Search results

This article describes several lessons learned during my career. Some describe ways of approaching intellectual issues and others express values and attitudes underlying these approaches. Although the lessons have evolved in a largely academic context, they seem equally appropriate in the world of practice. The personal rules of thumb and ideas inherent in these lessons are typically developed and practiced implicitly. However, readers should find these explicit statements relevant in different ways. Some lessons might be candidates for adoption outright. Others might be constructive points of departure for evolving a related lesson better suited to one's own working style. All lessons, whether or not they are agreeable or appropriate, can serve as thought starters by challenging readers to surface their own implicit career lessons for comparison.

Effective teaching, while supplemented by best practice methods and assessments, is rooted in accurate, age-appropriate, and engaging content. As a foundation for history content, elementary educators rely strongly on textbooks and children’s literature, both fiction and non-fiction. While many researchers have examined the historical accuracy of textbook content, few have rigorously scrutinized the historical accuracy of children’s literature. Those projects that carried out such examination were more descriptive than comprehensive due to significantly smaller data pools. I investigate how children’s non-fiction and fiction books depict and historicize a meaningful and frequently taught history topic: Christopher Columbus’s accomplishments and misdeeds. Results from a comprehensive content analysis indicate that children’s books are engaging curricular supplements with age-appropriate readability yet frequently misrepresent history in eight consequential ways. Demonstrating a substantive disconnect between experts’ understandings of Columbus, these discouraging findings are due to the ways in which authors of children’s books recurrently omit relevant and contentious historical content in order to construct interesting, personalized narratives.

Mr. LEVENSTEIN, the President of the Society of Chemical Industry, in his address delivered at Liverpool recently, dealt very fully with the question of the commercial position of Great Britain as compared with other countries, more especially Germany, and emphasised the fact that if this country is to compete successfully with her contemporaries she must, to use the words of the Prince of Wales at the Gúildhall, “wake up.” After reviewing the chief factors making for Germany's advance in industry and commerce Mr. LEVENSTEIN says: “How are we to defend ourselves? Shall we rest content as we are or bestir ourselves and awake to the irresistible fact that continued apathy and indifference mean ruin to our national position?” This is strong language but not stronger than the occasion demands, for the statistics by which these observations are backed clearly indicate a marked decadence in the national prosperity notwithstanding the years of apparent “record” trade, which, however, cannot be regarded so favourably when subjected to detailed analysis and comparison. Mr. LEVENSTEIN'S suggestions to meet this situation are as follows: (1) The appointment of a competent and expert Minister of Commerce. (2) The nationalisation and extension of our canals and waterways. (3) A measure for greatly extending and improving our secondary education. (4) A sensible reform of our patent laws.

This paper aims to clarify the persuasion mechanism of chief executive officers (CEOs) and employees as endorsers of brand advertising and helps discern consumer attitudes toward internal endorsement.

The exploratory character of the present research required a qualitative approach combining focus groups and face-to-face interviews considered as both meaningful and complementary.

The findings suggest that while the celebrity endorsement ensures familiarity and likability, internal endorsement supports credibility and congruity with an important role of storytelling. Moreover, employee endorsements induce an internalization process based on the real-self, while the endorser CEO induces admiration grounded in the ideal self. More fundamentally, the study reveals how the internal endorsement modifies the meaning transfer model and involves a process of meaning translation, which affects the corporate brand image rather than the product brand image.

The present paper reveals that CEOs and employees can be strong levers for gilding the corporate brand image compared to the celebrities who enhance the product brand image. Moreover, the authors show that the CEO is a character who can be admired without the threat of upward comparison at the opposite of celebrities. Finally, this research highlights the specific role of employees bringing authenticity because of their anchorage in real life.

The purpose of this paper is to highlight the ways gender influenced the 2016 presidential election, as well as ways in which the USA might progress to become a more gender-egalitarian nation.

Drawing on a combination of voter data, psychological theories – including sexism, social role theory, stereotype content model, group status threat, and system justification theory – and opinions, this paper explores the factors that drove the 2016 presidential election outcome.

This paper asserts that while there were reasons other than gender that people voted the way they did in the 2016 presidential election, these reasons were ancillary to the role that gender bias and stereotypes played. It concludes with a call to action, arguing that: more women need to enter into politics, each of us must recognize our own and make others aware of their overt sexism and subtle biases, the public must acknowledge and change the often double standards that exist for women but not men, and we must realize that a win for women is also often a win for men.

The value lies in introducing a social psychological lens focused on gender to the 2016 presidential election. This paper combines data, theory, and broader opinions to present a compelling perspective on the election in a way that, to our knowledge, has not been done before.