Search results

Prior to the passage of the 20th amendment to the US Constitution in 1920, several states had extended the suffrage to women. Helen Laura Sumner (later Woodbury), a student of John R. Commons at Wisconsin, undertook a statistical study of the political, economic, and social impacts of the granting of voting rights to women in the state of Colorado, and subsequently defended the results against numerous attacks. In this paper, we present a brief account of the struggle for women’s equality in the extension of the suffrage and examine Sumner’s critical analysis of the evidence as to its effects, as well as the counterarguments to which she responded.

Randall W. Eberts, Ph.D., is the executive director of the W. E. Upjohn Institute for Employment Research, Kalamazoo, Michigan.Mary Hatwood Futrell, Ed.D., is president of Education International (EI), headquartered in Brussels, Belgium, and dean of the Graduate School of Education and Human Development at George Washington University, Washington, DC.Bob Harris, M.A., Dip.T (Sec.), (Australia), advanced study at the Institut Universitaire des Hautes Etudes Internationales, Geneva, is a former EI executive director and current senior consultant based in Nyon, Switzerland.Ronald D. Henderson, Ph.D., is the director of the Research Department at the National Education Association, Washington, DC.Rachel Hendrickson, Ph.D., is the higher education coordinator in the Membership and Organizing Department at the National Education Association, Washington, DC.Kevin Hollenbeck, Ph.D., is a senior economist and director of publications at the W. E. Upjohn Institute for Employment Research, Kalamazoo, Michigan.Susan Moore Johnson, Ed.D., is Carl H. Pforzheimer, Jr., Professor of Teaching and Learning at the Harvard University Graduate School of Education, Cambridge, Massachusetts.Charles T. Kerchner, Ph.D., is Hollis P. Allen Professor of Education at the Claremont Graduate University, Claremont, California.Julia E. Koppich, Ph.D., is president of Koppich & Associates, an education policy research and consulting firm, in San Francisco, California.Carrie M. Lewis, J.D., is a senior writer-editor in the Government Relations Department at the National Education Association, Washington, DC.Christine Maitland, Ph.D., is a former higher education coordinator for the National Education Association who now works on higher education issues with the NEA’s Pacific Regional Office in Burlingame, California.Christine E. Murray, Ph.D., is a professor in the Department of Education and Human Development and dean of the School of Professions, State University of New York College at Brockport.Diane Shust, J.D., M.S.Ed., is the director of the Government Relations Department at the National Education Association, Washington, DC.Joe A. Stone, Ph.D., is W. E. Miner Professor of Economics at the University of Oregon, Eugene.Wayne J. Urban, Ph.D., is Regents’ Professor of Education in the Department of Educational Policy Studies at Georgia State University, Atlanta.Fred van Leeuwen is the general secretary of Education International, Brussels, Belgium.Maris A. Vinovskis, Ph.D., is Bentley Professor of History, senior research scientist at the Institute for Social Research, and faculty member of the Gerald R. Ford School of Public Policy at the University of Michigan, Ann Arbor.Paul Wolman, Ph.D., is a senior policy analyst in the Research Department at the National Education Association, Washington, DC.

Analyses focusing on the intersecting forces of race, class, and gender have been around much longer than theorists in the traditions of social science and the humanities have acknowledged. As early as the 19th century, Sojourner Truth and Anna Julia Cooper began to voice many of the sentiments that continue to shape the discourse around race, gender, and class that is occurring in this new millennium. They anticipated today's debate over the inadequacy of reliance on single categories of race, gender, or even class, to capture the complexities of lived experience (Lemert & Bahn, 1998; Painter, 1990). Their awareness of the importance of the intersection between race, gender, and class made their spoken perspectives on gender inequality unique at a time when the “cult of true womanhood” reigned supreme. Despite this fact, much of the literature utilizing this intersectional framework of analysis emerged just after the Civil Rights and Women's Liberation movements of the 1960s. Memorable pioneers of this paradigm of analysis are Angela Davis’ Women, Race & Class (1981), Audre Lorde's Sister-Outsider (1984), and Paula Giddings’ When and Where I Enter (1984). These crucial texts and speeches call for us to be mindful of the intersections of experience that are instrumental in the formation and maintenance of families and that are so often ignored in discursive theory and research, which treats race, gender, and class, sexuality, etc. as mutually exclusive social forces.

How do we make sense of urban life in the past? What do we do when we study urban history, and to what extent do our methods fully capture the complexities of historical city living? These are crucial questions for any scholar interested in the historical dimensions of urban experience. Notwithstanding the interest of most urban historians in the relationship between the physical form of urban space and its experience by inhabitants and visitors, very few scholars have written histories that systematically integrate these two areas of inquiry. In this chapter, we argue that such research requires a method and an accompanying tool that can analyze historical urban life in a more integrated, holistic way. We propose a way forward by introducing the Time Machine platform as a scalable data visualization and analysis tool for researching everyday urban experience across space and time. To illustrate the potential we focus on a case study: the area of the Bloemstraat in early modern Amsterdam. Unpacking a section of the Bloemstraat, house by house and room by room, we show how the Time Machine forms an instrument to connect spatial layouts to the arrangement of objects and to the practical and social use of the space by the inhabitants and visitors. We also sketch how this tool illuminates more dynamic spatial and temporal practices such as how people, goods, and activities are connected to locations in the wider city and beyond.

This chapter explores three different Cinema, Memory and Wellbeing pilot projects, two of which were carried out in Liverpool and the other in Petrópolis, a city of comparable size in the state of Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. It begins by discussing our motivations for developing these projects and how we drew on our previous research relating to films and cinema-going. It then presents the three different projects, showing how each was tailored to the care context in question (a residential nursing home and a day-care centre on Merseyside, and a GP practice in Brazil), explaining how they were conducted and discussing the results, with a view to informing and improving future initiatives of this type. We also show how our findings have shaped the creation of the ‘best-practice’ toolkit designed to enable activities coordinators, carers and health professionals to optimize the benefits of using films to stimulate memories and reminiscence and promote an improved sense of wellbeing among older people and those living with dementia. (This toolkit is available to download from the Emerald website in English: https://books.emeraldinsight.com/page/detail/Selfies/?K=9781787437173). We recount in detail our practical experiences of setting up and running screenings in diverse environments, how we set about trying to ‘measure’ or at least gather some tangible evidence of the wellbeing benefits of these events, and provide numerous examples of the reminiscences that they generated, as well as the feedback on the projects that we received from both the people who participated and the people who care for them.