Search

This conversation between the editors of Teaching Theology and Religion and Joanne Maguire Robinson continues an occasional series of interviews that has previously featured Jonathan Z. Smith, Stephen Prothero, Mary Pierce Brosmer, and Mary Elizabeth Mullino Moore. The exchange takes as its point of departure the teaching statement that Professor Robinson produced in support of her candidacy for the American Academy of Religion's Excellence in Teaching Award. Issues addressed include the impact of institutional context on one's teaching, teaching the humanities in universities that are ever more focused on job training, making the transition from a graduate program focused on research to teaching undergraduates who are unlikely to take even a second course in the study of religion, and ways in which women are challenged to navigate multiple responsibilities while striving to make their way in a male-dominated academy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A panel at the 2016 American Academy of Religion conference staged, taped, transcribed, and edited this conversation about the challenges and opportunities of teaching in a 'nano department' - an undergraduate religion or religious studies department (or combined religion and philosophy department) with only one, two, or three faculty members. Two things quickly become evident: one is the impossibility of coverage of the full religious studies curriculum, and the other is the necessity for collaboration with other departments. Neither of these is unique to nano departments, but there exists an intimacy between students and faculty in small departments, a necessary freedom to rethink the place of the study of religion in the liberal arts curriculum, and a disruptive value in what can be critiqued and contributed from a marginalized position. Arguably, nano departments are the canaries in the academic coal mine, charting the future of the humanities that cannot be discerned from the vantage point of Research-1 contexts. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article examines the state of the humanities in Taiwan. It is noted that Taiwan was able to preserve the pre-revolutionary traditions of cultural and knowledge production, while China's humanistic knowledge was altered by the Cultural Revolution. Several factors that contributed to the decline of the humanities in Taiwan are also cited, including the country's successful democratization and the Taiwanese society's movement toward utilitarianism.

The article discusses the Columbia Global Humanities Project which involves a group of scholars and policy makers from several regions including Africa, the Arab world, and South Asia. The project is aimed at assessing and rethinking the place of humanities in universities and institutes. It describes the dismal state of the humanities in the regions caused by the redirection of resources and prestige to science and technology.

As many national commissions and observers have noted, the past forty years have brought unprecedented declines in humanities enrollments and programs in U.S. higher education. These changes are particularly striking in the iconic academic heart of the enterprise, the four-year college sector, where many institutions have diversified curricular offerings well beyond their historic roots in the liberal arts. Colleges have significantly varied, however, in the extent of their retreat from the traditional core curriculum. What factors, then, are associated with maintaining earlier established academic norms in this organizational field? This analysis of four-year colleges' humanities degree production investigates several propositions, concluding that deeper institutionalization and stronger financial resources have been especially important in constraining schools' retreat from the humanities over recent decades. Examination of time-based interaction effects suggests notable evolution in the role of religious affiliation and gender in humanities degree production over the period. Implications of the findings for research and policy are considered. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Revista de Educacion y Desarrollo Social is the property of Universidad Militar Nueva Granada, Departamento de Educacion and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

The article discusses liberal education in American universities and colleges, with particular focus given to its use in business and career-focused education programs. The author's assertion that these programs are an unfortunate result of commercial and political motivations and that they ignore the purpose of humanities education is examined. The argument that students are poorly served by universities when they are conceptualized as customers and faculty are given productivity and marketing goals is also touched on.

Humanistic studies cultivate types of conceptual fluency and modes of awareness important to thought concerning values. Not all knowledge is scientific knowledge. There is genuine comprehension of some valuative matters – they are not all to be interpreted in expressive or subjective terms. Education in the humanities can encourage value-relevant types of discernment, awareness, and articulateness in uniquely effective ways. Though important kinds of thought concerning values may lack formal, theoretical elaboration they involve genuine standards of intellectual responsibility. Engagement with the humanities does not ensure development of sound valuative thought and judgment – nothing ensures it – but can have a crucial role in shaping it. Moreover, intellectual and moral imagination should not be constrained by boundaries of academic specialization. Specialization has several merits but it can motivate inappropriately reductionist claims and theoretical over-extension. Often, sound normative understanding is not dependent upon explicit theoretical justification or a specific inquiry’s explanatory idiom. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

This article raises a number of questions that the author believes need to be addressed in order to defend and justify the teaching and practice of the humanities in an age when they continue to face swingeing cuts and unreasoned attacks from many quarters, both inside and outside the Academy. They are questions that have to do with the uniqueness of the humanities, its role in teaching values, the objectives of research, the connection between research and teaching, the value of an education in the humanities for society overall, and the ways in which humanists can play a useful public role. In sum, the author advocates for a coherent justification for what the humanities, plain and simple, are (or is). [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

Given the academic specialization endemic today in humanities disciplines, some of the most important work of humanities centers has become promoting education about the humanities in general. After charting the rise of humanities centers in the US, three characteristics of centers that enable their advancement of larger concerns of the humanities as a whole are discussed: location, flexibility, and broadened perspective. Independence from departmental demands and responsibilities allows humanities centers to reach diverse public audiences, to explore new paradigms and alternative structures for knowledge, and to overcome the intellectual divisions created by organizational structures of the contemporary university. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

The article presents a speech by Professor of Humanities and President of the Modern Language Association of America (MLA) Russell A. Berman, delivered at the MLA Convention in 2012, in which he discussed the importance of academic scholarship in the humanities. He commented on the necessity of academic collaboration, second language teaching in higher education, and humanistic education.

The article provides an analysis of the liberal studies in engineering (LSE), which may prove beneficial for higher education students considering it as a career of choice. Topics discussed include LSE covering basic principles of engineering from the perspective of the humanities, liberal arts studies, understanding the art and science of engineering, holistic engineering education, and fundamental understanding of engineering principles through critical thinking.