Tag: Blog

  • the-authors-of-new-titles-in-the-major-problems-series – The Cengage Blog

    the-authors-of-new-titles-in-the-major-problems-series – The Cengage Blog

    Reading Time: 3 minutes

    Cengage authors dedicate themselves to producing high-quality content, while also prioritizing a functional learning experience for students, equipping them with background information and tools necessary to analyze the important topics covered in their courses. We’re happy to introduce you to the authors of two first edition titles, and one upcoming fifth edition title, within the Major Problems Anthology series, which familiarizes students with important topics in U.S history, world history and western civilization.

    Ready to meet these authors and learn about their titles? We can’t wait for you to get to know them all.

    Jackson J. Spielvogel and Kathryn Spielvogel ― authors of Major Problems in Western Civilization, Volume I and Volume II, 1e 2025

    “Major Problems in Western Civilization,” 1e includes a variety of supporting materials and historical prose, guiding a carefully curated set of primary and secondary source selections. This text preps instructors and students so they can engage primary sources at the highest level.

    Jackson J. Spielvogel is Associate Professor Emeritus of History at The Pennsylvania State University. He received his Ph.D. from The Ohio State University, where he specialized in Reformation history. His work has been supported by fellowships from the Fulbright Foundation and the Foundation for Reformation Research. He is the author of  “Western Civilization,” now in its 12th edition, as well as co-author (with William Duiker) of “World History,” now in its 10th edition. Professor Spielvogel has won five major university-wide teaching awards.

    Kathryn Spielvogel earned a B.A. in history, and M.A. in art history from The Pennsylvania State University. She continued her graduate studies in history at the University at Buffalo, SUNY, before working as a research editor on history textbooks for the past fifteen years. Passionate about historic preservation and economic development, Kathryn volunteers for several non-profit organizations while renovating historic homes and commercial buildings throughout Pennsylvania.

    Read Kathryn Spielvogel’s blog article about this first edition title: “Why the Study of Western Civilization Still Matters”

    William J. Duiker, author of Major Problems in World History, Volume I and Volume II, 1e 2025

    “Major Problems in World History,” 1e is a comprehensive source for documents and secondary essays dealing with a broad sweep of world history. Each chapter begins with a short introductory essay providing historical context for that period of history.

    William J. Duiker is Liberal Arts Professor Emeritus of East Asian studies at The Pennsylvania State University. He earned a Ph.D. in East Asian history at Georgetown University in 1968. A former foreign service officer with assignments in Taiwan and South Vietnam, he is the author of several books on East Asia. He is also co-author with colleague Jackson Spielvogel of “World History,” 10e. He has traveled widely and was awarded a Faculty Scholar Medal for Outstanding Achievement in 1996.

    Plus a new fifth edition

    Elizabeth Cobbs, Edward J. Blum and Vanessa Walker ― authors of Major Problems in American History, Volume I and Volume II, 5e 2025

    “Major Problems in American History” includes both primary sources and analytical essays on important U.S history topics, with an overall goal towards helping students refine their critical thinking skills.

    Elizabeth Cobbs is a Professor and Dwight E. Stanford Chair in American Foreign Relations at San Diego State University and has won literary prizes for both history and fiction, including the Allan Nevins Prize and Stuart Bernath Book Prize. She earned her Ph.D. in American history at Stanford University. She has served on the jury for the Pulitzer Prize in History and on the Historical Advisory Committee of the U.S. State Department. She has received awards and fellowships from the Fulbright Commission and other distinguished institutions. Her essays have been published in the New York Times, Jerusalem Post and Los Angeles Times, among others. Her current project is a history of women soldiers in World War I.

    Edward J. Blum is a Professor of History at San Diego State University. He received his B.A. from the University of Michigan and his M.A. and Ph.D. from the University of Kentucky. He is the author and co-author of several books on United States history and the winner of numerous awards, including the Peter Seaborg Award for Civil War Scholarship and the Gustave O. Arlt Award in the Humanities.

    Read Professor Blum’s blog article about this fifth edition: “The Importance of Discussion in American History”

     

    Vanessa Walker is the Gordon Levin Associate Professor of Diplomatic History at Amherst College, where she teaches classes on U.S. politics, foreign relations and human rights. She received her B.A. from Whitman College and her M.A. and Ph.D. from the University of Wisconsin-Madison. She is the recipient of fellowships from the Miller Center for Public Affairs at the University of Virginia, the George Mosse Program at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem and the Stanton Foundation Applied History Program.

    Read: “Q&A With Vanessa Walker, Co-Author of Major Problems in American History”

     

    Did these Major Problems titles pique your interest? Explore them all and decide which one is right for your history course.

    Source link

  • Second-generation student borrowers | SRHE Blog

    Second-generation student borrowers | SRHE Blog

    by Ariane de Gayardon

    Since the 1980s, massification, policy shifts, and changing ideas about who benefits from higher education have led to the expansion of national student loan schemes globally. For instance, student loans were introduced in England in 1990 and generalized in 1998. Australia introduced income-contingent student loans in the late 1980s. While federal student loans were introduced in the US in 1958, their number and the amount of individual student loan debt ramped up in the 1990s.

    A lot of academic research has analysed this trend, evaluating the effect of student loans on access, retention, success, the student experience, and even graduate outcomes. Yet, this research is based on the choices and experiences of first-generation student borrowers and might not apply to current and future students.

    First-generation borrowers enter higher education with parents who have either not been to higher education, or who have a tertiary degree that pre-dates the expansion of student loans. The parents of first-generation borrowers therefore did not take up loans to pay for their higher education and had no associated repayment burden in adulthood. Any cost associated with these parents’ studies will likely have been shouldered by their families or through grants.

    Second-generation borrowers are the offspring of first-generation borrowers. Their parents took out student loans to pay for their own higher education. The choices made by second-generation borrowers when it comes to higher education and its funding could significantly differ from first-generation borrowers, because they are impacted by their parents’ own experience with student loans.

    Parents and parental experience indeed play an important role in children’s higher education choices and financial decisions. On the one hand, parents can provide financial or in-kind support for higher education. This is most evident in the design of student funding policies which often integrate parental income and financial contributions. In many countries, eligibility for financial aid is means-tested and based on family income (Williams & Usher, 2022). Examples include the US where an Expected Family Contribution is calculated upon assessment of financial need, or Germany where the financial aid system is based on a legal obligation for parents to contribute to their children’s study costs. Indeed, evidence shows that parents do contribute to students’ income. In Europe, family contributions make up nearly half of students’ income (Hauschildt et al, 2018). But the role of parents also extends to decisions about student loans: parents tend to try and shield their children from student debt, helping them financially when possible or encouraging cost-saving behaviour (West et al, 2015).

    On the other hand, parents transmit financial values to their children, which might play a role in their higher education decisions. Family financial socialization theory states that children learn their financial attitudes and behaviour from their parents, through direct teaching and via family interactions and relationships (Gudmunson & Danes, 2011). Studies indeed show the intergenerational transmission of social norms and economic preferences (Maccoby, 1992), including attitudes towards general debt (Almenberg et al, 2021). Continuity of financial values over generations has been observed in the specific case of higher education. Parents who received parental financial support for their own studies are more likely to contribute toward their children’s studies (Steelman & Powell, 1991). For some students, negative parental experiences with general debt can lead to extreme student debt aversion (Zerquera et al,2016).

    As countries globally rely increasingly on student loans to fund higher education, many more students will become second-generation borrowers. Because their parents had to repay their own student debt, the family’s financial assets may be depleted, potentially leading to reduced levels of parental financial support for higher education. This is likely to be even worse for students whose parents are still repaying their loans. In addition, parental experiences of student debt could influence the advice they give their children with regard to higher education financial decisions. As a result, this new generation of student borrowers will face challenges that their predecessors did not, fuelled by the transmitted experience of student loans from their parents (Figure 1).

    Figure 1 – Parental influence on second-generation borrowers

    As the share of second-generation borrowers in the student body increases, the need to understand the decision-making process of these students when it comes to (financial) higher education choices is essential. Although the challenges faced by borrowers will emerge at different times and with varying intensity across countries — depending in part on loan repayment formats — we have an opportunity now to be ahead of the curve. By researching this new generation of student borrowers and their parents, we can better assess their financial dilemmas and the support they need, providing further evidence to design future-proof equitable student funding policies.

    Ariane de Gayardon is Assistant Professor of Higher Education at the Center for Higher Education Policy Studies (CHEPS) based at the University of Twente in the Netherlands.

    Author: SRHE News Blog

    An international learned society, concerned with supporting research and researchers into Higher Education

    Source link

  • welcome-dr-haiyan-maier-new-author- The Cengage Blog

    welcome-dr-haiyan-maier-new-author- The Cengage Blog

    Reading Time: 3 minutes

    Ellie Whitney, author of “Understanding Nutrition” has been known as a nutrition trailblazer for many years. And after several editions, she hand-picked Sharon Rolfes, well known and respected in the field, to become the next author. Today, the Cengage nutrition team is excited to introduce Dr. Haiyan Maier as the new author of “Understanding Nutrition,” 17e. Dr. Maier, Ph.D., R.D., brings state-of-the-art nutrition research, advanced discipline knowledge and a multicultural perspective to the newest edition of the text. As a Registered Dietitian and nutrition professor, she presents an inclusive and comprehensive approach that reflects the latest research, addresses current trends and emphasizes key concepts for your course.

    “All foods fit”

    Dr. Maier prioritizes healthy eating, physical activity and family adventures. Growing up on the coast of northeast China and studying in Europe, she was able to enjoy foods from around the world, and now shares nutritious meals and global cuisine with her family. She advocates an “all foods fit” and “moderation is key” approach, and believes it’s essential to be mindful of the body.

    New topics and perspectives

    Dr. Maier’s contributions to “Understanding Nutrition” aim to promote health at every size, intuitive eating and the importance of the microbiome. Students will gain a deeper understanding of how gut health can influence overall well-being. Additionally, she has helped to present expanded discussions on nutrition misinformation, particularly its influence on diet culture in the United States. The 17th edition delves into the impact of social media on health and provides insights to help readers navigate information effectively. In-text examples, graphs, figures and photos are now more inclusive, showcasing people of various capabilities, life stages, cultures and ethnicities.

    Hear more from Dr. Maier below:

    What’s updated in this edition

    17e has been revised to include expanded discussions, updated highlights and a focus on key concepts, empowering students to develop a deeper understanding of nutrition.

    The highlights

    This best-selling title continues its tradition of providing cutting-edge nutrition coverage. Every chapter is followed by an updated highlight, offering an in-depth look at current and controversial topics. The text has been thoroughly revised to reflect the most recent research findings, ensuring students have access to the latest information. From energy balance to chronic condition prevention, the 17th edition addresses the diverse aspects of nutrition with contemporary relevance.

    Explore key concepts and inclusion

    To enhance learning, each chapter begins with outlines and learning objectives that focus readers’ attention on essential concepts. These objectives have been updated to align with Bloom’s Taxonomy, ensuring strong objective wording. The review features have been reformatted into bullet points, facilitating the capture of key information. This edition also embraces inclusion and diversity by incorporating diverse cultural and ethnic backgrounds, weight-inclusive information and weight-neutral language.

    Artificial sweeteners, sugar addiction and mindful eating

    This edition offers more information on artificial sweeteners, including a detailed exploration of different types of sugar on food labels. It also delves into the relationship between sugar addiction and the gut-brain axis, providing valuable insights into this prevalent issue. Additionally, the text introduces the principles of mindful eating and intuitive eating, emphasizing their importance in establishing a healthy relationship with food.

    Interactive content

    This title is also available in MindTap, our online learning platform, which includes Diet & Wellness Plus, diet analysis software powered by the ESHA database. With Diet & Wellness Plus, students can delve deeper into their own nutrition habits through active and engaging resources, tracking activities and reports.

    The 17th edition is an invaluable resource combining the latest research, contemporary relevance and an inclusive approach.

     

    Interested in “Understanding Nutrition,” 17e for your Intro to Nutrition course? Watch for this new edition coming soon, and explore other nutrition titles on the discipline page.

    Source link

  • want-to-build-a-robot- The Cengage Blog

    want-to-build-a-robot- The Cengage Blog

    Reading Time: 2 minutes

    Welcome to “System Dynamics and Controls,” 1e by Dr. S. Graham Kelly — a new first edition and comprehensive guide to understanding and controlling interdisciplinary engineering systems. The goal of this text is to provide the reader with a general understanding of how to mathematically model a linear engineering system and how to control it effectively.

    The fundamentals

    Engineering is inherently interdisciplinary, and successful engineers often navigate and work in multi-disciplinary teams. Whether you’re a mechanical engineer learning about electrical systems or an electrical engineer diving into chemical processes, understanding diverse disciplines is key. All engineers should have some familiarity with the modeling of physical systems of any kind, as well as with the time-dependent responses of these systems. This knowledge isn’t just theoretical, it’s integral to designing control systems that guide these systems’ operations.

    Take robotics, for example. Designing a robot requires expertise in both mechanical and electrical systems. A control system for the robot, usually an electrical controller, is designed to make the robot respond appropriately to certain inputs.

    The prerequisites

    Before diving in, it’s important to come prepared. This text is meant for those with a background in:

    • Single-variable calculus, including ordinary differential equations
    • Engineering physics, with a focus on mechanics, electromagnetism, and thermal systems
    • Core concepts from statics and dynamics, especially rigid body dynamics in planar motion

    For more advanced sections, knowledge of multi-variable calculus will be helpful. Additionally, while not essential, prior or concurrent study in chemistry, circuit analysis, fluid mechanics, and thermodynamics will enrich your understanding of specific topics and examples.

    MATLAB and Simulink

    This text frequently uses MATLAB as a tool for the determination of the response of a dynamic system. MATLAB is used as a computational tool, a programming tool, and a graphical tool. From determining dynamic system responses to programming and graphical analysis, MATLAB is used extensively throughout the text. Some specific applications include:

    Simulink, a MATLAB-developed simulation and modeling tool, is also integrated throughout this text. Simulink allows development of models, using either the transfer function or the state-space formulation, without the programming required for MATLAB.

    This text’s comprehensive approach, combining theory with practical tools like MATLAB and Simulink, equips students to tackle the complexities of interdisciplinary engineering systems.

    Written by Dr. S. Graham Kelly, Ph.D., Professor Emeritus, University of Akron and author of “System Dynamics and Controls,” 1e.

     

    Interested in this title? Dr. Kelly’s new first edition text is available for your engineering course now.

    Source link

  • Perspectives on pedagogical innovation | SRHE Blog

    Perspectives on pedagogical innovation | SRHE Blog

    by Kamilya Suleymenova and Emma Thirkell

    The landscape of higher education (HE) in the UK (but also more widely, in Western countries and across the globe) has significantly changed, driven by the massification and the following marketisation of HE studies (Alves & Tomlinson, 2021; Molesworth et al, 2009). The predominance of particular governance structures and schools of thought shape the narrative further (as discussed by Marcia Devlin (2021) in her SRHE blog) and create a deceptively heterogeneous environment, where each prospective student can find their “place”, but all are conditioned to follow a similar narrative.

    New disruptions

    On this backdrop new disruptions appear, of which we want to focus on two specifically for the UK HE. First, the legacy of lockdowns, bringing more flexible working environment and an astonishing pervasiveness of digital tools together with disrupted earlier education and legacy of health, including mental health, concerns, unsettles further already brittle UK HE sector (as illustrated by SRHE blog by Steven Jones (2022). Second, the advent of Generative AI and its implications for teaching, learning, and assessment. Much has been said about these (Lee et al, 2024; O’Dea, 2024) – our learning points from this rapidly growing literature are that i) significant disruption has occurred and ii) something needs to be done to react to this change in context. In other words, while there are many tried and tested theories and methods in teaching and assessment, they need to be reviewed and very likely adapted to keep up with the changing context.

    The change did not occur only in the tools: we argue here that it is not merely a quantitative technical change (eg speed of communication), but a qualitative change, which affected or at least has the potential to affect, the mindset and the behaviour of students (and staff). Together, these factors produce more stressed, more demanding, potentially differently engaged students (sometimes perceived as less engaged), focused on the “added value” of their degrees and their “university experience”, anxious to acquire competences and skills through experiential learning to be in the best position for securing the employment of their choice.

    In this rapidly changing context, the need for pedagogical innovations (PI), or at least the desire and the ability to engage with disruptions in the education process, seems almost inevitable. But how do the staff working in the UK HE, respond to this demand? Are the challenges viewed as opportunities or rather as additional pressures, adding to an evolving workload and requirements to navigate a complex bureaucracy?

    Research focus: understanding the lived experiences of educators

    Our research explores the lived experiences of educators across 13 UK universities, investigating their engagement with PI in the aftermath of the COVID-19 pandemic. By examining how institutional dynamics, personal motivations, and perceived barriers shape decisions surrounding PI, we have developed the initial stages of a conceptual framework, presented at the SRHE International Conference, to guide policies that better support educators and foster sustained PI in teaching. Through 30 interviews with educators, senior staff, and technology-enabled learning (TEL) specialists, we reveal the complex decision-making processes that influence whether and how educators embrace or resist innovation in their teaching practices.

    What drives educators to innovate?

    Our research highlights a multifaceted landscape where educators’ motivations for engaging with PI are shaped by both intrinsic and extrinsic factors. For many, intrinsic motivations, such as a deep-rooted desire to enhance student learning and a personal commitment to pedagogical excellence, act as powerful drivers for innovation. As one educator noted, “I’m always looking for new ideas. Innovation gives me a sense of purpose and connection with my students, making teaching more fulfilling.” This indicates that where academics feel a strong personal commitment to education, and it is rewarded, they are more likely to embrace innovative practices.

    The tension between rhetoric and reality

    However, these motivations are often counterbalanced by extrinsic pressures from the institutional environment, whether perceived or real. Many educators reported feeling that institutional strategies, while rhetorically supportive of PI, were undercut by bureaucratic barriers, a lack of adequate resources, and managerial cultures focused on short-term, measurable outcomes. One academic explained, “Innovation is a buzzword here, but when it comes to implementing anything new, we’re stuck in a system that values research output over teaching innovation. There’s little incentive to invest time in something that doesn’t directly contribute to my publication record.” This highlights the tension between institutional narrative and individual motivations, with many educators perceiving a disconnect between institutional rhetoric purporting to encourage PI and the reality of its implementation.

    Autonomy and trust

    Another key finding concerns the role of autonomy and trust in fostering a culture of innovation. Educators who felt empowered within their departments – where trust was placed in their judgment – were more likely to experiment with new teaching methods. As one TEL specialist remarked, “When leadership trusts us, we feel freer to try new approaches. But when we are micromanaged, the innovation just stops. You’re constantly battling to prove that your idea is worth the time it takes.” This sense of autonomy, closely linked to professional identity, is crucial in determining whether educators feel motivated to innovate or revert to traditional methods.

    The cost of innovation

    However, these ‘empowering’ environments were not universally experienced. Many educators, particularly those in large departments or with heavy teaching loads, reported feeling that the cost of innovation – both in terms of time and energy – was too high. “It’s hard to innovate when you’re overwhelmed with marking, preparation, and administration. It feels like there’s no room to breathe, let alone experiment,” shared an academic. This sense of burnout, compounded by a perception of growing academic bureaucracy, led some to feel that the costs of engaging in PI outweighed the benefits, making it more difficult to justify the time and effort required for innovation.

    A balancing act

    Perhaps not surprisingly, some educators justified their lack of engagement with PI by citing these perceived institutional constraints. As one educator put it, “We’re told to innovate, but the structure just isn’t there to support it. It’s easier to stick with what we know works than to risk failure with something new.” This reflects the cognitive flexibility educators employ when balancing personal motivations with institutional limitations. As per Goffman’s (1959) ‘front’ and ‘back’ stage theory, educators sometimes present a compliant, innovative persona on the ‘front’ stage in order to ‘fit in’ (Nästesjö, 2023), while in the ‘back’ stage, they rationalize their lack of engagement by attributing it to costs and benefits, reconciling their professional image with their lived experiences.

    Reflections

    We are certain that some, if not all, of these quotes will resonate with many of the readers: these trends have been discussed in, for example, Lašáková et al (2017) and Findlow (2008). Our aim is not only to systematise and categorise the individual aspects shared with us by both frustrated and aspiring colleagues, but to focus on an in-depth analysis of their motivations. Based on previous literature and our data, we aim to generalise and develop a theoretical framework through the lens of an interdisciplinary management and economics analysis. The preliminary version of this theoretical framework, presented at the 2024 SRHE Conference, should provide a foundation for shaping institutional policies to develop a sustainable pipeline of innovations, in the full respect of both academic freedom and students’ interests. In other words, we hope that our work will facilitate structural changes to unlock the innovation potential and help institutions to help us to innovate.

    Kamilya Suleymenova is Associate Professor at the Department of Economics, Birmingham Business School, University of Birmingham with interests in assessment and feedback particularly for large cohorts, Generative AI in HE, as well as institutional and behavioural and experimental economics. Now twice a presenter at SRHE International Conference, Kamilya appreciates the constructive feedback of the community.

    Emma Thirkell is an Assistant Professor in Human Resource Management at Newcastle Business School, Northumbria University with interests in pedagogical innovation, experiential learning, and the integration of technology in education. A four-time teaching award winner, she is passionate about bridging academia and practice through innovative curriculum design and leadership in higher education.

    Author: SRHE News Blog

    An international learned society, concerned with supporting research and researchers into Higher Education

    Source link

  • Invisible labour: visible activism | SRHE Blog

    Invisible labour: visible activism | SRHE Blog

    by Sarah Montano, Inci Toral and Sarah Percy

    Behind many academic success stories lies an untold narrative of invisible labour – a hidden force driving progress but often overlooked or undervalued. From providing emotional support to sitting on committees, the silent effort sustains institutions yet leaves many working tirelessly in the background on non-promotable tasks. Only when invisible labour is met with visible activism, can change begin.

    As a group of academics over the years we became conscious of a phenomenon that affected not only ourselves but many of our colleagues. We particularly noticed that women* were increasingly being asked to take on emotional labour and tasks that, when it came to promotions were classified as “Non-Promotable Tasks” yet were essential to institutional practices. We concluded that this form of emotional labour was a form of wife work, work that is essential to the running of the home (aka Higher Education Institutions (HEIs)) yet often undervalued and the person carries the mental load. We use the term wife work due to the pejorative nature of wife work in the media and the value placed on such work in wider society. Using a feminist collaborative autoethnographic approach we explored invisible and emotional labour among female academics. Therefore, at the 2024 SRHE conference we delivered our paper on ‘Invisible Labour: Visible Activism’ and argued that it is only such activism that will help to end the inequities in HEIs.

    *we acknowledge that invisible and emotional labour can affect any academic of any gender, particularly those on education/ teaching focussed contracts.

    Shining a light on invisible labour

    Despite the increase in women’s participation in the workforce and in academia, there is still a significant gender pay gap and to compound the issue, this gap widened in 2021 and 2022 in 20/33 OECD countries. As noted by Stephenson (2023), in HE only 28% of professors are female despite women making up 43% of the academic workforce leading to a pay gap of 11.9%. We acknowledge that the reason for such pay gaps and gender biases are complex and multi-factorial (Westoby 2021), thus we focus specifically on the issue of the “gender unequal distribution” of academic labour (Järvinen and Mik-Mayer 2024:1).

    There is much discussion on the mental load outside the workplace; therefore, our focus is on the unpaid or unrewarded workload inside the workplace. As universities have new developed pathways to promotion (e.g. education or impact), citizenship has become less important, yet it is critical work that still needs to be done. However, the result of shifting paths to tenure/promotion means that women are carrying out “Non-Promotable Tasks” (Babcock et al, 2022: 15), which are institutionally important yet will not help career success.

    Wife work defined

    Wife work tasks include: writing references for students; mentoring; assisting students with emotional problems or recruitment; careers advice; taking on someone’s admin work whilst they gain awards; and committee work, effectively comprising what is known as service work. Importantly, a significant component of wife work is emotional labour. Emotional labour involves managing emotions and interactions in the academic setting without formal recognition or workload compensation. These emotional labour tasks may include student emotional support, listening, supporting colleagues, helping people or just always being nice. Such wife work occurs due to societal and institutional expectations that prompt women to take on such wife work, yet this labour whilst maintaining the organisation’s reputation and can lead to emotional dissonance and burnout (Grandey, 2013).

    Making the invisible visible

    Drawing on institutional theory​, feminist theory and theory of gendered organizations we explore how universities, embedded in social norms and values, perpetuate traditional gender roles and expectations. Our research specifically focuses on the “Non-Promotable Tasks,” which are essential for institutional functioning but do not contribute to career success and are undervalued and unrecognised. We highlight patterns about gender distinctions that lead to advantages or exploitations of academics and how these create differing identities and expectations within academia.​

    How we uncovered the invisible

    Our research has two stages. In the first stage, we used a feminist collaborative autoethnographic approach to explore invisible and emotional labour among female academics (Rutter et al, 2021)​. This method allowed for an in-depth examination of personal and shared experiences within our academic community (Akehurst and Scott, 2021)​. As the research subjects, we are comprised of female academics from the same department across international campuses, reflecting on our experiences with non-promotable tasks, emotional dissonance, mental load, and burnout (Grandey, 2013; Lapadat, 2017; Babcock et al, 2022)​. We go beyond individual experiences to co-construct the meaning of invisible and emotional labour collectively​.

    Findings that shape our understanding of invisible labour

    We identified the following categories of “wife-work”:​

    • Mentoring support (outside normal expectations or workload) ​
    • Administrative and Logistical Tasks/ Roles​
    • Recruitment and Outreach ​
    • Committee Work
    • Supporting Career Development
    • Academic and Professional Development​
    • Volunteering and Institutional Presence​
    • Helping people​
    • Taking on someone else’s role while they work on “important stuff”​
    • Listening​
    • Being kind ​

    Using the institutional framework, in which the institutional norms shape the undervaluation of service work (Palthe, 2014), we argue that the regulative, normative, and cognitive-cultural elements of institutional theory contribute to the gendered division of labour.  Through the application of these key dimensions, our findings can be categorised under three dimensions:

    1. Institutional Dimension, underpinned by the explicit rules, laws, and regulations that constrain and guide behaviour such as academic quality assurance and behavioural expectations within HEIs.

    2. Social Dimension, encompassing implicit values, norms, and expectations that define acceptable behaviour within a society or organization such as social expectations around punctuality, dress codes, and academic etiquettes in HEIs.

    3. Individual Dimension, which involves implicit but shared beliefs and mental models shaping how individuals perceive and interpret their environments. These are often taken for granted and operate at a subconscious level.

    Using this framework our findings are categorised accordingly to these elements outlined in Figure 1 below.  

    Figure 1:  Invisible Labour: Visible Activism Findings. Source: Developed by the authors

    It’s time for change

    We recognise that the critical issue is, as Domingo et al (2022) highlighted, the significance of recognising and valuing women’s work within institutions, and stress that the real issue lies within organisational practices rather than women themselves. Addressing emotional labour is vital for a supportive and equitable work environment. The burden of responsibility is deeply embedded into the societal norms and often acts as a catalyser for such responses by female academics (Andersen et al, 2022). ​As organisations shift their focus towards formal progress procedures that undervalue volunteerism and emotional labour (Albia and Cheng, 2023), there is a pressing need for activism to ensure equitable recognition and valuation of women’s contributions within academia.

    A path forward – from silence to solidarity

    Invisible labour has long been an unseen and unrecognised necessity in academia, but we argue that it need not, and should not be this way. Acknowledging and recognising the existence and value of invisible and emotional labour will ensure these ‘non-promotable’ tasks become more visible.  Therefore, there is a pressing need for activism to ensure equitable recognition and valuation of women’s contributions within academia. We emphasise the necessity of addressing these systemic issues to foster a more inclusive and supportive academic environment for all individuals involved. Change starts with awareness, so we hope this is a step in the right direction.

    Professor Sarah Montano is a Professor of Retail Marketing at Birmingham Business School. She was awarded a National Teaching Fellowship in 2023. Her research interests are primarily authentic assessments, digital education and retail as a place of community. She is an engaging and skilled communicator and regularly appears in the media on the subject of retail industry change.

    Dr Inci Toral is an Associate Professor at the University of Birmingham, Business School and she is the Business Education Research and Scholarship (BERS) Convenor at Birmingham Business School. Her work revolves around digital marketing, retailing, creativity and innovation in retail education and authentic assessments. 

    Dr Sarah Percy is an Assistant Professor in Marketing at Birmingham Business School, University of Birmingham, with a special interest in authentic assessments.

    Author: SRHE News Blog

    An international learned society, concerned with supporting research and researchers into Higher Education

    Source link

  • Happy New Year | SRHE Blog

    Happy New Year | SRHE Blog


    by Rob Cuthbert

    SRHE News is glad to bring you the Augur Report, its prognostications for 2025, based on extensive research into the works of Nostradamus, Old Moore’s Almanac and Mystic Meg.

    January

    • Donald Trump resumes the US Presidency and announces that free speech in HE requires him to ban the use of the words Diversity, Equality and Inclusion in US HE. Elon Musk argues that this should  also be applied in the UK.
    • UUK launches another major campaign to point out that most universities really are in serious financial trouble.
    • UCEA points out the difficulty of affording any staff salary increases at all in the present climate.
    • Vice-chancellors point out that the financial difficulties facing their institutions would not be significantly alleviated if they took a 50% cut in salary, and competitive salaries are essential to enable Britain’s world class universities to recruit and retain the best leaders. Especially when it has become so difficult to recruit staff.
    • The OfS announces a concordat with Russian higher education to support a major increase in its use of AI, using Russian cyber experts. The first expansion of AI will be in the approval of new university titles: the new AI Department will be known as the Nomenklatura Department. The criteria remain unchanged: the OfS “will consult on a provider’s proposed new name and assess the extent to which the proposed name is confusing or misleading”.
    • The OfS is already the investigating authority, prosecutor, judge, jury and executioner for all HE infractions, and now seeks the power to exile to Siberia any academics complicit in breaching Condition of Registration B2. Government agrees in the interests of reducing net migration.

    February

    • After the disappointing application figures for 2025 entry, UCAS launches a major advertising campaign to point out that the increase in undergraduate fees won’t make any difference to most student debt repayments.
    • UUK launches a new campaign to point out that the increase in undergraduate fees won’t make any difference to the financial troubles in most universities.
    • Government announces that even after all those new teachers are appointed there might be a bit left over for HE from the proceeds of VAT on private school fees. Teacher educators point out that after yet another year of missed targets in teacher training there is no-one qualified to apply for the new jobs in schools.
    • OfS approves a name change from Anglia Ruskin University to the University of Cambridge(shire).

    March

    • The OfS approves a name change from Oxford Brookes University to University of Oxford(shire).
    • UUK relaunches its campaign: “Most universities really are in deep financial trouble, honest.”
    • Government says there might still be something left for HE from VAT on school fees, and Elon Musk might have a point.
    • The interim temporary Archbishop of Canterbury says she will renounce the power of the Archbishop to award degrees.

    April

    • The OfS approves a name change from University of the West of England to the Greater Bristol University.
    • The OfS announces a major increase in the use of AI, to extend to all interventions on quality/standards/ breach of conditions of registration. The OfS Nomenklatura Department has been renamed, partly because no-one remembers the Soviet Union any more, and also because it was too likely to cause confusion with the rest of the OfS, who are already party-appointed bureaucrats. The suggested new name, the Behan Bots – conscripted to work for low pay, completely in the dark – is rejected because nobody remembers the Second World War any more and in any case it was too likely to cause confusion with existing university staff. OfS CEO Susan Lapworth says the new Department will now be known as the Laptops.
    • The OfS announces a concordat with Chinese higher education which will start with a new student recruitment campaign in the North East: “Huawei the lads”.

    May

    • The OfS approves a name change from Coventry University to Warwick(shire) University.
    • Government says sorry – even though they couldn’t appoint any new teachers there was nothing left from VAT on school fees because they diverted it to fill the £22billion hole in the public finances. It issues guidance on the use of language in HE, known as the Musk Directive.
    • UUK’s Taskforce on Efficiency and Transformation in Higher Education announces that it is in advanced talks with Government about restructuring the HE sector in England. Luckily the Taskforce chair is a lawyer specialising in mergers and acquisitions.

    June

    • The OfS approves a name change from Birmingham City University to the Greater Birmingham University
    • GuildHE issues a reminder that it has no formal connection with the Church of England or any other faiths but remains committed to whatever you are allowed to call diversity, equity and inclusion since the Musk Directive.
    • Canterbury Christ Church University is renamed University of Kent Two. OfS says this is unlikely to cause confusion among international students, especially since Kent is so near to Paris.
    • Bishop Grosseteste University becomes the University of Lincoln Two But We Were Here First. Leeds Beckett, Northumbria, Sheffield Hallam, Greater Birmingham and Greater Bristol consider name changes.
    • UUK issues a media release saying “we did warn you” as 30% of universities merge or close. OfS says everything will be OK, because all universities are required to have plans for an orderly exit from the market. Wimbledon fortnight begins and UCAS says “you cannot be serious”.

    July

    • OfS approves a name change for Liverpool John Moores to Liverpools University.
    • The BBC is forced to suspend filming of the new series of University Challenge after 30% of universities appearing have merged, have new names or have announced their intention to close.

    August

    • UCAS announces that the 30% reduction in available university places has luckily been matched by an equivalent fall in the number of applicants.
    • Government announces its three priorities for HE – reduction, reduction, reduction – will apply particularly to the numbers of students from all disadvantaged groups.

    September

    • The OfS approves its own name change from the Office for Students to the Office with No Students on the Board (ONO).

    October

    • Government announces its new higher education policy, with the establishment of a new corporation to take over all the universities not in a position to complain, provisionally titled the Great British University. ONO says this is unlikely to cause confusion, but governments in Wales and Scotland say they are confused since all the universities in the GBU are in England. The Northern Ireland Assembly say they’re glad it wasn’t the Great UK University, or they would have been confused. The new HE policy includes a pledge/mission/milestone promising net zero admissions by 2030, or maybe 2035.
    • The last Bishop to leave the Church of England is asked to remember to switch off all the lights to comply with its Net Zero Bishops pledge.

    November

    • The Greater London Non-University College of Monkey Business publishes its annual Report and Accounts: income £925,000; expenditure £925,000, all annual salary for the principal. It  recruited 100 students but they all left at the end of the year without leaving forwarding addresses. Having no students at all on its Board it claims to be completely aligned with the regulator.

    December

    • ONO announces it has breached its own conditions of registration and has removed itself from the Register of Approved Regulators. Dusting down a forgotten part of the Higher Education and Research Act (2017) it issues an urgent appeal – Quick, Anyone? Anyone! – for a new designated quality body to replace itself, which becomes known as the QAA appeal.
    • A High Court judgment finds that publishers have mis-sold the copyright of academics to multinational AI corporations and orders financial compensation, known as Publishers Pay Instead (PPI). Publishers set aside £100billion.
    • Universities launch a counter claim, asserting their ownership of, or failing that a pretty strong  interest in, copyright of academics in their employ, and sue to recover the costs of journal subscriptions and transitional agreements. Publishers set aside a further £100billion.
    • Multinational AI corporation share prices, now quoted only in bitcoin, continue to rise.
    • The new Wallace and Gromit film, Academic Free-Don, is set in a university where the inmates are planning a mass escape. When they realise that their new zero-hours contracts allow them to leave at any time, they apply for exile to Siberia, where they expect better pay and conditions of employment.
    • The theme for the 2026 SRHE Conference is announced: “Where do we go from here?”

    SRHE News is a not-for-prophet enterprise. No octopuses were harmed in the making of this editorial.

    SRHE News Editor Rob Cuthbert is Emeritus Professor of Higher Education Management, University of the West of England and Joint Managing Partner, Practical Academics [email protected]. Twitter @RobCuthbert

    Author: SRHE News Blog

    An international learned society, concerned with supporting research and researchers into Higher Education

    Source link

  • From Gogglebox sofa to a degree via Go Higher – ALL @ Liverpool Blog

    From Gogglebox sofa to a degree via Go Higher – ALL @ Liverpool Blog

    Photo by Andrew Teebay, Liverpool Echo.

    At the University of Liverpool December graduations this year, 2024, the traditional student speech was given by Gogglebox and Go Higher star Viv Woedenweber. Viv came to Go Higher at the age of 56 after leaving the Goggle box show in 2020 to seek a change in her career and a route into university. Her love of history saw her excel on the Go Higher access programme and go on to achieve a Bachelor degree and then a Master’s degree in Archaeology.

    In her Graduation speech at the Philharmonic Hall, Viv said: “I came along with slight trepidation at first, as perhaps we all did, but was soon overwhelmed by the sense of belonging I experienced. I have made so many good friends, gained a passion for my discipline, climbed hillforts, laughed, cried and had many adventures..’.

    Alongside her studies, Viv works as a disability coach at the University of Liverpool to support students to fulfil their full potential, including Go Higher students and those on other courses in the Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences.

    You can read more about Viv’s reflections on completing a degree as a mature student in the Liverpool Echo. Her story is yet another illustration that no matter your age or background, university is for you if you want it.

    And, of course, mature people make the very best students….

    Source link

  • Q&A with Vanessa Walker – The Cengage Blog

    Q&A with Vanessa Walker – The Cengage Blog

    Reading Time: 5 minutes

    We recently had the opportunity to talk with Vanessa Walker, new co-author of “Major Problems in American History, Volume I,” 5th edition. In this Q&A, Professor Walker discusses her background, why she’s thrilled to be a part of the “Major Problems” series and what sets this text apart from the crowd.

    Tell us a little bit about yourself and your background. 

    I am the Gordon Levin Associate Professor of Diplomatic History at Amherst College where I teach classes on US foreign relations, politics, social movements and the history and politics of human rights. I became interested in these topics as an undergraduate student at Whitman College, where I wrote my thesis on Carter’s human rights policy, a subject that became my dissertation topic at the University of Wisconsin-Madison. I published my first book, “Principles in Power: Latin America and the Politics of US Human Rights Diplomacy” with Cornell University Press in 2020, and have written several articles on the Carter administration’s foreign policy and the role of nongovernment activists in influencing high level diplomacy. I live in Western Massachusetts with my husband, who is also a historian, and our two kids. I love to spend a lot of time outdoors hiking, skiing and swimming in lakes, especially in Vermont.

    Why were you excited to join the Major Problems in American History series as a co-author?

    I was excited to join the “Major Problems” series because I have used these volumes in the classroom, both as a student and as an instructor. As a student, I remember using them in my college history courses, relying on the competing perspectives in classroom debates, and combing through the documents and essays when writing my papers. When I began teaching, I turned to them again as a way to introduce my students to the ways historians think, and to help me curate and frame the core themes and ideas I wanted to integrate into my class. These volumes reflect the way I approach my teaching and learning, so I was excited to shape that for another generation of students and faculty.

    History encompasses such a vast array of topics. In what ways does your textbook offer something truly unique and differentiating to the field?

    I think one of the distinctive features of “Major Problems in American History” is in its name. Rather than synthesizing debates and interpretations, or offering a consensus position on a topic, this edition highlights the scholarly conversation and raw materials that comprise the fabric of producing historical knowledge. The text does not attempt to be comprehensive. Instead, by focusing on core debates within the field, it allows students to develop their own interpretations, and for teachers to challenge dominant or singular narratives and perspectives on complex topics and issues.

    Given the ever-evolving nature of history, how does your textbook discuss the complexities of current events and modern issues to remain relevant and impactful for students, and what are they?

    This edition engages with the creation of modern America. By studying its foundations and evolution, students unavoidably confront how many of the issues and debates we think of as contemporary problems have much deeper roots. The study of history is inherently one that involves change over time. Highlighting themes of gender, race, economic security and democratic inclusion, this volume invites students to consider major inflection points and persistent dynamics that have defined the modern United States.

    How do you see this textbook deepening students’ understanding of history and fostering a more active engagement with its core concepts?

    “Major Problems in American History,” by design, demands that students move away from the idea that history is the practice of memorizing names and dates. This text instead involves them in the process of integrating and prioritizing competing interpretations and arguments. Each chapter invites students to explore how different figures viewed critical moments and ideas, and really think about the assumptions and experiences that might give rise to divergent interpretations.

    With learners from diverse academic backgrounds, how does Major Problems in American History accommodate both those majoring in history and those encountering it through general education?

    Interpretation of sources—both primary and secondary—depends on a basic knowledge to frame and contextualize the issues at play. To support students regardless of their expertise, we have expanded the introductory essays to each chapter. We also provide a timeline for each chapter, highlighting key events and relevant dates. Additionally, we situate the secondary sources within broader themes and scholarly debates central to the chapter’s topic. These elements, together, empower students to explore primary and secondary sources, so they can become aware of their broader settings and the important dynamics at play.

    What do you hope instructors will take away from this textbook that will enhance their teaching?

    With this edition, we’ve given more focus to the idea of one or two “major problems” to shape the conversations around each chapter’s historical moment or theme. We hope this will provide instructors with the ability to go deeper into crucial topics, while also bringing in their own areas of expertise to broaden out the themes and ideas highlighted in each chapter. We’ve also included more primary sources that capture voices outside of government, which are often harder to find. Additionally, we’ve also increased the number of images to provide greater diversity of primary source materials.

    Lastly, what do you hope is the most significant takeaway students will carry with them after using your textbook?

    I hope that students will come away with an awareness that history, fundamentally, is about the ability to take in and explore different peoples’ perspectives, which might be radically different than their own. I believe that exercising critical thinking about the past can shed new light on assumptions and biases attached to current problems and issues. I believe that grappling with debates presented in the text will help students develop the skills and awareness necessary to apply these same approaches beyond their study of history. Additionally, I hope it will allow them to productively engage those who hold fundamentally different opinions, and use that as a foundation for pursuing their interests outside of the classroom.

     

    Vanessa Walker is the Gordon Levin Associate Professor of Diplomatic History at Amherst College, where she teaches classes on U.S. politics, foreign relations and human rights. She received her B.A. from Whitman College and her M.A. and Ph.D. from the University of Wisconsin-Madison. She is the author of “Principles in Power: Latin America and the Politics of U.S. Human Rights Diplomacy” (Cornell University Press, 2020), and co-author of “Major Problems in American History, Volume I” 5e. She is currently working on a project exploring U.S. domestic human rights campaign as a response to the decline of the liberal state in the 1970s.

     

    Interested in learning more about “Major Problems in American History”? Explore this new edition for your history course.

     

    Source link

  • The Luck of the Irish by Cheri Kelly – ALL @ Liverpool Blog

    The Luck of the Irish by Cheri Kelly – ALL @ Liverpool Blog

    On 12th July 2019 I drove into Liverpool for my Go Higher assessment  full of nervous anxiety and anticipation for what was to come.  I had been encouraged by a friend to think about doing an Access to Higher Education course. I had no idea what it was.  I  googled the term and  Go Higher  popped up in my browser and I was hooked immediately.  That discussion had not really been about using the course to go on to University, I had not even entertained that idea,  it was much more about me doing something that was just for me, rebuilding my confidence and getting myself back out into the world.

    So, here I was driving along through Toxteth, heading to the car park with an hour to spare when I got stuck behind the Orange March! Who knew they even existed in Liverpool?  I was diverted and, in a panic, got completely lost. Parking up in a cul de sac I ‘phoned through to the office to explain the situation and convinced myself that was the end of that then. The admin team were great, calmed me down and told me that they would move me back to the afternoon session.  Obstacle Number One overcome.  I do not know what I was expecting but being told that there was to be a written maths exam was not on my radar. I have a real phobia of the word maths; it sends me into a tailspin if ever mentioned. I explained to the coordinator that I probably wouldn’t pass and why. He was amazing and calmed me down, as did the couple of people sitting on each side of me. We were all a little panicked about different things, but the staff all made it such an enjoyable and calming experience. I felt a real affinity with the lecturer that interviewed me.  A few days later I received the letter congratulating me on being accepted onto the course.

    By September I had connected with Paula who was also starting the course, she lived not far from me and so we decided that we would car share and go together for the induction week.  I will not lie; it was probably one of the most intense weeks of my life for many reasons. The imposter syndrome set in immediately, the number of people at the first meeting was overwhelming, the schedule of work looked enormous, and the list goes on.  What was great was that everybody made new friends, groups were formed, and those groups really encouraged each other from day one.  By the end of the induction week a lot of people had dropped out.  I had several wobbles, but the excitement of learning took over from the imposter syndrome.  A few people threatened not to come back but, with encouragement from the tutors and their new friends they did return.  The wobbles do not stop after the induction week, they come back time and time again, but you just have to remember why you want to do the course and talk to people for support.

    By the time I had finished the course I had decided that I did want to go on to do a degree. I had decided part way through that I wanted to do a degree in Psychology and duly applied to three universities, including Liverpool, and was accepted by all. I had a change of mind and thought that I would prefer to do English. After speaking to Claire at Go Higher I realised that I could not apply for English at Liverpool as I hadn’t taken the English module on Go Higher. She suggested I consider Irish Studies. It was a perfect fit for me as a multi-disciplinary course incorporating History, Culture, Politics and Literature of Ireland.  I applied and was accepted. It seems ironic that just a year earlier my chance to even do the Go Higher was almost scuppered by an Orange march!  I was given so many fantastic opportunities as a student in the Institute of Irish Studies. I acted as both Student and Faculty representative;  I was privileged to be selected as an Undergraduate Research Student for Prof Frank Shovlin and I completed a placement at the Museum of Liverpool where I worked on a project to update the Irish Trail and revamp the Information pamphlets.

    My journey through university was not as straightforward as I had hoped it would be. Each year brought me ‘out of the ordinary’ personal challenges that affected my studies, but I persevered. It took me a little longer to complete my degree than I would have hoped but, with the fantastic support and encouragement from all of the academic staff in the Institute of Irish Studies I got there in the end.  I graduated earning a BA (Hons) in Irish Studies, 2:1 and winning the George Huxley prize for best dissertation.  I am so very proud of myself and will be forever grateful to all of the staff from Go Higher who inspired me, pushed me and helped me to find my way to university.

    If I can give any advice to anybody thinking about doing Go Higher it would be to just put one foot in front of the other. Sign up and focus on the assessment day, cross each bridge as it comes, when you wobble, get back up and keep moving forward.  Everybody suffers from Imposter Syndrome; everybody wants to give up at some point. When you graduate Go Higher and become an undergraduate, embrace being around  the younger students, join in with as many societies as you can, really immerse yourself in the lectures and seminars, enjoy every moment. Mostly I would say, never give up on yourself because the staff will not give up on you.

    Cheri Kelly.

     

    Source link