Issues in Academic Leadership

Author(s):  
Uche T. Onyebadi ◽  
Dorothy Bland ◽  
Herman Howard ◽  
Carolyn Walcott

Occupying administrative positions in any organization is an enormous and difficult task, especially in universities and other higher institutions of learning where the culture and conventional practices demand shared governance and collective decision making. Even more complex is when such positions are occupied by minorities who need to weigh a lot of factors in their decision making in order to effectively navigate and accomplish their duties and objectives. This chapter offers a brief theoretical insight into administrative leadership in the academy. More importantly, it provides the narratives of the personal experiences of administrators in the United States and Guyana; people whose gender and racial backgrounds categorize them as minorities. Sharing such experiences aligns with the purpose of this book and also provides some learning opportunities for people in the diaspora who aspire to become administrators in the academy and minorities who are currently doing the job.

1985 ◽  
Vol 37 (3) ◽  
pp. 403-415
Author(s):  
Henry Trofimenko

For anyone whose job is to study the United States, the memoirs of its statesmen provide more than merely entertaining reading. They not only give you a closer insight into the “kitchen” of statesmanship and political decision making; they also provide an opportunity to check the assumptions and paradigms that were constructed earlier to analyze the policy of any particular administration. The memoirs confirm that in spite of hundreds of books and thousands of articles in the U.S. press that discuss specific policies, as well as daily debates in Congress and its committees, press conferences, and official statements, the policy process is not as open as it might seem at first glance. Rather, American foreign policy is made within a very restricted circle of the “initiated”—official and unofficial presidential advisers, including selected members of the Cabinet.


2009 ◽  
Vol 63 (1) ◽  
pp. 33-65 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nicole Deitelhoff

AbstractFor many political observers the successful creation of the International Criminal Court (ICC) came as a surprise, as major powers, in particular the United States, had opposed the plans for the ICC. Moreover, the institutional design of the ICC entails enormous sovereignty costs for states but only uncertain benefits. An analysis of the negotiations suggests that the court's successful creation can be attributed to persuasion and discourse within negotiations, that is, a shift in states' interests. The article develops a theoretical model of institutional change that defines the conditions under which persuasion and discourse can affect collective decision making. In particular, this study attempts to show that if (traditionally) weaker actors alter normative and institutional settings of negotiations they can further the chance of persuasion and discourse.


Author(s):  
Maarten Jansen ◽  
Rob Baltussen ◽  
Leon Bijlmakers ◽  
Marcia Tummers

Background: A deliberative Citizen Forum ‘Choices in healthcare’ was held in the Netherlands to obtain insight into the criteria informed citizens would propose for the public reimbursement of healthcare. During 3 weekends, 24 citizens participated in evidence-informed deliberation on the basis of 8 case studies. The aim of this study was to assess how the opinions of 8 participants in the deliberative Citizens Forum changed and if so, why participants themselves believe their opinions have changed, whether participation influenced their perceived reasonableness of other participants in the forum and whether it influenced their opinions about involvement of citizens in decision-making. Methods: Semi-structured interviews were held with 8 participants before and after their participation in the Citizen Forum. Using the method of reconstructing interpretive frames opinions about the public reimbursement of healthcare were reconstructed. Results: Participants’ opinions changed over time; they became more aware of the complexity of decision-making and came to accept that there are limits to the available resources and accept cost as a criterion for reimbursement decisionmaking. Participants report that exchanging arguments and personal experiences with other participants made them change their initial opinions. Participants ascribed increases in the perceived reasonableness of other participants’ opinions to feelings of group-bonding and becoming more familiar with each other’s personal circumstances. Participants further believe that citizens represent an additional opinion to that of other stakeholders and believe their opinions should be considered in relation to those of other stakeholders, given they are provided with opportunities for critical discussion. Conclusion: Organized deliberation should allow for the exchange of arguments and the sharing of personal experiences which is linked to learning. On the one hand this is reflected in the uptake of new arguments and on the other hand in the revision, specification or expansion of personal argumentation. Providing opportunities for critical deliberation is key to prevent citizens from adhering to initial emotional reactions that remain unchallenged and which may no longer be supported after deliberation.


2020 ◽  
Vol 42 (3) ◽  
pp. 113-140
Author(s):  
William N. Laforge

The governance of universities and colleges in the United States basically follows the concept and spirit of democracy embraced by the nation from its birth.  The systems and practices in place at most U.S. institutions of higher learning include collaborative, representative, or collective decision-making arrangements known as shared governance.  However, these systems and practices are hardly uniform due to the diversity of governance patterns that reflect the unique and different history, needs, and mission of a particular institution.  Sometimes they are differentiated from, and contrasted with, corporate, business, and more authoritarian or centralized forms of institutional governance. In contrast with university governance elsewhere in the world—that can range from strong central government control to private self-regulated operations—the U.S. forms of campus governance have emerged in a country that does not have centralized authority over education.  U.S. institutions of higher learning respond to a variety of controls and interests that are on display variously at public, private non-profit, private for-profit, and religious universities.  Governance, authority, and administration are spread across a wide spectrum of players, including governing boards; presidents, chancellors, and other administrators; the academy/faculty; administrative staff; campus committees; students; and, even some external factors. Shared governance is not a perfect formula or panacea for university administration and decision-making.  It does, however, provide a methodology, system, and concept that can help guide the leadership of a university as it approaches the administration and conduct of its educational responsibilities.  In today’s higher education environment, the term governance is rather expansive.  In one sense, it means top-down governance that is the rightful role and authority of an institutional board charged with overseeing policy, programming, performance, and executive guidance and evaluation.  But, it also variously means the use of institutional strategies, operations, and components to distribute, disseminate, and “share” authority and responsibilities for a university’s administrative, management, and decision-making functions, i.e., “on-campus governance.”  In this respect, shared governance “borrows” many of the attributes and principles of democratic government. In any case, shared governance, in its many forms and applications, is widely practiced in U.S. universities, including Delta State University.  


2020 ◽  
Vol 8 (6) ◽  
pp. 10
Author(s):  
Leyuan Ma

Self-Portrait on the Borderline Between Mexico and the United States by the Mexican artist Frida Kahlo reveals a multitude of insights. This paper assesses how the nuances embodied in the painting serve as critical clues to comprehend Frida Kahlo’s personal experiences, Mexican culture, and the approach of discovering the contextual background through the work of art. Beginning with a detailed formal analysis of the portrait, this paper further explores it by making connections with contextual evidence. Through timely reference to Frida Kahlo’s political stance, cultural identity, and health, the paper demonstrates how the painting proffers insight into both the artist’s life and Aztec culture.


2020 ◽  
Vol 11 (3) ◽  
pp. 287-305
Author(s):  
Christopher Pullen ◽  
Ieuan Franklin

This article explores the advent of the ‘Undocuqueer’ movement, an activist social network that represents the life chances of undocumented queer youth migrants in the United States, arguing for acceptance, equality and integration, with a particular focus on needs for education. Considering the promise of the Development, Relief and Education for Alien Minors Act (a possible legislative act that would offer education to undocumented migrant youth), this article offers an historical and cultural foundation as to the emergence of the Undocuqueer movement, and also theoretical insight into the use of online technology to produce transmedia testimonials. Relating the significance of the affective queer body, this article argues that the online work of the Undocuqueer movement offers a model of affective queer activism, framing the performative potential of undocumented queer youth and their attempts to attain civil rights.


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sarah Conlisk

In early 2020, the novel coronavirus (COVID-19) spread to the United States and upended normal life. Using trip-level data on over 17 million taxi rides taken in Chicago from 2018-2021, I document how tipping behavior changed during the COVID-19 pandemic. I find that the average non-zero tip increased by almost 2 percentage points, from roughly 26% to 28% of the taxi fare. Meanwhile, the likelihood that a passenger left a tip at all declined by roughly 5 percentage points, down from a pre-pandemic likelihood of 95%. My preferred specification suggests that the effect on the intensive margin dominates that in the extensive margin, leading to an aggregate increase in tipping generosity during the pandemic. I leverage granularity in the data to explore the mechanisms behind these trends and offer two explanations consistent with thedata. First, passengers responded to the two economic shocks of the pandemic – unemployment and savingsoverhangs – by varying their tipping rates accordingly. Second, passengers internalized the increased risk of COVID-19 infection as an additional cost for taxi drivers and increased their tips as compensation. My analysis testifies to the sustainability of tipping in times of crises and offers theoretical insight into what drives tipping behavior.


2005 ◽  
Vol 35 (2) ◽  
pp. 357-368 ◽  
Author(s):  
JEFF YATES ◽  
ANDREW B. WHITFORD ◽  
WILLIAM GILLESPIE

In recent decades, political science has turned to the study of agenda setting as a central aspect of collective decision-making environments. The content of the public agenda – and the issue agendas of political institutions – make significant social change possible. Recent studies suggest that these political institutions are engaged in both competitive relationships, as they identify and pursue both active and latent public issues, and more complex cue-taking relationships. For separated powers, the problems of co-operation and competition with one another are entwined with internal collective decision-making dilemmas.In this study, we focus on the tension within a political institution between agenda setting as a mechanism for internal organizational maintenance, and agenda setting as a consequence of that institution's interaction with other branches of government and the general public. Specifically, we examine agenda setting by the United States Supreme Court, and ask the question of why the Court allocates more or less of its valuable agenda space to one policy issue over others. Our study environment is the policy issue composition of the Court's docket: the Court's attention to criminal justice policy issues relative to other issues. Among the most important powers of the Court is the power to apportion its agenda space among policy issues.Pacelle argues that the Court's agenda-building process, its culling of cases and issues from numerous petitions, may represent the most important sequence of decisions the Court makes. But the Court's docket is a finite agenda space on which some issues are provided with a larger proportion of the Court's attention. Allocating space to an issue can promote the issue's national visibility and legitimacy as an important public concern.


Author(s):  
Stefan Scherbaum ◽  
Simon Frisch ◽  
Maja Dshemuchadse

Abstract. Folk wisdom tells us that additional time to make a decision helps us to refrain from the first impulse to take the bird in the hand. However, the question why the time to decide plays an important role is still unanswered. Here we distinguish two explanations, one based on a bias in value accumulation that has to be overcome with time, the other based on cognitive control processes that need time to set in. In an intertemporal decision task, we use mouse tracking to study participants’ responses to options’ values and delays which were presented sequentially. We find that the information about options’ delays does indeed lead to an immediate bias that is controlled afterwards, matching the prediction of control processes needed to counter initial impulses. Hence, by using a dynamic measure, we provide insight into the processes underlying short-term oriented choices in intertemporal decision making.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document