Search results

University administrators are increasingly using a range of metrics to evaluate the “quality” of work being undertaken at their institutions. The unit of analysis for these assessments varies from Department (England), field of research (Australia), and the like, but inevitably the assessment works its way to individual researchers. This poses a major challenge for administrators and even more so for researchers. Shifts in institutional policy to meet the challenges of funding and reputation/esteem of rising in the ranks raise a number of questions concerning the temporality and value of academic labor. Notably, decisions about the worth of academic labor are often well removed from the undertaking of that labor and this separation removes the human side of scholarly work and reduces knowledge production to numerical indicators and the achievement of key performance indicators. In this chapter I draw on shifts in an institution’s policy position and the impact that this has on researchers. Particularly I explore the implications of historically mapping research performance using different metrics than were available at the time and expecting researchers to adopt alternate strategies immediately (irrespective of delays in the publication process). Although I do not doubt that administrator decisions are arguably made in the best interests of advancing the institutions position in the increasingly global academy, the presentism of such strategies is in many ways at odds with the long-term focus of building coherent and sophisticated research programs. Alternate means of understanding the challenges and tensions of administrator strategy has the potential to impact on policy and the development of programs for current and aspiring researchers.

This chapter sets forth a plan designed to encourage and enable teachers to engage in first-person characterization in their classrooms. The author draws on his extensive background in social studies teaching, administration, and consulting to argue for the value of historical interpretation within the context of today's curricular emphasis on science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM). This chapter then explores and explains historical interpretation from a classroom perspective, focusing on pedagogical best practices. In a first-person presentation, the presenter assumes the identity of a historical figure. The first question to be asked then is, Who is the individual I wish to represent, and why? This person should be selected from subject matter being studied in your class. Be aware that it is necessary to anticipate some element of controversy when you undertake this activity. With rare exceptions, any historical figure selected for portrayal will have something questionable in their background, and you will have to contend with this. So, the next question to ask is, Why engage in first-person interpretation in the first place? In this chapter, experienced teachers provide reasons for doing so, and consider necessary preparations for effectively implementing such a characterization. That discussion leads to examining ways to ensure successful presentations that achieve established lesson goals, followed by suggestions for debriefing and effectively bringing closure to the exercise. As the accompanying lesson extension demonstrates, a characterization can ground further study of an issue associated with the individual being depicted.

The purpose of this paper is to report about the presence of misconceptions in the historical thinking of fifth-grade children with learning disabilities (LD) and their normally achieving (NA) peers. We also sought to determine the effects of implementing an integrated instructional unit about 19th century U.S. Westward Expansion on children's historical misconceptions. This unit was taught over an eight-week period by a special education teacher (subsequently referred to as Ms. M) who had approximately two years of prior professional teaching experience. In addition to quantitative information about changes in children's content knowledge, we report interview data about children's understanding of historical content and historical reasoning. Furthermore, we captured on videotape approximately 12h of classroom instruction. Ms. M and the first author of this paper independently reviewed and then discussed these videotapes for the purpose of assessing the effects of her teaching practices on the development of children's historical understanding. The implications of our findings are discussed.

The history of economics has often been described as the “history of economic thought.” In this essay, I explore an alternative perspective that builds on the French tradition of historical epistemology and treats economics as a social practice. I argue that a practice-based view provides a more philosophically robust conception of historiography and a richer field of investigation for historians of economics.

Our point of departure is a reservation concerning the validity of cosmopolitan ideas in response to 9/11. Cosmopolitanism in the social and political sciences plays an important role in the reconstruction of conceptual tools, the diagnosis of the current epoch and the creation of new normative standards. Its key motif, however, that of epochal change from a nationally-based to a cosmopolitan world order, is prematurely dismissive of traditional categories and assimilative of a normative vision. The separation of the present from the past is as overstated as is its conflation with the future.