Conservation Science Laboratory, Graduate School of Conservation, Tokyo University of the Arts

2021 ◽  
Vol 75 (10) ◽  
pp. 945-947
2017 ◽  
Vol 60 (4) ◽  
pp. 722-746 ◽  
Author(s):  
David Monaghan ◽  
Sou Hyun Jang

Although the bachelor’s degree is considered the “great equalizer,” returns vary substantially by field of study, particularly in the years immediately following graduation. In the first section of our analysis, we study the varying labor market experiences of recent graduates with different majors. We build on prior research by more fully accounting for the complicating role of graduate school attendance in the relationship between majors and income. We find some majors to be distinctly “risky,” exposing their holders to heightened risk of low income and unemployment during the postcollege transition. Those who select such majors are much more likely to later enroll in graduate school. After 10 years, graduate degrees mitigate, but do not entirely erase, major-based income disparities. We use these findings in the second section to explore the determinants of major choice among first-time freshmen. Female and higher socioeconomic status (SES) students are more likely to select risky majors, but the latter relationship is entirely explained by academic and institutional variables. In contrast to prior research, we find strong institutional effects on major choice, with those attending selective colleges, smaller institutions, and institutions with fewer low-SES students more likely to select risky and graduate-school-associated majors, net of individual-level factors. We conclude by discussing the implications of our findings for the situation of the arts and sciences fields in the era of mass enrollment.


2017 ◽  
Vol 31 (2) ◽  
pp. 39
Author(s):  
Cybèle Elaine Warts

Tamara Moats was curator of education at the University of Washington's Henry Art Gallery for nineteen years where she organized programs for all ages, developed the museum’s teaching methods, and wrote extensive curricula. She now teaches art history at the Bush School Upper School and the Cornish College of the Arts, and visual thinking at the University of Washington Medical School. Moats holds a BA degree in art history from the University of Puget Sound and an MA in Asian Studies from the Claremont Graduate School. 


Author(s):  
James Britton

I’ve been interested in story for a long time. I’m thinking basically of stories about the writers themselves. Telling them is a means of learning, a digestive kind of learning which is so often ignored in schools. It seems to me to be the field of operation of most of the arts. So I want my students to move toward an art-like selection of the elements of their personal experience. The more sharply the form resolves the content, so to speak, the more sharply is it a digestive process. I try to interest students in writing both autobiographical and fictional stories and to find their way between the two. When I was teaching children I discovered that story writing was central to them. They all loved stories at an early age and they liked to write them when they got over the hump, the difficulty, of shaping letters and words in writing. They get over that hump better, I find, by writing stories than by reading them. I think that’s most applicable at a very young age, but it still worked when I was teaching eleven-year-olds. Barbara Hardy—who’s the head of the English Department at Birkbeck College at the University of London—came down to talk to our teachers once at the London Association for the Teaching of English. She said that telling stories is not a way an artist has of manipulating an audience, but something that is transferred from life to art. She says that narrative is a primary act of mind. Her article, with those words as title, was printed in Novel: A Forum on Fiction. She wrote: . . . We dream in narrative, daydream in narrative, remember, anticipate, hope, despair, believe, doubt, plan, revise, criticize, construct, gossip, learn, hate, and love by narrative. In order really to live, we make up stories about ourselves and others, about the personal as well as the social past and future. . . .


2019 ◽  
Vol 38 (1) ◽  
pp. 52-59
Author(s):  
Shari Tishman

This article takes a look at 624 neighborhood maps, drawn by students aged 8 to 18 years from 24 countries, between 2017 and 2018. The maps were made as part of an online cultural exchange program called Out of Eden Learn, developed at Project Zero at the Harvard Graduate School of Education. In honor of Dr. Ellen Winner, a preliminary analysis of the maps is offered using The Studio Thinking framework as a lens. Developed by Winner and her colleagues, the Studio Thinking framework identifies eight habits of mind—sometimes called thinking dispositions—that are characteristic of high-quality thinking in the arts and elsewhere. The article focuses on three of these dispositions in particular: Envision, Observe, and Express. With a twist, it also says a few words about a fourth, Understanding Art World.


Paragrana ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 25 (2) ◽  
pp. 12-26 ◽  
Author(s):  
Erika Fischer-Lichte

AbstractThe essays assembled in this volume were initially presented at the concluding conference of the International Doctoral School “InterArt Studies” held at the Freie Universität Berlin from June 25-27, 2015. The school bore the label “international” not just because its students hailed from five different continents. Rather, it was called that because it was born out of the collaboration with the Copenhagen Doctoral School in Cultural Studies, Literature and the Arts, later joined by the Doctoral School of Goldsmiths College, London, and the Graduate School of Arts and Sciences at Columbia University, New York. During these nine years (2006-2015) of research, it was generously funded by the German Research Council.


2021 ◽  
Vol 2 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sara Asu Schroer

In this perspectives essay, I propose some ways in which current thinking in anthropology might inform the emergent cross-disciplinary field of coexistence studies. I do so following recent calls from within the conservation science community (including this special issue), acknowledging that understanding human-wildlife coexistence in the fractured landscapes of the Anthropocene1 requires being open to alternative approaches beyond conventional frameworks of conservation science and management (see for instance; Carter and Linnell, 2016; Pooley, 2016; Chapron and López-Bao, 2019; Pooley et al., 2020). The essay suggests that relational (non-dualist) ways of thinking2 in anthropology, often building on Indigenous philosophy and expertise, may help ground coexistence studies beyond Euro-Western modernist conceptual frameworks—frameworks that perpetuate exploitative and colonial logics that many scholars from across academia view as being at the heart of our current ecological crisis (e.g., Lestel, 2013; van Dooren, 2014; Tsing, 2015; Todd, 2016; Bluwstein et al., 2021; Schroer et al., 2021). By proposing “relations” rather than objectified “Nature” or “wildlife” as the more adequate subject of understanding and facilitating coexistence in shared landscapes, I understand coexistence and its study first and foremost as an ethical and political endeavor. Rather than offering any conclusive ideas, the essay's intention is to contribute some questions and thoughts to the developing conversations of coexistence studies scholars and practitioners. It does so by inviting conservation scientists to collaborate with anthropologists and take on board some of the current thinking in the discipline. Amongst other things, I suggest that this will help overcome a somewhat dated notion of cultural relativism—understood as many particular, cultural views on one true objective Nature (only known by Science), a perspective that explicitly and implicitly seems to inform some conservation science approaches to issues of culture or the “human dimensions” of conservation issues. Ultimately, the paper seeks to make a conceptual contribution by imagining coexistence as a dynamic bundle of relations in which the biological, ecological, historical, cultural, and social dimensions cannot be thought apart and have to be studied together.


Author(s):  
Cecil E. Hall

The visualization of organic macromolecules such as proteins, nucleic acids, viruses and virus components has reached its high degree of effectiveness owing to refinements and reliability of instruments and to the invention of methods for enhancing the structure of these materials within the electron image. The latter techniques have been most important because what can be seen depends upon the molecular and atomic character of the object as modified which is rarely evident in the pristine material. Structure may thus be displayed by the arts of positive and negative staining, shadow casting, replication and other techniques. Enhancement of contrast, which delineates bounds of isolated macromolecules has been effected progressively over the years as illustrated in Figs. 1, 2, 3 and 4 by these methods. We now look to the future wondering what other visions are waiting to be seen. The instrument designers will need to exact from the arts of fabrication the performance that theory has prescribed as well as methods for phase and interference contrast with explorations of the potentialities of very high and very low voltages. Chemistry must play an increasingly important part in future progress by providing specific stain molecules of high visibility, substrates of vanishing “noise” level and means for preservation of molecular structures that usually exist in a solvated condition.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document