Academic literature on the topic 'Williams College. Class of 1799'

This easy-to-read paperback is the result of the author's desire to learn more about how students think and feel about themselves as learners in a “large urban college” pre-freshman ESL composition class. It is intended for teachers, scholars, and graduate students who are interested in how students learn to write as well as their accompanying thought processes and emotions. The main body of the book, chapters 4–7, presents “case studies of the journal writing experiences of five students” (p. 8) chosen to represent the variety of cultural backgrounds and personal involvement with the freewriting process in journal keeping. The students came from Colombia, Ethiopia, the Dominican Republic, People's Republic of China, and Japan.

This article is based on a lecture I was originally invited to deliver at Aberystwyth in the University of Wales in honour of the late Sir Thomas Parry-Williams (one of my earliest University teachers) and to do so on a topic which, I feel sure, would have met with his approval. He had himself studied with several of the most renowned and gifted scholars of the early part of this century, Edward Anwyl at Aberystwyth, John Rhys at Oxford, Rudolf Thurneysen at Freiburg im Breisgau, and Joseph Loth and Joseph Vendryes at the Sorbonne in Paris. He was one of the great scholarly and cultural heroes of my boyhood days and of my youth, a truly renowned scholar, literary figure and critic. His teaching days in the Department of Welsh at the University College of Wales at Aberystwyth spanned five decades, from 1914 to 1952 (he held the Chair of Welsh there with great distinction from 1920 to 1952). I treasure the memory of having been a member of a large post-war first year undergraduate class in his Department as long ago as 1947.

AbstractDrawing on evidence from research interviews, workers’ memoirs, oral histories, and a range of secondary sources, the development of popular workers’ education is traced over a thirty year period, 1955 to 1985, and is rooted in the proletarian culture of South Yorkshire, UK. The period is seen as an historical conjuncture of Left social movements (trade unions, the Communist and Labour parties, tenants’ movements, movements of working-class women, and emerging autonomous black movements) in a context of trade union militancy and New Left politics. The Sheffield University extramural department, the South Yorkshire Workers' Educational Association (WEA), and the public intellectuals they employ as tutors and organizers are embedded in the politics and actions of the labor movement in the region, some becoming Labour MPs. They develop distinctive programs of trade union day release courses and labor movement organizations (Institute for Workers' Control, Conference of Socialist Economists, Society for the Study of Labour History). Workers involved in the process of popular workers' education become organic intellectuals having key roles in local and national politics, in the steel and miners' strikes of the 1980s, and in the formation of Northern College. The article draws on the language and insights of Raymond Williams and Antonio Gramsci through the lens of social movement theory and the praxis of popular education.

BACKGROUND Temporary bite opening with occlusal composite is performed routinely during orthodontic treatment of patients with deep bite and cross bite. There have been no studies yet to assess its effect on periodontium. This study was done to assess the effect of temporary bite-raising on periodontium when placed on the mandibular molars. METHODS A prospective clinical trial which was a pilot study conducted on fifteen subjects attending the Department of Orthodontics, Saveetha Dental College and Hospitals, (SIMATS), Chennai. Probing depth and pain score on percussion were recorded bilaterally on subjects with class 1 malocclusion, before and after placing bite blocks in the posterior teeth. The bite-raising was done using light cured orthodontic composite Blu BiteTM on both mandibular first molars. Probing depth was measured using a Williams probe at mesiobuccal, mid-buccal and distobuccal sites on molars and pain score on percussion was recorded using visual analogue scale. The pocket probing, before (T0) and after one month of temporary bite-raising (T1) was recorded and statistically analysed using paired t test and Wilcoxon sign rank test based on normality of variables. RESULTS There was a significant increase in the mean probing depth after bite raising with a mean difference of 1.07 ± 0.04 (P = 0.000). The mean pain score also significantly increased after temporary bite-raising (P = 0.002). CONCLUSIONS There were minor yet significant changes in the periodontium that occurred after temporary bite rising with Blu BiteTM. KEY WORDS Composite Resin, Periodontium, Occlusal Force, Orthodontic Adhesive, Visual Analogue Pain Scale

It was confusing to him. He was in a world which had a set of rules all its own. He knew the other rules—the rules of his own world. But these were different. Men actually lived their four years away at the University, and sent children after them. It was a wild, improbable thing to have fallen into, and the day student looked at his fellows, could distinguish them no differences among them at first, and felt lost. His evenings were spent in the company of old friends and in the old places; his days at the college. And he plunged from past to present; present to past. They told him about loyalty, and he went home to think about it. But at home it became dim and unreal. Then he went back, the next morning, and they told him of loyalty again, of the mighty traditions. If he took it to heart he could only do so above the sickening realization that at four o'clock he must be on Trolley 13 again. And it was hard to take the traditions over the river.Samuel Lipschutz, B.A.University of Pennsylvania, 1929Many of our alumni and some of our students, supported by more than a few of our faculty and corporation, have seriously queried whether or no Brown, in common with other institutions located in a like environment, has in her student body too large a proportion of socially undesirable students. We are most emphatically not concerned with Jew-baiting. I am proud to say that race and creed are still not valid causes for concern in the liberal community founded by Roger Williams. But some of us are worried by the influx of alien blood into what was not so long ago a homogeneous group of students prevailingly Baptist and Anglo-Saxon. Says one alumnus, “A certain type of student is far below the standard we should like to see. I refer to those called carpet-baggers! They live in or near Providence, arrive at the University in the morning in time for their first class, park themselves, their books, and their lunch in the Union, leave the college the minute their last class is over, take no part in college life, absorb all they can, give back nothing of benefit, and probably will prove no credit to the University as alumni.” Surely some of you have heard the same tale.—Kenneth O. MasonDean of Freshmen, Brown University, 1927Were colleges obliged to address the dilemmas faced by the many firstand second-generation Americans who enrolled after World War I? No, replied many administrators who espoused exclusion or assimilation, or who expressed indifference. These attitudes meant that many students would never learn to navigate the turbulent waters of campus social life. Dropout rates were significant even before the Great Crash created insurmountable financial difficulties for numerous undergraduates. The testimony of peers who remained suggested that success often came despite institutional hostility.

Robert Millner Shackleton, who died peacefully in his sleep on 3 May 2001, was born on 30 December 1909 in Purley, Surrey, the son of John Millner Shackleton (an electrical engineer of Irish derivation who, at one time, worked for the Post Office telephones) and Agnes Mitford Shackleton (née Abraham). He was distantly related to the Antarctic explorer Sir Ernest Shackleton and was educated at the Quaker school of Sidcot, which profoundly influenced his subsequent life and career. He entered Liverpool University in January 1927 and graduated with a first–class honours BSc in geology in July 1930 under P. G. H. Boswell FRS, the first George Herdman Professor of Geology. He was only the fourth student in the history of the department to achieve a First. Shackleton's first visit to Africa was as an undergraduate in July to September 1929 to attend the 15th International Congress in Pretoria, South Africa. He always remembered Boswell's help and how he had persuaded him into going and even shared a cabin on the Union Castle ship to South Africa with him to reduce the cost at a time when most professors would not have done so. He saw the Karroo, the Kimberley diamond mine, the Witwatersrand mines, the Bushveld, Rhodesia, and the Drakensberg. This visit to Africa was to be the foundation of his love of Africa, its people and its geology. Shackleton went on to complete a PhD at Liverpool in December 1933 on the Moel Hebog area of North Wales, between Tremadoc and Nantlle, although some of the work was done while at Imperial College, London (IC), where he was Beit Research Fellow from 1932 to 1934, largely facilitated by Boswell, who was also an IC man and had moved back there to the Chair in 1930. The Moel Hebog mapping included examining some cliff faces never scaled by any geologist or, indeed, anyone before; it was part of a systematic re–survey of North Wales encouraged by Boswell, and followed the surveys of Snowdonia by David and Howell Williams. The Moel Hebog mapping was superb and, with his other field achievements, led to his receiving the Silver Medal of the Liverpool Geological Society in 1957. Shackleton was one of several Liverpool students, including one of us (B.E.L.), who from the 1920s onwards did part of their PhD work at IC. He had a petrological training, being taught silicate analysis by A. W. Groves at IC, but the petrological and palaeogeographic interpretation of his PhD area was hindered by the fact that ignimbrites had not yet been recognized and only a few chemical analyses could be completed. The published account (7) è did not appear until 1959 and then only because of the encouragement and devoted help given by Dr J. C. Harper.

At a recent conference I attended, a colleague stated that there was no education abroad research being conducted. In effect, he argued, we were a field without a research base to guide our program design and management. I heartily disagreed, countering that the field is producing an unprecedented amount of research of various types representing a wide range of disciplinary perspectives. The challenge, I said, was to expand our view of what we consider study abroad “research” to be. We work in a complex field that encompasses a tremendous range of issues and topics that invite analyses from multiple disciplines. Our challenge is more one of keeping up with reviewing all of this research and finding the time to analyze it and use it to improve programming. This present volume of Frontiers, the nineteenth since the journal’s first volume was published in 1995, contains research that education abroad professionals can use to consider how best to inform decisions about program administration, pedagogies, and curricula. For example, in the lead article by Vande Berg, Paige, and Connor-Linton, the results of one of the most comprehensive projects ever to assess study abroad learning outcomes, “The Georgetown Consortium Project,” the authors suggest that the results point education abroad in the direction of designing and managing “structured interventions” that promote intercultural and target language learning in study abroad. The results from this landmark study will be cited for many years to come. In keeping with the interdisciplinary nature of Frontiers, Stephanie Evan’s provides another perspective on education abroad through a scholarly review of African American women who have been influenced by study abroad. Her article, “African American Women Scholars and International Research: Dr. Anna Julia Cooper’s Legacy of Study Abroad,” details how Dr. Anna Julia Cooper, as well as other prominent women, were both impacted by study abroad and how they, in turn, impacted others. This historical research not only gives greater meaning and significance to the work of education abroad professionals by documenting these compelling stories, but also inspire the field to seek to expand access to study abroad for underrepresented students. Moreover, Evans presents practical ways in which she has designed and led her own study abroad programs utilizing her research, and in doing so helps us to think about how we might conduct similar kind of research that can inform our programming. Other articles in this volume serve the same purpose of providing research that informs education abroad programming. Five articles present research studies that examine study abroad outcomes, a fast-growing area of education abroad research. These include two studies that use a new instrument for assessing global learning called the Global Perspectives Inventory, or GPI (Braskamp, Braskamp and Merrill; and Doyle); a study of intercultural knowledge and competence in science students who study abroad (Bender, Wright and Lopatto); research on the influence that language courses taken prior to short-term study abroad (Duperron and Overstreet); and a study by Purdue University faculty and graduate students (Phillion, Malewski, Sharma, and Wang) of how preservice teachers participating in study abroad experience and interpret race, ethnicity, class and gender issues. Frontiers has always encouraged research into the nature and purposes of study abroad, and in this volume a number of authors present theoretical perspectives to advance our thinking about and practice of study abroad. Fred Dervin’s provocative analysis of how we conceive of study abroad is based on his research on European (especially Finnish) student mobility. Readers will find that his “proteophilic model” of intercultural competencies covers familiar ground but in ways that push us to examine our practices anew. Martha Johnson conducts a “post” analysis of study abroad and in doing so reminds us that the world is a complex place that challenges both study abroad students and those who develop and manage programs. She helps us to identify our inherent biases so that we may redefine the ways we design and deliver our study abroad programs. Tracy Williams presents the reflective model of intercultural competency in her article, which offers a qualitative approach to assessment that is built into several structures of the three stages (pre-departure, abroad, returned) of the study abroad experience. Pagano and Roselle describe their experiential education model as a means to improve study abroad learning, one that views student intellectual development as a process that ideally moves from reflection to critical thinking to a final stage of what they describe as “refraction.” Another theoretical approach to study abroad is provided by Reilly and Senders in their proposal of what they call “critical study abroad.” They argue that study abroad as a field needs to reevaluate its assumptions in light of the global challenges that we face, and they propose several reference points for doing so. Finally, Soneson and Cordano use universal design theory to encourage the re-design of study abroad programs in order to provide more effective access to a greater number of students. Yet another form of research that has frequently appeared in Frontiers is represented in articles by John Lucas and William Moseley: perspectives from resident directors and faculty. Formerly resident director of the IES Abroad Barcelona Program, Lucas presents and analyzes case studies that together explore important topics and issues related to the mental health of students who study abroad. Both on-site and campus-based staff alike will appreciate the insights offered in this article. A faculty member at Macalester College, Moseley draws on his experience leading a study abroad program as a pre-tenured faculty member to present a case study of how study abroad opportunities may be leveraged to support the research goals of junior faculty. Faculty with an interest in study abroad, deans and provosts, and study abroad directors will find Moseley’s article useful for considering how pre-tenured faculty may become involved in study abroad programming and at the same time meet the demands of institutional research requirements. Fourteen years ago, in my introduction to the first Frontiers volume, I wrote: “As we set out across the frontiers that have defined study abroad we cross into uncharted territory, but with a purpose that defines our path… the journey of encountering the frontiers of our field.” Since its founding Frontiers has remained true to this original purpose of seeking to expand our research approaches to and perspectives on study abroad. This current volume represents well how far the field of study abroad has come, and future volumes will no doubt take us further. Brian Whalen, Editor Dickinson College The Forum on Education Abroad

The trajectory of my life changed in the most mundane of ways. It was on the first day of classes during my junior year in college. While seated at a desk in a classroom in the Armory at the University of Illinois, I awaited eagerly for what would be my first upper-division history course: Professor Robert McColley’s course on Early National America, which covered the period roughly from the 1780s to the 1820s. After introducing the class, the professor handed out a list of topics and assigned one of them to each of us. My topic was William Blount (1749-1800). Who was William Blount, I wondered. The assignment was to write a research paper that would be due at the end of the semester.

Bell A. J., Rosen L. A., Dynlacht D., (1994). Truancy intervention. The Journal of Research and Development in Education, 27, 203-211. Lawson M. A., Lawson H. A., (2013). New conceptual frameworks for student engagement research, policy, and practice. Review of Educational Research, 83, 432–479. Rodriguez L. F., Conchas G. Q., (2009). Preventing truancy and dropout among urban middle school youth: Understanding community-based action from the student’s perspective. Education and Urban Society, 41(2), 216-247. Coordinator, J. L. R., (2014). Factors associated with truancy. Journal of Counseling & Development, 34(7), 431-436. Shute, J. W., & Cooper, B. S. (2015). Understanding in-school truancy. Phi Delta Kappan, 96(6), 65-68. Shute, J., & Cooper, B. S. (2014). Fixing truancy now: Inviting students back to class. Rowman & Littlefield. Janosz, M., Archambault, I., Morizot, J., & Pagani, L. S. (2008). School engagement trajectories and their differential predictive relations to dropout. Journal of social Issues, 64(1), 21-40. Chesney-Lind, Meda & Nakano, Joanne. (2004). Arrest Trends, Gang Involvement, and Truancy in Hawaii: An Interim Report to the Twenty-Second Hawaii State Legislature. Honolulu, HI: University of Hawaii at Manoa. Conolly M., O’Keeffe D. (2009). Don’t fence me in: Essays on the rational truant (pp. 115–138). Buckingham, England: University of Buckingham Press. Finn, J. D. (1989). Withdrawing from school. Review of Educational Research, 59, 117–142. doi:10.2307/1170412 Wang, M. T., & Peck, S. (2013). Adolescent educational success and mental health vary across school engagement profiles. Developmental Psychology. Advance online publication. doi:10.1037/a0030028 Wang M.-T., Fredricks J. A., (2013). The reciprocal links between school engagement, youth problem behaviors, and school dropout during adolescence. Child Development, 85, 1–16. doi:10.1111/cdev.12138 Wang, M. T., Dishion, T. J., Stormshak, E. A., & Willett, J. B. (2011). Trajectories of family management practices and early adolescence behavioral outcomes in middle school. Developmental Psychology, 47, 1324–1341. doi:10.1037/a0024026 Hemphill S. A., Toumbourou, J. W., Smith R., Kendall G. E., Rowland B., Freiberg K., Williams J. W., (2010). Are rates of school suspension higher in socially disadvantaged neighborhoods? An Australian study. Health Promotion Journal of Australia, 21, 12–18. doi:10.1071/HE10012 Battin-Pearson S., Newcomb M. D., Abbott R. D., Hill K. G., Catalano R. F., Hawkins J. D., (2000). Predictors of early high school dropout: A test of five theories. Journal of Educational Psychology, 92, 568. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.92.3.568 Southwell N., (2006). Truants on truancy: A badness or a valuable indicator of unmet special educational needs? British Journal of Special Education, 33, 91-97. Deci E. L., (2009). Large-scale school reform as viewed from the self-determination theory perspective. Theory and Research in Education, 7, 244–252. doi:10.1177/1477878509104329 Thapa A., Cohen J., Guffey S., Higgins-D’Alessandro A., (2013). A review of school climate research. Review of Educational Research, 83, 357–385. doi:10.3102/0034654313483907. Chase P. A., Hilliard L., Geldhof G. J., Warren D., Lerner R., (2014). Academic achievement in the high school years: The changing role of school engagement. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 43, 884–896.doi: 10.1007/s10964-013-0085-4 Roorda, D. L., Koomen, H. M. Y., Spilt J. L., Oort F. J., (2011). The influence of affective teacher–student relationships on students’ school engagement and achievement: A meta-analytic approach. Review of Educational Research, 81, 493–529. doi:10.3102/0034654311421793. Henry K. L., Thornberry T. P., (2010). Truancy and escalation of substance use during adolescence. Journal of Studies on Alcohol and Drugs, 71, 115-124. Vaughn, M. G., Maynard, B. R. , Salas-Wright, C. P. , Perron, B. E. , & Abdon, A. . (2013). Prevalence and correlates of truancy in the us: results from a national sample. Journal of Adolescence, 36(4), 767-776. Giddens, A. (1984). Pp：328-329. The constitution of society: Outline of the theory of structuration. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press.

At the heart of Harvard lay the College. Half of the University’s students were there, as was most of the history that fueled the Harvard mystique. Undergraduate tuition and the contributions of well-heeled College alumni provided much of the income on which the University depended. But the elitist, inbred College culture posed a substantial obstacle to Conant’s goal of a more meritocratic Harvard. Admission was the first step in the student life cycle, and admissions policy went far to set the tone of the College. Eliot did not pay much attention to the matter. But his successor Lowell wanted students who would be a social elite. Catholic students were quite acceptable to him: in comportment and values they passed his entry test for the leadership class. So, too—more doubtfully—did wealthy, assimilated German Jews, though assuredly not their Russian-Jewish brethren. Anne MacDonald, executive secretary of the admissions office since the beginning of the century, was one of those women then (and now) essential to the smooth functioning of Harvard. In a 1934 memorandum to Conant, she explained the workings of her bailiwick. She and her opposite numbers at Yale (a Miss Elliot), Princeton (a Miss Williams), and the College Entrance Examination Board (a Miss McLaughlin) met yearly “to compare notes on all matters concerning admission, and the different ways in which they are treated at the three universities.” Some of her work required special handling: “The interviews with rejected Hebrews or their relatives are particularly precarious, and one needs to be constantly on the alert. . . . For the past ten years, or since the restriction [Harvard’s unofficial Jewish quota] we have been particularly fortunate in settling these cases.” But there were snakes in this admissions Garden of Eden. A substantial portion of each entering class failed to meet the academic standards of the College: 30 to 40 percent of freshmen had unsatisfactory records in the early 1930s. And the student body was too parochial: in 1931 Harvard had the highest portion (40 percent) of students from its home state among the nation’s major colleges.

No analysis of the history of the community college movement in Massachusetts can begin without a discussion of some of the peculiar features of higher education in that state. Indeed, the development of all public colleges in Massachusetts was, for many years, inhibited by the strength of the state’s private institutions (Lustberg 1979, Murphy 1974, Stafford 1980). The Protestant establishment had strong traditional ties to elite colleges—such as Harvard, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Williams, and Amherst—and the Catholic middle class felt equally strong bonds to the two Jesuit institutions in the state: Boston College and Holy Cross (Jencks and Riesman 1968, p. 263). If they had gone to college at all, most of Massachusetts’s state legislators had done so in the private system. Private college loyalties were not the only reasons for opposition to public higher education. Increased state spending for any purpose was often an anathema to many Republican legislators, and even most urban “machine” Democrats were unwilling to spend state dollars where the private sector appeared to work well enough (Stafford and Lustberg 1978). As late as 1950, the commonwealth’s public higher education sector served fewer than ten thousand students, just over 10 percent of total state enrollments in higher education. In 1960, public enrollment had grown to only 16 percent of the total, at a time when 59 percent of college students nationwide were enrolled in public institutions (Stafford and Lustberg 1978, p. 12). Indeed, the public sector did not reach parity with the private sector until the 1980s. Of the 15,945 students enrolled in Massachusetts public higher education in 1960, well over 95 percent were in-state students. The private schools, by contrast, cast a broader net: of the nearly 83,000 students enrolled in the private schools, more than 40 percent were from out of state (Organization for Social and Technical Innovation 1973). The opposition to public higher education began to recede in the late 1950s. Already by mid-decade, a large number of urban liberals had become members of the state legislature, and a new governor, Foster Furcolo, had been elected in 1956 on an activist platform.

The period of Dring’s life as a full-time student at the Royal College of Music overlapped with the concluding years of World War II. The director of the RCM, George Dyson, decided to keep the school open, and Dring’s diaries provide a picture of her life during the first years of the war. Principal teachers included W.H. Reed in violin, Lilian Gaskell in piano, Topliss Green in voice, and Margaret Rubel in “dramatic.” Dring continued to be active as a performer, earning her ARCM certificate in piano, and she performed in many plays and scenes as part of the dramatic class. She also had the opportunity to produce, direct, and write the music for The Emperor and the Nightingale, the annual Christmas play for the Junior Department. Her most important instructor was Herbert Howells in composition, with whom she studied for her entire four years as a full-time student, and she also took occasional lessons with Ralph Vaughan Williams. Her musical style is discussed through an examination of “Under the Greenwood Tree,” the first of her Three Shakespeare Songs, written and first performed during these years.

Chapter 4 begins at the point at which the Bob and Rose Brown’s ‘readies’ project supposedly failed: after the Readies for Bob Brown’s Machine anthology was published in 1931. Featuring experimental texts by Ezra Pound, Gertrude Stein, William Carlos Williams and many others, the readies project has hitherto been considered one of many modernist casualties of the Great Depression. This chapter finally reveals its full story, and details how Rose Brown led the development of a new working reading machine in the 1930s and beyond. Anthology contributors including James T. Farrell, Norman MacLeod and the Browns had begun to chart a course beyond the binary orbits of dour social realism and ‘ivory-tower’ aestheticism. The chapter combines new readings of these American super-realist writers with extensive archival research using a meta-formational approach, which relies on (rather than is undermined by) different disciplinary approaches to cultural production. Reconstructing the Browns’ journey from the rural labour institute Commonwealth College to the Polytechnic Museums of Russia – from the burgeoning microfilm industry in New York City to their plantation in Brazil – it reveals how the Browns’ proletarian class politics and Veblenist technicities articulate a sustained and dialogic engagement between modernist vanguards and mass culture.