Educational Studies

The professoriate often questions its relation to the public weal and wonders about its public image. In particular, most professors strive to reconcile the tension between what historian Mary O. Furner identified as advocacy and objectivity. New technologies have added an additional layer of complexity for professors in their attempts to communicate to other citizens and policy makers. As professors continue to grapple with their role in a democratic society, they would do well to read Katherine Elise Chaddock's new book, The Multi-Talented Mr. Erskine. This biography focuses on academic John Erskine (1879-1951), who would, over the course of his career, "evolve into a fully formed 'celebrity professor'-the first to deserve that title in the age of mass communication and mass culture" (p. 3). Though the book is organized as a traditional biography, less attention is paid to Erskine's formative years, and greater emphasis is placed on "his aim in bringing fine taste to the masses and the intersection of 'celebrity' with his many other defining roles-professor, administrator, husband, father, community leader, concert pianist, essayist, poet, novelist, friend, and lover" (p. 13). The book also charts his struggles with the tensions of gentility and progress, popular work and academic work, elitism and egalitarianism, specialization and essentialism, and advocacy and objectivity (p. 13).

This work posits that the Cooperative Study in General Education, which operated under the auspices of the American Council on Education from 1937-1947 held special significance to the larger general education movement in American higher education. It presents a discussion of the movement as a quest for both institutional and societal consensus. It then argues that the Cooperative Study actively took part in this quest as well.

This study explores the general education movement of 1930-1960-a movement devoted to revising the content, and methods, of reforming the first two years of postsecondary study for undergraduates. It begins by noting that much of the extant literature focuses on the curricular statements produced by Harvard, Columbia, and the University of Chicago as well as their assumed influence upon other institutions of higher learning-including historically black colleges and universities, women's colleges, religiously affiliated colleges, land grants, and community colleges-during this time period. This study complicates this reading of the movement by arguing that the curricular statements of Harvard, Columbia, and the University of Chicago were unable to achieve curricular reform on their respective campuses and were deemed to be unacceptable by institutions across the nation. The study asks, then, if the curricular theories of these prestigious universities were unable to create and/or sustain a fixed body of curricular content on their own campuses, is it likely that they influenced the curriculums of other institutions across the country? And more important, if the curricular structures in place at these institutions were constantly evolving-driven by faculty and student concerns, local context, the politics of curricular compromise, and not representing a linear, top-down method of reform-what method of reform did these universities and other institutions of higher learning look to, for achieving tangible and sustainable mechanisms of reform? This study then offers a new way of seeing curricular reform in the general education movement by relying on the lenses provided by an exploration of three cooperative studies of general education-or studies funded by philanthropic groups in which a number of institutions and their representatives cooperate with each other and educational researchers to spur reform of iii their own curricular measures. The three cooperative studies of general education focused on are the Eight-Year Study (1930)(1931)(1932)(1933)(1934)(1935)(1936)(1937)(1938)(1939)(1940)(1941)(1942); the Cooperative Study in General Education (1938)(1939)(1940)(1941)(1942)(1943)(1944)(1945)(1946)(1947), and the California Study of General Education in the Junior College (1948)(1949)(1950)(1951)(1952).

This article explores the leadership qualities of education researcher and professor Ralph W. Tyler (1902-1994). It argues that Tyler’s theoretical understanding and practical approach to administration, leadership, and mentoring—something he frequently referred to as “the art of the possible”—is instructive for business executives, academics, and others interested in leadership. The article examines key moments in Tyler’s childhood and schooling that served to guide his later thought and actions, considers what, precisely, Tyler meant by “the art of the possible,” and offers glimpses into his leadership style by analyzing the perspectives of those who had a first-hand look at Tyler in action.

This course examines classroom management theorists, concepts, and practical research-based models. Students will explore systematic best-practice strategies conducive to positive social interaction with diverse student populations; active student engagement and motivation; and, effective classroom organization in a variety of education settings.

What do most Americans picture when they hear the term " college? " Is it the Ivy-covered brick buildings of Harvard University or the sprawling campus of a large community college? Perhaps they picture a commencement ceremony where they proudly look on as a loved one— draped in academic regalia—collects their hard-earned and door-opening college degree. While Americans today hold the concept of " college " in high esteem, this has not always been the case. Rather, they have often struggled to will colleges to serve a multitude of interests and populations. Additionally, the unfinished and ongoing quest of providing " college for all " Americans is older than the republic itself. This course will explore that quest. It will also provide students with insights and tangible methods by which they can join contemporary efforts to reform American higher education. The course will explore the many institutional types that make up the American system of higher education including research universities, liberal arts colleges, women's colleges, historically black colleges, tribal colleges, normal schools, and community colleges. It will examine when and why these institutions were founded, who they sought to serve, what their campuses and curricula looked like, and most important, the experiences that students had and continue to have in their institutions. Special emphasis is given to the issues of access, student experiences, (extra)curriculum, and reform. The first unit of the course will provide a theoretical understanding of these issues. The second unit will provide historical perspectives on the American higher education. The final unit will consider the student movements of the 1960s considering the aforementioned issues. Course Objectives Satisfactorily completing this course will allow students to: