Much of the work done by faculty at both public and private universities has significant public dimensions: it is often paid for by public funds; it is often aimed at serving the public good; and it is often subject to public evaluation. To understand how the public dimensions of faculty work are valued, we analyzed review, promotion, and tenure documents from a representative sample of 129 universities in the US and Canada. Terms and concepts related to public and community are mentioned in a large portion of documents, but mostly in ways that relate to service, which is an undervalued aspect of academic careers. Moreover, the documents make significant mention of traditional research outputs and citation-based metrics: however, such outputs and metrics reward faculty work targeted to academics, and often disregard the public dimensions. Institutions that seek to embody their public mission could therefore work towards changing how faculty work is assessed and incentivized.

obstacle to overcome, but as the Spanish philosopher Jorge Larrosa points out, "[I]t is always interesting to know why a field forbids or ignores something. In fact, omissions and prohibitions are the best ways to know the structure of a discipline, the rules that structure it and its deep grammar" (1998, p. 213). Thus, the goal of this article is to reflect on the obstacles, problems, and possibilities of incorporating visual culture into educational research.

No abstract

Critical pedagogy problematizes the relationship between education and politics, between sociopolitical relations and pedagogical practices, between the reproduction of dependent hierarchies of power and privilege in the domain of everyday social life and that of classrooms and institutions. In doing so, it advances an agenda for educational transformation by encouraging educators to understand the sociopolitical contexts of educative acts and the importance of radically democratizing both educational sites and larger social formations. In such processes, educators take on intellectual roles by adapting to, resisting, and challenging curriculum, school policy, educational philosophies, and pedagogical traditions. This article revisits the contributions of Antonio Gramsci and Paulo Freire to critical pedagogy, giving particular attention to the related concepts of hegemony and the intellectual.

T he purpose of this volume is to contribute to education research by presenting comprehensive and nuanced understandings of intersectional perspectives. Researchers working within an intersectional framework try to account for the dynamic and complex ways that race/ethnicity, class, gender, sexuality, religion, citizenship, ability, and age shape individual identities and social life. We argue it is essential to overcome simplistic, static, one-dimensional, and additive approaches to education research by expanding the use of analytical categories and engaging the multiplicities of people's circumstances within and across teaching and learning settings. This volume is our attempt to open a space for analysis, dialogue, and reflection among scholars about intersectionality, and the possibilities of reimagining the research tools used to address the complex demographic, social, economic, and cultural transformations shaping education. Ideally, this conversation will reach audiences outside of the academy. Drawing from a long tradition of Black feminist theorizing and activism, Kimberlé Crenshaw (1989, 1991) is credited with proposing the term intersectionality as an academic concept. Intersectionality was also nurtured by the theorizing of women of color regarding race, gender, sexuality, and other forms of inequality that occurred as early as the 1960s (

Given the seemingly ever-increasing scholarly production about the ideas and ideals of global citizenship education (GCE), it is not surprising those discussions started to gain influence in teacher education (TE) debates. In this study, we examine the discourses that tacitly shape the meanings of GCE within the contemporary academic literature on TE. After analyzing the peer-reviewed scholarship published from 2003 to 2018, we identified patterns in how GCE for TE was described and defended, beyond the differences in their conceptual frameworks. The dominant trend found is to frame GCE as a redemptive educational solution to global problems. This framing requires teachers to embrace a redemptive narrative following a model of rationality based on altruistic, hyperrationalized and overly romanticized ideals. Ultimately, TE literature contributes to the configuration of an excessively naïve discourse that tends to ignore the neoliberal context in which both GCE and TE take place today.

No abstract

No abstract