Search results

Sociologists have long thought of the integration of people in communities – social integration – and hierarchical social systems – systemic integration – as contradictory goals. What strategies allow organizations to reconcile social and systemic integration? We examine this question through 40 in-depth, longitudinal interviews with leaders of nonprofit organizations that engage in the dual pursuit of social and systemic integration. Two processes reveal how the internal structure of organizations often mirrors the ways in which organizations are embedded in their local environments. When organizations engage in loose demographic coupling, relegating those who “match” the community to the work of social integration, they produce internal inequalities and justify them by claiming community building as sacred work. When engaging in community anchoring, organizations challenge internal and external inequalities simultaneously, but this process comes with costs. Our findings contribute to a constructivist understanding of community, the mechanisms by which organizations produce inequalities, and a place-based conception of organizations as embedded in community.

Local governments use taxes on future increases in property values to pay for current economic development through tax incremental financing (TIF). TIF is a powerful tax tool used to spur improvements to a designated area. Proponents of TIF argue that it allows local governments to make investments without affecting previously established government and school district programs. Detractors argue that because the TIF designation denies existing overlapping districts (e.g., schools) the benefits of increases in property values, TIF can have a negative impact on a community. Empirical evidence on the economic and fiscal effects of TIF is mixed. This paper describes the potential costs and benefits associated with the use of TIF and then summarizes prior research on outcomes associated with this widely used property tax program.

Education to an international standard that can provide successful careers has arguably been the main drive of many parents to allocate scarce financial resources to the education of their progenies. Competition for high-calibre degrees has seen an explosion of opportunity in the private education sector. As many Global South countries do not have the equivalent control of standards provided in the United Kingdom (UK) by the Quality Assurance Agency, this can lead to dissatisfaction with the qualifications received in the Global South. This chapter aims to explore the factors influencing participation in higher education in the Global North versus the Global South, particularly where these relate to or vary by locality, and the relative influence these have on the propensity of the learners living in these areas to progress into higher education in local universities. The conceptual framework and methodology provided in this chapter show the differences between transnational education (TNE) as primarily a standalone or independent activity supported by a UK higher education institution (HEI)/provider versus being a collaborative effort between a UK host university and a South/Southeast Asian HEI university partner. The methodology provides a strategy for UK host institutions to best provide carefully aligned independent or collaborative partnerships with the partner country regulatory bodies. The chapter concludes with the author’s personal reflections and recommendations based on decades of collaborative and independent university provision of TNE. These reflections are focused on design-based courses in selected South/Southeast Asian HEI partnerships with the College of Architecture and Design at Birmingham City University.

Values have long guided special education services and supports for students with extensive support needs; over the past four decades, those values have been backed by research evidence demonstrating the critical nature of values related to inclusive education, self-determination, and seeking strengths and assets. In this chapter, we investigate these values and their supporting research, documenting strengths and needs in extant research. We emphasize the need to continue to embrace and maintain these values while pursuing research that addresses research gaps while centering the priorities, perspectives, and preferences of people with extensive support needs.

In this chapter, we seek to bring greater attention to language-based stigma at work and how it affects employees speaking English as their second language. We integrate research findings across multiple disciplines, including management, psychology, linguistics, education, and business ethics, identifying three major themes and knowledge gaps in this research domain. Based on the multidisciplinary knowledge integration, we suggest six promising future directions for organizational and business ethics scholars to pursue. We call for more empirical research focusing on how language-based stigma may harm nonnative English speakers (NNESs) with and without actual mistreatment or discrimination at work and how organizations may intervene to support NNESs. We hope our chapter will spark conducive conversations about mitigating language-based stigma in the workplace.