-2021: Member, Advisory Council for the Princeton Institute for International and Regional Studies (PIIRS) 2009-2015: Member, Advisory Board, Fellowship Program, Open Society Foundation 2009-2013: Member, Advisory Board, Réseau français d’Instituts d’études avancées 2010-2012: Member, Haut conseil de la science et de la technologie, French Government 2008-2012: Member, International Scientific Advisory Board, Sciences Po, Paris EXTERNAL GRANTS: 2018-2019: “Doctoral Dissertation Research: Becoming Part of the City: Place-Belonging in Urbanizing China” with Amy Tsang, NSF Doctoral Dissertation Improvement grant program ($11,983) 2002-2019: “Successful Societies Program.” Canadian Institute for Advanced Research. Program co-director (app $1,000,000 a year) 2014-2016: “Cultures of Health.” Robert Wood Johnson Foundation ($25,000) 2013-2016: “The Fukushima Disaster and the Cultural Politics of Nuclear Power in the United States and Japan.” Science and Technology program, National Science Foundation, with Kyoko Sato and Sheila Jasanoff ($175,686) 2012-2014: “Qualitative Data Repository.” National Science Foundation, with Colin Elman, Diana Kapiszewski, Howard Turtle, and Lisa Wedeen, Syracuse University ($599,822) 2010-2011: “Doctoral Dissertation Research: Low Income Youth and Perceptions of Mortality.” National Science Foundation, with Nathan Fosse, Harvard University ($8,365) 2009-2011: “Destigmatization Strategies among Ethnic Groups in Israel.” United States - Israel Binational Science Foundation, with Nissim Mizrachi and Hanna Herzog ($52,000) 2009-2010: “Doctoral Dissertation Research: A Multilevel Study of Symbolic Boundaries towards Muslims, 2007- 2008.” National Science Foundation, with Christopher Bail, Harvard University ($10,000) 2007-2010: “African-American Responses to Racism and Discrimination.” National Science Foundation ($209,985) 3 2007-2009: “Fostering Successful Interdisciplinarity through Shared Cognitive Platforms.” Canadian Institute for Advanced Research ($250,000) “Doctoral Dissertation Research: Hiring and Inequality in High Prestige Professions.” National Science Foundation, with Lauren Rivera, Harvard University ($7,500) 2008: “Exploring Culture and Poverty.” Ford Foundation, with David Harding and Mario Luis Small ($25,000) 2006-2007: “Knowledge Making, Use, and Evaluation in the Social Sciences.” Russell Sage Foundation, with Charles Camic and Neil Gross ($35,000) 2005-2006: “Workshop on Interdisciplinary Standards for Systematic Qualitative Analysis.” National Science Foundation ($52,122) 2005: “The Social Study of the Social Sciences and the Humanities.” Radcliffe Institute for Advanced Study, exploratory seminar, with Charles Camic and Neil Gross ($12,000) 2004-2005: “Negotiating Social Identities in an Elite Independent High School.” National Science Foundation Doctoral Dissertation Research Award, with Rubén Gaztambide-Fernández, Harvard University ($7,490) 2002-2003: “Architects and the Puzzle of State Socialist Modernization: Architectural Discourse in Hungary and East Germany after the Second World War.” National Science Foundation Doctoral Dissertation Research Award, with Virag Molnar, Princeton University ($4,500) “Explaining Changes in Criminal Justice and Social Welfare Policies in the American States, 1967- 1985.” National Science Foundation Doctoral Dissertation Research Award, with Joshua Guetzkow, Princeton University ($7,500) 2001-2003: “Categories and Criteria of Evaluation of Research Proposals in the Social Sciences and the Humanities.” National Science Foundation ($114,575) 1998-1999: “Defining Sexual Harassment in France and the United States.” National Science Foundation, Dissertation improvement
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Regulating Secure Software Development Analysing the Potential Regulatory Solutions for the Lack of Security in Software
    Jari Råman Regulating Secure Software Development Analysing the potential regulatory solutions for the lack of security in software Academic Dissertation to be presented, with the permission of the Faculty of Law of the University of Lapland, for public discussion in Auditorium 2, Yliopistonkatu 8, Rovaniemi, on May 26th, 2006, at 12 o´clock. Acta Electronica Universitatis Lapponiensis 1 University of Lapland Faculty of Law Copyright: Jari Råman Distributor: Lapland University Press P.O. Box 8123 FI-96101 Rovaniemi tel. + 358 16 341 2924, fax + 358 16 341 2933 [email protected] www.ulapland.fi/publications Paperback ISBN 952-484-034-0 ISSN 0788-7604 PDF ISBN 952-484-053-7 ISSN 1796-6310 www.ulapland.fi/unipub Preface V ”…if a person can’t feel safe, he can never be free…” (ADA Richard Bay in the drama series “The Practice”, Season 4: Episode 14 – “Checkmates”) Preface This is what an assistant district attorney (ADA) told to a colleague about the role of prosecutors in order to cheer her up after losing another case to a devious defence counsel. Who said that watching courtroom drama, especially American series, is a waste of time; that they do not teach anything about lawyers’ work in continental law countries? Well... Maybe they do not, but this prosecutor certainly understood a part of the essence of freedom and safety and I got to spend amusing moments in front of a TV. This ADA was talking about personal safety, but the same statement is true also for security in general. In the era of Internet and the discussion of its inherent freedom, this really is a crucial statement.
    [Show full text]
  • The Superiority of Economists†
    Journal of Economic Perspectives—Volume 29, Number 1—Winter 2015—Pages 89–114 The Superiority of Economists† Marion Fourcade, Etienne Ollion, and Yann Algan here exists an implicit pecking order among the social sciences, and it seems to be dominated by economics. For starters, economists see themselves T at or near the top of the disciplinary hierarchy. In a survey conducted in the early 2000s, Colander (2005) found that 77 percent of economics graduate students in elite programs agree with the statement that “economics is the most scientific of the social sciences.” Some 15 years ago, Richard Freeman (1999, p. 141) speculated on the origins of such a conviction in the pages of this journal. His assessment was candid: “[S]ociologists and political scientists have less powerful analytical tools and know less than we do, or so we believe. By scores on the Graduate Record Examina- tion and other criteria, our field attracts students stronger than theirs, and our courses are more mathematically demanding.” At first glance, the academic labor market seems to confirm the natives’ judg- ment about the higher status of economists. They are the only social scientists to have a “Nobel” prize, thanks to a grant from the Bank of Sweden to the Nobel foundation. Economists command some of the highest levels of compensation in American arts and science faculties according to Bureau of Labor Statistics data. In fact, they “earn more and have better career prospects” than physicists and ■ Marion Fourcade is Professor of Sociology, University of California, Berkeley, California, and Associate Fellow at the Max Planck-Sciences Po Center, Sciences Po, Paris, France.
    [Show full text]
  • Imp Ar Tiality, Separation of Powers
    IMP AR TIALITY, SEPARATION OF POWERS, AND BY TORSTEIN ECKHOFF Professorof Law, University of Oslo © Stockholm Institute for Scandianvian Law 1957-2009 I. INTRODUCTION Scandinavian attitudes towards judicial independence are not unlike those held in Britain and the United States. We take it for granted that judicial independence is desirable, and are inclined to believe that it is secured in our own legal systems.! My object in this article is to discuss the basic conceptions of the desirability and existence of judicial independence. The questions to be con- sidered are: What do we mean by judicial independence? Why are we in favour of it? What are the conditions under which the desired independence can be obtained? When it is said that judges are, or should be, independent, it is appropriate to ask: Independent of whom or what? Unlimited in- dependence is certainly not what we have in mind. We want to protect our judges against domination by, for example, the execu- tive branch of government and by political parties and pressure groups, but we do not want them to act independently of law and morals. Nor do we want to eliminate the existing interdependence of judge and counsel in court procedure. There are many possible sources of influence on judicial behaviour, and a separate con- sideration of each is required in order to specify which influences judges should be protected against. A survey and discussion of some of these factors is the subject of section IV of this article. Before dealing with these specific questions, however, we must first examine some of the reasons usually offered in support of the general principle of judicial independence.
    [Show full text]
  • The 2006 Federal Liberal and Alberta Conservative Leadership Campaigns
    Choice or Consensus?: The 2006 Federal Liberal and Alberta Conservative Leadership Campaigns Jared J. Wesley PhD Candidate Department of Political Science University of Calgary Paper for Presentation at: The Annual Meeting of the Canadian Political Science Association University of Saskatchewan Saskatoon, Saskatchewan May 30, 2007 Comments welcome. Please do not cite without permission. CHOICE OR CONSENSUS?: THE 2006 FEDERAL LIBERAL AND ALBERTA CONSERVATIVE LEADERSHIP CAMPAIGNS INTRODUCTION Two of Canada’s most prominent political dynasties experienced power-shifts on the same weekend in December 2006. The Liberal Party of Canada and the Progressive Conservative Party of Alberta undertook leadership campaigns, which, while different in context, process and substance, produced remarkably similar outcomes. In both instances, so-called ‘dark-horse’ candidates emerged victorious, with Stéphane Dion and Ed Stelmach defeating frontrunners like Michael Ignatieff, Bob Rae, Jim Dinning, and Ted Morton. During the campaigns and since, Dion and Stelmach have been labeled as less charismatic than either their predecessors or their opponents, and both of the new leaders have drawn skepticism for their ability to win the next general election.1 This pair of surprising results raises interesting questions about the nature of leadership selection in Canada. Considering that each race was run in an entirely different context, and under an entirely different set of rules, which common factors may have contributed to the similar outcomes? The following study offers a partial answer. In analyzing the platforms of the major contenders in each campaign, the analysis suggests that candidates’ strategies played a significant role in determining the results. Whereas leading contenders opted to pursue direct confrontation over specific policy issues, Dion and Stelmach appeared to benefit by avoiding such conflict.
    [Show full text]
  • Book of Abstracts Global Perspectives on Media and Populism
    Book of Abstracts Global Perspectives on Media and Populism Key Note Speakers Natalia Roudakova: Populism and Post-Truth: A Relationship Natalia Roudakova is a cultural anthropologist (Ph.D., Stanford University, 2007) working in the field of political communication and comparative media studies, with a broad interest in moral philosophy and political and cultural theory. She has worked as an Assistant Professor at the Department of Communication, University of California in San Diego, and most recently as a visiting scholar in the Media and Communication Department at Erasmus University in Rotterdam. In 2013- 2014, Roudakova was a Fellow at the Center for Advanced Study in the Behavioral Sciences in Palo Alto, California, where she completed her book manuscript titled Losing Pravda: Ethics and the Press in Post-Truth Russia which is now out with Cambridge University Press. Michael Schudson: Democracy, Desperation, and Distraction: Notes on Populism Today Michael Schudson grew up in Milwaukee, Wisc. He received a B.A. from Swarthmore College and M.A. and Ph.D. in sociology from Harvard. He taught at the University of Chicago from 1976 to 1980 and at the University of California, San Diego from 1980 to 2009. From 2005 on, he split his teaching between UCSD and the Columbia University Graduate School of Journalism, becoming a full-time member of the Columbia faculty in 2009. He is the author of seven books and co-editor of three others concerning the history and sociology of the American news media, advertising, popular culture, Watergate and cultural memory. He is the recipient of a number of honors; he has been a Guggenheim fellow, a resident fellow at the Center for Advanced Study in the Behavioral Sciences, Palo Alto, and a MacArthur Foundation "genius" fellow.
    [Show full text]
  • TRACING the DISCOURSE of AMERICAN EXCEPTIONALISM by Aron Tabor
    DOES EXCEPTION PROVE THE RULE? TRACING THE DISCOURSE OF AMERICAN EXCEPTIONALISM By Aron Tabor Submitted to Central European University Doctoral School of Political Science, Public Policy and International Relations In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Political Science Supervisor: Alexander Astrov Word Count: 91,719 Budapest, Hungary 2019 ii Declaration I hereby declare that no parts of this thesis have been accepted for any other degrees in any other institutions. This thesis contains no material previously written and/or published by another person, except where appropriate acknowledgement is made in the form of bibliographical reference. Aron Tabor April 26, 2019 iii iv Abstract The first two decades of the twenty-first century saw an unprecedented proliferation of the discourse of American exceptionalism both in scholarly works and in the world of politics; several recent contributions have characterized this notion in the context of a set of beliefs that create, construct, (re-)define and reproduce a particular foreign policy identity. At the same time, some authors also note that the term “American exceptionalism” itself was born in a specific discourse within U.S. Communism, and, for a period, it was primarily understood with reference to the peculiar causes behind the absence of a strong socialist movement in the United States. The connection between this original meaning and the later usage is not fully explored; often it is assumed that “exceptionalism” existed before the label was created as the idea is traced back to the founding of the American nation or even to the colonial period.
    [Show full text]
  • Educating Artists
    DUKE LAW MAGAZINE MAGAZINE LAW DUKE Fall 2006 | Volume 24 Number 2 F all 2006 Educating Artists V olume 24 Number 2 Also: Duke Faculty on the Hill From the Dean Dear Alumni and Friends, University’s Algernon Sydney Sullivan Medal, awarded annually for outstanding commitment to service. This summer, four Duke law faculty members were Graduates Candace Carroll ’74 and Len Simon ’73 called to testify before Congressional committees. have used their talents and resources in support Professor Neil Vidmar appeared before the Senate of civil liberties, women’s rights, and public inter- Committee on Health, Education, Labor and Pensions, est causes; their recent leadership gift to Duke’s to address legislation on medical malpractice suits. Financial Aid Initiative helps Duke continue to attract Professor Madeline Morris testified before the Senate the best students, regardless of their ability to pay, Foreign Relations Committee regarding ratification of and gives them greater flexibility to pursue public the U.S.–U.K. extradition treaty. Professor James Cox interest careers. Other alumni profiled in this issue offered his views on proposed reforms for the conduct who are using their Duke Law education to make a of securities class action litigation to the House difference include Judge Curtis Collier ’74, Chris Kay Committee on Financial Services Subcommittee ’78, Michael Dockterman ’78, Andrea Nelson Meigs on Capital Markets, Insurance, and Government ’94, and Judge Gerald Tjoflat ’57. Sponsored Enterprises. Professor Scott Silliman, I want to thank all alumni, friends, and faculty executive director of the Center on Law, Ethics and who contributed so generously to the Law School in National Security, was on Capitol Hill three times in the past year.
    [Show full text]
  • Ten Years in the Making
    ANATOMY OF THE ORANGE CRUSH: TEN YEARS IN THE MAKING Brad Lavigne It has been called an overnight success a decade in the making. The historical political realignment of federal politics by Jack Layton and the New Democratic Party was in fact an ambitious and methodical strategy to modernize Canada’s social democratic party into a viable contender for government. Brad Lavigne, the 2011 campaign manager, NDP senior strategist and longtime Jack Layton adviser, provides an insider’s account of the anatomy of the Orange Crush. Un succès instantané, certes, mais précédé d’une décennie de préparation. C’est ainsi qu’on a qualifié l’exploit de Jack Layton et du NPD, qui ont opéré un réalignement historique de la vie politique canadienne grâce à leur stratégie de modernisation ambitieuse et méthodique en vue de faire du parti social-démocrate un aspirant crédible à la direction du pays. Directeur de la campagne 2011, stratège en chef du NPD et longtemps conseiller de Jack Layton, Brad Lavigne décortique les tenants et aboutissants de la « vague orange ». t only took a few minutes. I stepped out of the makeshift It was an outcome that very few outside Jack Layton’s cir- war room in our election-night operations at the cle believed was possible and one that even fewer predicted. I Intercontinental Hotel in downtown Toronto to make a few short calls to congratulate newly elected New Democratic o how did it happen? Was it an accident? Was Jack Party (NDP) Members of Parliament from Atlantic Canada. S Layton — and the 2011 NDP campaign — simply the By the time I returned from the adjoining room, the benefactor of lacklustre performances from the Liberals and team had taped a bunch of flip-chart paper to the walls with the Bloc Québécois? Or was it something more? the names of dozens and dozens of Quebec ridings scribbled To understand how the “Orange Crush” on May 2, on them.
    [Show full text]
  • Conflicting Narratives in the 2015 Canadian Federal Election And
    It’s the Way you Tell It: Conflicting Narratives in the 2015 Canadian Federal Election and 2016 US Presidential Election by Sandford Borins, 1 Professor of Public Management, University of Toronto A paper to be Presented at The Canadian Political Science Association Annual Conference May 30, 2017 © Sandford Borins 2017 Preliminary Draft: Not for Citation 1 Funding from the University of Toronto and the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada; the research assistance of Simran Manghirmalani, Adam McGrath, and Karen Hu; and the comments of Beth Herst and Peter Sage are gratefully acknowledged. Previous versions of this paper were presented at the University of Regina, University of Ottawa, and Blurring Genres Research Network (London, UK). 1 Abstract This article develops a narrative-based model for political communication in election campaigns. Political parties develop a heroic fable about the relationship between their leader and the electorate and an ironic fable about the relationship between the leader(s) of their opponent(s) and the electorate. This model was applied to English-language political advertisements posted online by the three major parties in the 2015 Canadian federal election and advertisements by the two major party candidates in the 2016 US presidential election. The narrative characteristics of the ads (fable employed, narrating voice, background music, visual tonality) demonstrated significant differences among the five parties’ narrative strategies. YouTube viewcounts were used to determine the effectiveness of individual ads as well as the overall campaigns. The article demonstrates how narrative analysis enhances our understanding of the essential role of the party leader in election campaigns.
    [Show full text]
  • Sociological Research in Norway
    Sociological research in Norway An evaluation Evaluation Division for Science Sociological research in Norway An evaluation Evaluation Division for Science © The Research Council of Norway 2010 The Research Council of Norway P.O.Box 2700 St. Hanshaugen N–0131 OSLO Telephone: +47 22 03 70 00 Telefax: +47 22 03 70 01 [email protected] www.forskningsradet.no/english The report can be ordered at: www.forskningsradet.no/publikasjoner or green number telefax: +47 800 83 001 Design: Design et cetera AS Photo/illustration: Shutterstock Printing: Allkopi Number of copies: 500 Oslo, December 2010 ISBN 978-82-12-02842-5 (printed version) ISBN 978-82-12-02843-2 (pdf) Preface The panel for the evaluation of sociological research in Norway hereby submits the following report to the Research Council of Norway. The panel is unanimous in its assessments, conclusions and recommendations. Thirteen research units were included in the evaluation, comprising five university departments, two departments at university colleges and six institutes for applied research. Altogether, 177 researchers at these units were involved in the evaluation process. The panel wishes to thank the representatives of the 13 research units for their participation in the evaluation and for interesting discussions during the interview sessions. The panel also wishes to thank the researchers for their participation, as well as the Ph.D. students for sharing their views in meetings with the panel. Last but not least, the panel wishes to thank the Research Council of Norway for providing this opportunity for discussion and reflection about sociology in Norway and sociology as a discipline.
    [Show full text]
  • MAKING the UNIVERSITY MATTER DECEMBER 4-5, 2009 Presented by the Scholars Program in Culture and Communication Speakers
    A Symposium Annenberg School for Communication University of Pennsylvania MAKING THE UNIVERSITY MATTER DECEMBER 4-5, 2009 Presented by The Scholars Program in Culture and Communication Speakers Ien Ang Risto Kunelius Visiting Scholar SummerCulture Sponsor Spring 2006 Finland 2008 S. Elizabeth Bird Don Mitchell MAKING THE Visiting Scholar Visiting Scholar Fall 2007 Spring 2008 UNIVERSITY MATTER Dominic Boyer Mark Anthony Neal Guest Lecturer Visiting Scholar Fall 2007 Fall 2008 Making the University Matter Michael Bromley Kaarle Nordenstreng investigates how academics situate SummerCulture Sponsor SummerCulture Sponsor themselves simultaneously in the Australia 2009 Finland 2008 university and the world, and how Nick Couldry Radhika Parameswaran doing so affects the viability of the Visiting Scholar Visiting Scholar university setting. The university Fall 2008 Spring 2009 stands at the intersection of two sets of interests, needing to be at one Michael X. Delli Carpini Jeff Pooley with the world while aspiring to stand ASC Faculty Panelist Visiting Scholar apart from it. In an era that promises John Nguyet Erni Spring 2009 intensified political instability, growing Visiting Scholar Richard Cullen Rath administrative pressures, dwindling Spring 2008 Visiting Scholar economic returns and questions about economic viability, lower Isabel Capeloa Gil Fall 2009 enrollments and shrinking programs, can the university continue SummerCulture Sponsor Paddy Scannell to matter into the future? And if so, in which way? What will help Portugal 2007 Guest Lecturer it survive as an honest broker? What are the mechanisms for Spring 2009 ensuring its independent voice? This two-day symposium considers Larry Gross a multiplicity of answers from across the curriculum on making the Guest Speaker Michael Schudson university matter, including critical scholarship, interdisciplinarity, Fall 2008 Guest Speaker curricular blends of the humanities and social sciences, practical Larry Grossberg Fall 2006 training and policy work.
    [Show full text]
  • Nacimiento Y Primeros Pasos De La Sociología Del Derecho En Noruega
    CEFD Cuadernos Electrónicos de Filosofía del Derecho | ARTÍCULO Nacimiento y primeros pasos de la Sociología del Derecho en Noruega. Vilhelm Aubert y el Grupo de Oslo About the genesis of the Sociology of Law in Norway. Vilhelm Aubert and the School of Oslo Guillermo Vicente y Guerrero Área de Filosofía del Derecho Universidad de Zaragoza Fecha de recepción 12/05/2015 | De aceptación: 16/12/2015 | De publicación: 29/12/2015 RESUMEN. Tras la liberación de Noruega del dominio alemán al concluir la II Guerra Mundial se fue desarrollando en el país nórdico una corriente pragmática que interconectaba las diversas ciencias sociales a través de una metodología de carácter empírico. De este proceso emergió una nueva ciencia: la Sociología del Derecho, que en los veinte años siguientes al fin de la guerra se fue consolidando a través de un notable número de investigaciones de campo dirigidas por Vilhelm Aubert al calor de su Institutt for samfunnsforsking PALABRAS CLAVE. Realismo jurídico, Sociología del Derecho, Noruega, ideas jurídicas, Vilhelm Aubert, Institutt for samfunnsforsking ABSTRACT. After the Norwegian liberation from the German domain when the Second World War finished, a pragmatic stream which interconnected the different social sciences through a methodology of empirical nature developed in Norway. A new science siemmed from this process strongly: the Sociology of Law, which in the subsequent twenty years after the war, grew stronger due to a vast number of field investigations headed by Vilhelm Aubert and his Institutt for Samfunnsforsking. KEY WORDS. legal realism, Sociology of Law, Norway, legal ideas, Vilhelm Aubert, Institutt for Samfunnsforsking CEFD Número 32 (2015) ISSN: 1138-9877 CEFD Cuadernos Electrónicos de Filosofía del Derecho SUMARIO: I.
    [Show full text]