In the Tradition of Dissent

2013 ◽  
Vol 66 (1) ◽  
pp. 129-190 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sally Bick

Abstract As an institution of higher learning, the New School for Social Research was widely regarded as unorthodox. From its inception in 1919, its guiding principle was freedom: freedom of opinion, of teaching, of research, of publication. Initially focusing on the social sciences, by 1927 it introduced music as a significant part of that program. The School's social science perspective, its educational unorthodoxies, and its liberal philosophical ideals set a distinctive tone, nurturing an unfettered and accepting haven for a progressive community of musical personalities. Most prominent among them stood Henry Cowell, but Paul Rosenfeld, Aaron Copland, Charles Seeger, and others also contributed to the vitality of the School. From 1927 until 1933, Cowell presided over a program of lectures, concerts, symposia, and workshops dedicated to the cause of contemporary American music. In view of the School's adult population, music was treated primarily as an intellectual and cultural pursuit that stimulated new spheres of musical inquiry. At the same time, the influence of the social sciences encouraged the study of music through the political and social lens of culture. The diversity and singularity of these approaches created a new context for music and a significant contribution to the history of US musical culture.

1987 ◽  
Vol 11 (2) ◽  
pp. 233-236

The Committee on Historical Studies was established in the Graduate Faculty of the New School for Social Research in 1984. The Graduate Faculty has long emphasized the contribution of history to the social sciences. Committee on Historical Studies (CHS) courses offer students the opportunity to utilize social scientific concepts and theories in the study of the past. The program is based on the conviction that the world changes constantly but changes systematically, with each historical moment setting the opportunities and limiting the potentialities of the next. Systematic historical analysis, however, is not merely a diverting luxury. Nor is it simply a means of assembling cases for present-oriented models of human behavior. It is a prerequisite to any sound understanding of processes of change and of structures large or small.


Author(s):  
Judit Bokser Misses

Revista Social Research, An International Quarterly of the Social Sciences, Arien Mach (ed.), Nueva York, New School for Social Research, vol. 62, núm. 4, invierno de 1995.


1988 ◽  
Vol 124 ◽  
pp. 36-62 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kit Jones

The National Institute was founded in 1938, after a first initiative by Sir Josiah Stamp in the early 1930s. Stamp, who was the President of the London Midland and Scottish railway, had been connected with a Rockefeller Foundation scheme to provide fellowships in the social sciences; he became convinced that a wider attack was needed on the problem of financing the social sciences in Britain and his objective became the development of a central unit, of British origin, with funds under its own control. This would supplement and replace the help given by the Rockefeller Foundation (then the main source of research funds in the British social sciences) and develop an increasingly large research effort in economics and related subjects. Stamp made known his views and with the support of a number of prominent academics, in particular William Beveridge, Director of the London School of Economics; Henry Clay, Economic Adviser to the Bank of England; and Hubert Henderson, Secretary of the Economic Advisory Panel, began to search for British financial support.


Author(s):  
Mats Alvesson ◽  
Yiannis Gabriel ◽  
Roland Paulsen

This chapter introduces ‘the problem’ of meaningless research in the social sciences. Over the past twenty years there has been an enormous growth in research publications, but never before in the history of humanity have so many social scientists written so much to so little effect. Academic research in the social sciences is often inward looking, addressed to small tribes of fellow researchers, and its purpose in what is increasingly a game is that of getting published in a prestigious journal. A wide gap has emerged between the esoteric concerns of social science researchers and the pressing issues facing today’s societies. The chapter critiques the inaccessibility of the language used by academic researchers, and the formulaic qualities of most research papers, fostered by the demands of the publishing game. It calls for a radical move from research for the sake of publishing to research that has something meaningful to say.


Author(s):  
Svend Brinkmann ◽  
Michael Hviid Jacobsen ◽  
Søren Kristiansen

Qualitative research does not represent a monolithic, agreed-on approach to research but is a vibrant and contested field with many contradictions and different perspectives. To respect the multivoicedness of qualitative research, this chapter will approach its history in the plural—as a variety of histories. The chapter will work polyvocally and focus on six histories of qualitative research, which are sometimes overlapping, sometimes in conflict, and sometimes even incommensurable. They can be considered articulations of different discourses about the history of the field, which compete for researchers’ attention. The six histories are: (a) the conceptual history of qualitative research, (b) the internal history of qualitative research, (c) the marginalizing history of qualitative research, (d) the repressed history of qualitative research, (e) the social history of qualitative research, and (f) the technological history of qualitative research.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document