- Browse by Subject
Browsing by Subject "scholarship"
Now showing 1 - 7 of 7
Results Per Page
Sort Options
Item The impact of members of the Society of University Surgeons on the scholarship of American surgery(Elsevier, 2016-07) Valsangkar, Nakul P.; Kays, Joshua K.; Feliciano, David V.; Martin, Paul J.; Parett, Jordan S.; Joshi, Mugdha M.; Zimmers, Teresa A.; Koniaris, Leonidas G.; Department of Surgery, IU School of MedicineBackground A core objective of the Society of University Surgeons (SUS) is research focused: to “advance the art and science of surgery through original investigation.” This study sought to determine the current impact of the SUS on academic surgical productivity. Methods Individual faculty data for numbers of publications, citations, and National Institute of Health (NIH) funding history were collected for 4,015 surgical faculty at the top 55 NIH-funded departments of surgery using SCOPUS and the NIH Research Portfolio Online Reporting Tools. SUS membership was determined from membership registry data. Results Overall, 502 surgical faculty (12.5%) were SUS members with 92.7% holding positions of associate or full professor (versus 59% of nonmembers). Median publications (P) and citations (C) among SUS members were P: 112, C: 2,460 versus P: 29, C: 467 for nonmembers (P < .001). Academic productivity was considerably higher by rank for SUS members than for nonmembers: associate professors (P: 61 vs 36, C: 1,199 vs 591, P < .001) and full professors (P: 141 vs 81, C: 3,537 vs 1,856, P < .001). Among full professors, SUS members had much higher rates of NIH funding than did nonmembers (52.6% vs 26%, P < .05) and specifically for R01, P01, and U01 awards (37% vs 17.7%, P < .01). SUS members were 2 times more likely to serve in divisional leadership or chair positions (23.5% vs 10.2%, P < .05). Conclusion SUS society members are a highly productive academic group. These data support the premise that the SUS is meeting its research mission and identify its members as very academically productive contributors to research and scholarship in American surgery and medicine.Item The New Oxford Shakespeare Project at IUPUI(Office of the Vice Chancellor for Research, 2016-04-08) Bourus, Terri; Loughnane, Rory; Pruitt, Anna; Andrews, Chad; Cooper, KeeganBecause Shakespeare is the world’s most canonical and most commercially successful secular author, his works have been edited more than any other author. Editions of Shakespeare’s canon are usually based on commercial incentives rather than scholarly preparation; as a result, most editions re-package older ones and do not strive to rethink previous editing in light of more recent scholarship about the Shakespeare canon. The New Oxford Shakespeare editors, staff, and student assistants, however, are revisiting and rethinking the Shakespeare canon from the ground up. Due for publication in October 2016, this exciting new edition of Shakespeare’s Complete Works features the collaborative efforts of an international team of scholars, editors, and IUPUI faculty and students – working alongside each other over a seven year term on IUPUI’s campus. The research involved in this project is cutting edge and completely new to the discipline. We work from archived original printed texts (no manuscript in Shakespeare’s hand exists), and because we are creating the first multi-format, multi-platform Shakespeare edition in history, we approach the work from a three-tiered paradigm, including pedagogy, theatre practice, and computational stylistics. The completed five-volume edition will give readers deeper and multifaceted access to all of Shakespeare’s works: the traditional canon, alternative texts, and collaborative texts. Aiming to satisfy the needs of different users, an old spelling edition will preserve spelling, punctuation, and layout of the earliest texts while a Modern Spelling Edition will utilize recent pedagogical innovations to serve as a 21st century classroom text. The New Oxford Shakespeare will make Shakespeare more accessible to 21st century readers by engaging them through multiple editions and multiple types of media. The New Oxford Shakespeare will empower teacher-scholars to demonstrate Shakespeare’s work in performance and in process. We are the new face of Shakespeare.Item A Random Walk to Public Scholarship: Exploring Our Convergent Paths | Public(2014) Holzman, Laura M.; Wood, Elizabeth; Cusack-McVeigh, Holly; Kryder-Reid, Elizabeth; Labode, Modupe; Zimmerman, Larry JItem Sam H. Jones Service Scholarship Assessment Report (2016-17)(2017-10-15) Hahn, ThomasTo measure various indicators related to participation in the Sam H. Jones (SHJ) Community Service Scholarship Program, a questionnaire was administered to students who received a SHJ award in April 2017. This report encompasses the following SHJ programs: Alternative Break Team Leaders, Community Service Leader, Community Service Scholar, Family, School & Neighborhood Scholars, First-Year Service Scholars, Paws Pantry Scholars, and Service Corp Scholars. These 8 programs are referred collectively in this report as SAM Scholarships.Item Scholarly Concentrations: A Novel Platform for Delivery of Health Systems Science Exposure and Highlight Unique Learning Environments Across the Nine Campuses of Indiana University School of Medicine(2020-03-06) Allen, Bradley L.; Birnbaum, Deborah R.; Corson-Knowles, Daniel R.; Harrington, Maureen A.; Wallach, Paul M.Rapidly evolving challenges in health care mandate changes in the way health care professionals are educated. How do we integrate the need for new and different content into the medical school curriculum? One area of particular focus is called Health Systems Science. Health Systems Science is being called the 3rd leg of modern medical education to complement the foundational and clinical sciences curricula. IU School of Medicine is integrating Health Systems Science content into Scholarly Concentrations. Scholarly Concentrations is a program offering students longitudinal educational enhancement through coursework and scholarly work.Item The Snare of Systemic Racism and Other Challenges Confronting Hip-Hop Based Pedagogy(Columbia University, 2018) Mutegi, Jomo W.; Phelps-Moultrie, Jada A.; Pitts Bannister, Vanessa R.; School of EducationBackground: Although there has been a pronounced growth in hip-hop-based pedagogy (HHBP) scholarship in recent years, there has not been a concomitant critique of this growing body of work. As a consequence, much of this scholarship is best characterized as advocacy of HHBP. Purpose/Objective: The objective of this article is to promote critical discourse around the conceptualization and implementation of HHBP by (a) identifying a set of challenges presented in the conceptualization of HHBP scholarship, (b) describing the narrative that these challenges converge to support, and (c) suggesting an alternative narrative aimed at fostering a more empowering use of HHBP. Research Design: To accomplish this objective, we provide an in-depth critique of Emdin and Lee’s (2012) article, “Hip-hop, the ‘Obama effect,’ and urban science education.” Through this critique, we first identify eight challenges posed by the authors’ argument, as well as the narrative that is the foundation of this argument. Conclusions/Recommendations: We conclude by presenting an alternate narrative of hip-hop as an instrument of systemic racism and offering suggestions as to how HHBP can be used in both research and practice to both avoid and counter systemic racism.Item Twenty-First Century Design Scholarship(AIGA Design Educators Community, 2016-06-15) Ganci, AaronScholarship is a tricky thing for design academics, especially for junior faculty who are trying to build a body of work towards tenure. To stay relevant in a quickly changing field, we often fluctuate between creative practice and more traditional scholarly pursuits, all while attempting to build a cohesive dossier. At the same time, we work in an especially turbulent environment. Our institutions are under increasing pressure to define their worth and, in turn, are heightening their expectations around scholarship. The field is trying to distinguish itself (or not) from fine art, architecture, and others, muddying our dissemination outlets. Digital media is facilitating new and unproven outlets for publication. And, increasingly, the validity of our creative practice as a form of scholarship is under constant scrutiny. On top of this, we often enter academia under-prepared for the reality of serious scholarship and have to figure out what good work looks like as we go. Unlike other fields, the scholarship—and most importantly the writing—we do as graduate students does not necessarily prepare us for work as a professional academic. These factors all add up to cause many new design academics to struggle as they attempt to build a sound body of work. Luckily, we are not alone in this struggle. Our community of educators are all trying to answer the same question: what is good design scholarship in the Twenty-First Century? This roundtable will attempt to answer this question by bringing together academics with various levels of experience and from a diverse set of institutions. By opening conversation through the roundtable format, we can start to uncover the range of scholarship that is currently being done, how faculty are framing their work in dossier narratives, and how different types of work are being received by T&P committees. Each of our institutions will have its own set of standards and criteria but this discussion will start a dialog about our work that can help us all move forward as a community. One outcome of the conversation will be a plan to start an online community (via LinkedIn or a similar service) where design academics can continue the conversation about scholarship and post questions as they arise.