Search

This paper compares the prevalence and age-specific changes of coresidence patterns, by means of a classification of 12 coresidence types, for the age range from 16 to 30 in the United States (US), Germany (GE), Taiwan (TW), and mainland China (CN). Panel data were used in separate nested logistic regression models to estimate transitions in coresidence for individuals in each society in the transition to adulthood. On the first level, decisions to move from different types of family-of-origin-households were modeled, depending on intergenerational solidarity and parental resources. On the second level, target household types were modeled, depending on others' trajectory events and their interaction with gender. The analysis used the National Longitudinal Study of Youth (NLSY97) from the United States, the German Family Panel (pairfam), the Taiwanese Youth Project (TYP), and the China Family Panel Studies (CFPS). Age-specific coresidence patterns were pooled and transitions probabilities were estimated for a two-year period. The systematic comparative approach makes it possible to correct misinterpretations based on analyses from single societies. Our results demonstrated that differences in coresidence patterns within the patrilineal, collectivistic societies (CN and TW), and within the bilineal, individualistic societies (US and GE) were as important as the differences between these two groups of societies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Commercialization and corporatization (C&C) arguably contribute to the strain in the academic roles of professors in research, teaching, and service, and in their political roles asorganic, professional, and critical intellectuals, both in the United States and greater China. Although they may manifest themselves in different shapes and forms, these global trends have been going strong and areadverselyaffecting professors’ role playing, and in essence, their academic freedom, at different degrees in different places. The paper is informed by theoretical perspectives of the sociology of higher education, and its argument is supported by both quantitative and qualitative data. Higher education is not only an important engine of the economy, but also an important driver of social and political change. How well professors can play their roles will directly influence where a society is heading; hence, the importance of this topic and what this paper may contribute to the understanding and solution of the problem. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]