The Emerging Scholars Blog

What are you reading, watching, thinking about this week? As usual, here’s a few which have been on our mind. Let us know your thoughts on any/all of them. If you have items you’d like us to consider for the top five, add them in the comments or send them to Tom or Mike.

1.  Stand Up While You Read This! (Olivia Judson, NY Times Opinionator, 2/23/2010):  an evolutionary biologist warns her reader:

Your chair is your enemy.  It doesn’t matter if you go running every morning, or you’re a regular at the gym. If you spend most of the rest of the day sitting — in your car, your office chair, on your sofa at home — you are putting yourself at increased risk of obesity, diabetes, heart disease, a variety of cancers and an early death. In other words, irrespective of whether you exercise vigorously, sitting for long periods is bad for you. …

Probably much easier to address by those who work in labs, go into the field, pace as we think/present.  Some tips in the article for those who sit a lot.  Any to add?

2.   Academic Bait-and-Switch, Part 6 (Henry Adams, Chronicle of Higher Education, 2/25/2010).

… Today I wince at my naïveté. Studying literature doesn’t guarantee moral improvement any more than studying chemistry, economics, or plumbing does. I should have accepted that in my first year of graduate work at Elite National University, because the evidence was all around me, but I clung to my childish belief in the power of literature. In my second year, when my fellow teaching assistants elected me their representative to the first-year-composition committee, I even had a notion that I could help change the program for the better. …

The foundation of one’s vision for daily life, let alone culture making, when entering the messy milieu of any profession is vital.  What is yours?  Note: keep in mind that Henry Adams, the pseudonym for a professor of English at a liberal-arts college in the Midwest, shares his perspective in the Bait-and-Switch series.

3. Before you follow the link, take a guess on What They’re Reading on College Campuses (The Chronicle of Higher Education, 2/25/2010) or maybe I should make the question What  bestsellers did Barnes & Noble and the Follett Higher Education Group sell in January 2010?  Where do you draw your up and coming must reads, someplace like the Weekly Book List (Compiled by Nina C. Ayoub, The Chronicle of Higher Education, 2/22/2010)?

4. Do you practice the Examen? From our colleagues at The Well, Ann Boyd has written an excellent introduction to the Examen. This classical spiritual exercise was created by Ignatius of Loyola, founder of the Jesuits, and it has served Christians from many traditions well over the centuries. If you journal already, or you are looking for a new way to reflect on your life and God’s work, check out Ann’s article.

5. New website for Books & Culture: ESN partner Books & Culture has launched a new website. If you like what you see, why not head over the ESN Subscription Discounts page and subscribe to B&C for only $5 a year?

Education for Human Flourishing, Cover

Our conversations with hundreds of Emerging Scholars at Urbana 09 precluded us from keeping up with our readings.  But don’t worry, we’ll catch up as soon as our plane lands ;-)

In its place,

1.  swing by our Facebook page to see a few pictures of Emerging Scholars at Urbana 09.  Note:  more coming.

2.  enjoy the kick-off of a series of quotes from Education for Human Flourishing:  A Christian Perspective (Paul D. Spears and Steven R. Loomis, InterVarsity Press, 2009),* by considering an excerpt from the Christian Worldview Integration Series Preface:

The word integrate means “to form or blend into a whole,” “to unite.”  We humans naturally seek to find the unity that is behind diversity, and in fact coherence is an important mark of rationality.  There are two kinds of integration:  conceptual and personal.  In conceptual integration, our theological beliefs, especially those derived from careful study of the Bible, are blended and unified with important, reasonable ideas from our profession or college major into a coherent, intellectually satisfying Christian worldview. … In personal integration we seek to live a unified life, a life in which we are the same in public as we are in private, a life in which various aspects of our personality are consistent with each other and conducive to a life human flourishing as a follower of Jesus. — by Christian Worldview Integration Series editors Francis Beckwith and J.P. Moreland, pp. 9-10.

Questions to ponder as we begin a new year:  Why does integration matter?  How do we go about it?

*Find the title appealing?  Then check out the Preface & Precis of Book and Chapters.

Two recent articles on the profession of education worth consideration:

1. In Search of Education Leaders, by Bob Herbert, NY Times Op-Ed, December 4, 2009
2. The Ph.D. Problem: On the professionalization of faculty life, doctoral training, and the academy’s self-renewal, by Louis Menand, Harvard Magazine, November-December 2009.  HT: Miller.

Anyone willing to take a stab at why the educational system is so leaky and how we find/develop educational leaders which serve their department, discipline, campus, education in the United States/beyond?

Questions which come to mind with the Harvard degree program, topic of In Search of Education Leaders, “Will this program include the philosophy, purpose, and joy of education? Or are these unable to be expressed in the pragmatic, secular context of trying to keep up because we need to?”  With regard to ‘residency’ models, these already exist in education, e.g., the undergraduate student teacher model. Stronger cross-grade & inter-generational mentoring with the potential for long term relationships would profit the whole educational system.

HT:  Nick who responded to my Facebook musings by referring to Diane Rehm’s discussion of Women in Science with

1. Dr. Elizabeth Blackburn, Morris Hertzein Professor of Biology and Physiology at the University of California, San Francisco. Dr. Blackburn was awarded the 2009 Nobel Prize for Physiology or Medicine, along with Carol Greider and Jack W. Szostak.
2. Dr. Carol Greider, Daniel Nathans Professor of Molecular Biology & Genetics at The Johns Hopkins University. Dr. Greider was awarded the 2009 Nobel Prize for Physiology or Medicine, along with Elizabeth Blackburn and Jack W. Szostak.
3. Melody Barnes, director of the White House Domestic Policy Council, and special assistant to President Obama

Yes, higher education is leaky pipeline for women in the sciences.  Any responses by those part of the system?

According to Louis Menand in The Ph.D. Problem: On the professionalization of faculty life, doctoral training, and the academy’s self-renewal, the educational system is leaky in quite another way for the Humanities, but with a particular internal end in mind. Can/should higher education in the Humanities add practical skills and develop a specific graduation time line?  What about those who went through the system? Will they allow such changes (Note: Reminds me of the reduction of hours in medical training)?  Will the motivation for students in the Humanities become the pursuit and exploration of knowledge for the rich or those seeking direction later in life?  Even though the article seems focused upon the Humanities, especially English, does the article apply to all (or let’s say most) of higher education?

Here’s the top five articles, books, websites, etc., that we’ve been reading or thinking about the past week. Let us know your thoughts on any/all of them.  In addition, if you have items you’d like us to consider for the top five, add them in the comments or send them to Tom or Mike.

Claude Levi-Strauss

1.  The Big Questions: Have our colleges and universities lost sight of their purpose? (Jerry Pattengale, Books & Culture, November/December 2009) critiques Education’s End: Why Our Colleges and Universities Have Given Up on the Meaning of Life (Anthony Kronman, Yale University Press, 2008) and recommends The American University in a Postsecular Age (Co-edited by Douglas & Rhonda Jacobsen, Oxford University Press, 2008).

2. Can a biologist trust an evangelical Christian? – InterVarsity Graduate & Faculty Ministry at Indiana University will be hosting this event next Thursday, Nov. 12.

This panel discussion features three evangelical scholars on the topic of Christianity, science and evolution. Our primary audience for this event will be scholars who are skeptical or even hostile about the idea of integrating religion and science. We have chosen the topic as part of the Indiana University “themester” on “Evolution, Diversity, and Change.” Our goals, at this point, are to provide a model of what it might look like to integrate belief in God with scientific inquiry; to put names and faces behind what can often be the demonized other (evangelical Christians); to foster a discussion about the integration of religion and science; to work at eroding the destructive binary that is assumed to exist between science and religion; and to work at building trust between the scientific community and evangelical Christianity.

For more information, check out their website, www.iugfm.blogspot.com.

3. Claude Lévi-Strauss Dies at 100 – One of the most important intellectual figures of the 20th Century died last Friday. From the NY Times’ obituary:

A powerful thinker, Mr. Lévi-Strauss was an avatar of “structuralism,” a school of thought in which universal “structures” were believed to underlie all human activity, giving shape to seemingly disparate cultures and creations. His work was a profound influence even on his critics, of whom there were many. There has been no comparable successor to him in France. And his writing — a mixture of the pedantic and the poetic, full of daring juxtapositions, intricate argument and elaborate metaphors — resembles little that had come before in anthropology.

Other reflections on his life and work: WSJ’s obituary and an elegy, NPR’s story about his 100th birthday, Eric Banks’ post at the Chronicle of Higher Ed about Lévi-Strauss’ importance.

Photo: Claude Levi-Strauss in 1992, from sagabardon via Flickr

4.  In a NY Times Op-Ed entitled Teach Your Teachers Well, Susan Engel (a senior lecturer in psychology and the director of the teaching program at Williams College) builds upon Secretary of Education Arne Duncan’s Urging for ‘Revolutionary Change’ in Nation’s Teacher-Training Programs.  How about this angle on the problem?

Our best universities have, paradoxically, typically looked down their noses at education, as if it were intellectually inferior. The result is that the strongest students are often in colleges that have no interest in education, while the most inspiring professors aren’t working with students who want to teach. This means that comparatively weaker students in less intellectually rigorous programs are the ones preparing to become teachers.

So the first step is to get the best colleges to throw themselves into the fray. If education was a good enough topic for Plato, John Dewey and William James, it should be good enough for 21st-century college professors. — Susan Engel, Teach Your Teachers Well, NY Times, 11/02/2009

5. Online Education, Growing Fast, Eyes the Truly ‘Big Time’ (Marc Perry, Chronicle of Higher Education, October 30, 2009) as The $50K Club: 58 Private Colleges Pass a Pricing Milestone (Reported by Scott Carlson, Kathryn Masterson, and Jeffrey Brainard, and written by Mr. Carlson. Chronicle of Higher Education. November 1, 2009).  Looking for some thoughts on how liberal arts colleges and their ideals will survive the current economic crisis?

Traditional reasoning about the enrichment of the “student as future citizen” can only go so far when parents who pay the tuition or students taking the courses can’t see a bottom line in the form of a lucrative job after graduation. — Katharine S. Brooks, Close the Gap Between the Liberal Arts and Career Services, Chronicle of Higher Education, November 1, 2009

In Close the Gap Between the Liberal Arts and Career Services, Katharine S. Brooks, director of liberal-arts career services, University of Texas at Austin, offers some good ideas regarding career services.  For parents, students, and educators she has a new book,  You Majored in What? Mapping Your Path From Chaos to Career (Viking, 2009), which might be worth exploring.  If you’ve read it, let us know what you think.

Our Week-in-Review feature has a new format. We know there’s way too much to read out there already, so we’re going to be highlighting the top five articles, books, websites, etc., that we’ve been reading or thinking about the past week. If you have items you’d like us to consider for the top five, add them in the comments or send them to Tom or Mike.

The Millennial Muddle (Eric Hoover, Chronicle of Higher Education, October 11, 2009) takes awhile to wade through but is worth it. Tom’s placing this topic on his to post about list ;-)  Anyone with research, reflections, or personal testimonies regarding how to understand/categorize/define/relate to (?) the Millennials?

Speaking of Speaking (Chronicle of Higher Education, October 15, 2009) by a Female Science Professor gives tips on public speaking, in particular how the type of introduction can have a significant effect, at least at the beginning of my talk, on my mood and presentation strategy. She gives several illustrations which you might find of benefit. Any illustrations of best/worst speaker introductions you’ve heard?

Tweed: Oh, You Lucky College Professors! Adjuncts, Too (Chronicle of Higher Education, October 14, 2009).  Do you agree with …

Memo to America’s college professors: You have the third best job in the country.

This is according to a list of “the top 50 careers with great pay and growth prospects” that will appear in the November issue of Money magazine. OK, so you’re behind systems engineers and physician’s assistants, but No. 3 wins you a red ribbon, right?

What Has Theology Ever Done for Science? – Quite a lot actually, writes Denis Alexander, Director of the Faraday Institute for Science and Religion at St. Edmund’s College, Cambridge, in reply to a question that Daniel Dennett has been fond of asking lately. (HT: Bede Journal and Faith-Science News)

More on Souls in Transition – Christianity Today has published an interview with Christian Smith about his new book, Souls in Transition.  Smith and his fellow researchers followed up with the teens from Soul Searching to learn how their religious lives changed as they entered their early to mid-20s.  Overall, says Smith,

Most of what happens in emerging adulthood works against serious faith commitments and putting down roots in congregations. Most emerging adults are disconnected from religious institutions and practices. Geographic mobility, social mobility, wanting to have options, thinking this is the time to be crazy and free in ways most religious traditions would frown upon, wanting an identity different from the family of origin—all of these factors reduce serious faith commitments.

But – good news! – attending college is no longer the “faith killer” that it was in years past. Smith:

If anything, college is no different in terms of the faith corrosion outcomes on youth. It may even strengthen the faith of some. We think this is partly about a growing number of evangelical faculty at secular colleges. Another factor is the increasing presence and legitimacy of campus religious groups and ministries [InterVarsity Christian Fellowship, Campus Crusade] that provide support systems—not just fellowship, but also intellectual engagement that may have been lacking in past decades.

The culture has also changed: “spirituality” is more acceptable now than in past decades. Most faculty know you cannot say stupidly anti-religious things in the classroom and get away with it.

Can we imagine a day when the college experience becomes known for introducing students to the spiritual and historical depths of the Christian faith?

Did you catch last week’s New York Times article on Francis Collins?  Here’s how it begins:

He drives a Harley-Davidson, wears a black leather jacket on his back and his religion on his sleeve, and plays a custom guitar with big-name rock stars.  All that would seem to have nothing to do with Dr. Francis S. Collins’s day job as the new director of the National Institutes of Health. Except that at the institutes, such things do matter. …

First, there is the God issue. Dr. Collins believes in him. Passionately. And he preaches about his belief in churches and a best-selling book. For some presidential appointees, that might not be a problem, but many scientists view such outspoken religious commitment as a sign of mild dementia. … (Gardiner Harris, For N.I.H. Chief, Issues of Identity and Culture, NY Times, October 6, 2009)

As I’ve posted in other places, I find this charge of dementia of particular interest.  Why? I recently participated in a discussion regarding how a physician might diagnosis Jesus’ mental condition based upon Mark 3 and dementia had been raised. What is dementia?

Deterioration of intellectual faculties, such as memory, concentration, and judgment, resulting from an organic disease or a disorder of the brain, and often accompanied by emotional disturbance and personality changes. — “dementia.” The American Heritage® Stedman’s Medical Dictionary. Houghton Mifflin Company. 13 Oct. 2009. <Dictionary.com http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/dementia>.

In this case, it appears to be an off-handed manner of name calling, i.e., declaring Collins mentally ill, even insane for his outspoken religious commitment in order to discredit his leadership.  What do you think?  Part of our exploration of The Outrageous Idea of Christian Scholarship involves wrestling with how one responds to such comments, note:  this case highlights the war between science and religion/faith.

Have you ever faced such challenges?  If so, how have you responded?  How should Collins respond?  Should he stop wearing religion on his sleeve and just get his job done at the N.I.H., should he cut back on public declarations of faith, or should he keep on keeping on the way he is?

Cover of "The Outrageous Idea of Christian Scholarship"

George Marsden, Notre Dame’s Francis A. McAnaney Professor of History Emeritus, wrote The Outrageous Idea of Christian Scholarship (New York:  Oxford University Press, 1997) to take a step toward clarifying what the ancient enterprise of relating faith and learning might mean in the academy today (preface).  How can this be accomplished in a time when the university has lost the ability to have substantive conversation regarding not only religion, but also anything that goes beyond the practical to the larger issues of life?  Marsden boldly asserts that the assumptions of our hollow contemporary university culture must be re-examined, in particular our rejection of ancient religious learning and its bearing on what one thinks about (p.4).  Over the course of The Outrageous Idea of Christian Scholarship, Marsden delineates guidelines for religiously informed scholarship; guidelines that he believes will lead to scholarship that can be accepted as legitimate in the mainstream academy.

Is that outrageous?  What do you think?  Note:  If you haven’t already done such, time to pick-up the book and begin reading ;-)

The Outrageous Idea of Christian Scholarship emerged from Marsden’s responses to the critiques and questions raised by his provocative Concluding Unscientific Postscript to The Soul of the American University: From Protestant Establishment to Established Nonbelief (New York:  Oxford University Press, 1994).  His Concluding Unscientific Postscript digs into

1. higher education’s a priori rejection of all religiously based claims as unscientific
2. pluralism as a basis for imposing uniformity
3. academic freedom
4. relationship between church and state.

Marsden wraps up with this challenging summary:

In many of the American colonies all the citizens were taxed for the support of the established religious group, regardless of the citizen’s religious affiliations.  In the nineteenth century the Protestant establishment became informal and declared itself nonsectarian.  Today nonsectarianism has come to mean the exclusion of all religious concerns.  In effect, only purely naturalistic viewpoints are allowed a serious academic hearing.  As in earlier establishments, groups who do not match the current national ideological norms are forced to fend for themselves outside of the major spheres of cultural influence.  Today, almost all religious groups, no matter what their academic credentials, are on the outside of this educational establishment, or soon will be, if present trends continue.  Americans who are concerned for justice ought to be open to considering alternatives (440).

As we begin our on-line conversation of The Outrageous Idea of Christian Scholarship, please share your thoughts on some/all of the below questions.

1. What’s so outrageous about Christian scholarship?  Why does the term Christian scholarship stimulate a negative knee-jerk reaction by some Christians and non-Christians?  Do nonreligious viewpoints receive special privilege in higher education (24)?
2. Has a negative knee-jerk reaction to Christian scholarship (or religiously informed scholarship in general) receded in higher education over the past decade?  Is Christian scholarship (or religiously informed scholarship in general) now accepted through the lens of pluralism?  If so, please share some examples to bless one-another.
3. In your experience, how do you find Christian faith and scholarship to helpfully (and possibly unhelpfully) relate?
4. Do you agree with Marsden that faith precedes and conditions understanding? (p. 9)
5. Any particular points/quotes in the introduction or first chapter which you desire to draw our attention to and possibly even discuss?

Note:  as mentioned in a previous post, if you’d like to host a face-to-face book club coinciding with our online discussion, we recommend that you download the ESN discussion guide.

Last week when Dr. Joe Kearns, MD, Emergency Medicine, presented on Keys of Thriving (Not Just Surviving!) in Medical School and Beyond at PSU-Hershey’s Christian Medical Society lunch lecture, I couldn’t help but think this has ESN written all over it. Below are a few main points which I culled/distilled from his presentation.  Let me know what you think of their relevance to your graduate school/professional experience.  Feel free to highlight, expand upon, or share a story in relationship to one or several points.

1. “Life is going to get better after…”  This is just not true.  Life doesn’t get any better after you finish your degree, it only changes.  Note:  it is particularly important to keep in mind the growing complexity of commitments/responsibilities with family, friends, community, church, workplace, professional societies. …
2. We must feed upon the Word of God.  We need to learn how to live between Genesis and Revelation.  As Jesus answered the tempter, by quoting Deuteronomy 8:3, “It is written, ‘Man doesn’t live only on bread. He also lives on every word that comes from the mouth of God’ “ (Matthew 4:4, NIV).  Do not forget as you treat your patients [translate to your vocation/profession] that although the creation is broken, God created it all good.  Furthermore, part of our mission as members of the Kingdom of God is to restore the creation.  And one day God will bring full restoration in a new heaven and new earth.
3. Dwell in the wisdom literature, i.e., Job, Psalms, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, and Song of Solomon.  Why?  Because in school you’ll get a lot of knowledge, but you’ll not engage with wisdom directly.  Soak up the poetry, songs.  A lot of life is vanity.  Don’t take yourself so seriously.  It’s important to keep yourself in perspective.
4. Be troubled by the account of the rich young ruler (Matthew 19:16-30).  Why?  Because being rich is a mixed blessing.  The more you have, the more trouble you have.  And having everything doesn’t make you happy.
5. In summary, the two things necessary to thrive in school and after graduation:  read/query the Word of God AND have fellowship with the people of God no matter the work load.  If you can’t do the two above, then quit school.  Don’t become narrow and seek accolades.  Before moving for your job, make sure there is a good match with a local congregation.  Don’t focus on making money, limit your hours to be involved with community, church, family.  Take time to interact with your patients (translate to your vocation/profession).
6. Jesus came to give life and give it abundantly, not just to survive in school.  Without a relationship with the Creator, you don’t know who you are.

Some final thoughts on The Faculty of the Future:  Leaner, Meaner, More Innovative, Less Secure (Forum, Chronicle of Higher Education, 7/10/2009) from a friend who offers his gifts to Christ by serving as a business professor.  Do any readers have comments on technological determinism and/or the striving for organizational efficiency in higher education?

There are a few elements of the second commentary (TIMOTHY CARMODY) which make sense – but it reads to much like standard technological determinism predictions of “changes in technology change everything”. The model of a knowledgeable teach leading inquiry into a topic by providing information/explanation, prompting questions, and recognitions/correction of participant contribution is very old and has endured through many technology shifts (the distribution of print bibles does not eliminate the value of inductive bible studies with a leader who is at least minimally trained :-)).    So while some changes will happen are not likely to be the ones this author is predicting. …

The changes described by the 4th author (JOSEPH C. HERMANOWICZ) are already happening. There is a marked difference between how my senior colleagues and my junior colleagues see their career prospects and their role in the university.   One point I would make here:  I doubt the claim that this is an less expensive way to run a university.   Read the rest of this entry »

In the last Week in Review, I highlighted The Faculty of the Future:  Leaner, Meaner, More Innovative, Less Secure (Forum, Chronicle of Higher Education, 7/10/2009).  You may remember, I’ve asked a business professor to comment on the piece.  The faculty member graciously offered some time while writing a grant proposal, wrapping up a paper to be sent out (the 6th one of the summer), grading the exams and papers from an international class, summarizing of Business School IT/New Media innovation projects, handling some administrative issues for a conference, and briefly reflecting on how neither of us works as hard as our wives ;-)   For his thoughts on the material written by ANTHONY T. GRAFTON and PETER N. STEARNS visit Week in Review.  Next week we’ll conclude with TIMOTHY CARMODY and JOSEPH C. HERMANOWICZ.

Before turning to professor’s comments, I’d like to share that I’m not surprised that the research university model has taken us to a grant money approach (collective, entrepreneurial bureaucracy) where faculty/administrators must Show me the money.  It would seem to me that mentoring/discipling students in the ethics of securing/using such money would be of significant value and lead to the value of applying lessons learned from history, literature, philosophy, pyschology, sociology, etc.  But I went to a liberal arts college ;-)

In addition, the pressure to Show me the money is not just within the organization, but incoming students call for high job placement (undergraduate and graduate/professional schools).  Job acquisition and maintenance involves not just strong training in one’s field but also good communication skills, another humanities offering worth the investment. … All the more necessary in a difficult economic time such as we’re currently in/entering.  What do you think?  In the future, I’ll return to the history/philosophy of the research university.  But now let’s turn to a few insights offered by my faculty friend. … Read the rest of this entry »