I get all gushy about Metro architecture.
I had a chance to discuss Metro’s architecture on the Kojo Nnamdi Show, on the occasion of the system’s winning the AIA’s 25 Year Award.
In November, the AAUP issued a draft report on Academic Freedom and Electronic Communications. With the January 10 deadline for comments approaching, I have sent the following.
In a recent law journal article, Ryan Fairchild helpfully compares the freedom of information laws of all 50 states to see how they might govern requests for material from public universities. He finds that Alaska, Pennsylvania, and Georgia have the best laws in place.
[Ryan C. Fairchild. “Giving Away the Playbook: How North Carolina’s Public Records Law Can Be Used to Harass, Intimidate, and Spy.” North Carolina Law Review 91 (2013): 2117–2178. h/t Rebecca Tushnet]
The New York Times obtained “hundreds of emails and other documents” about public university professors in Texas and Illinois through Freedom of Information requests.
Over the past three years, various activists have filed public records or freedom of information requests for the e-mail of professors at public universities. In March 2011, the Republican Party of Wisconsin requested some of the e-mails of Professor William Cronon of the University of Wisconsin. Shortly thereafter, the Mackinac Center for Public Policy asked for similar e-mails sent among faculty and staff at public universities in Michigan. Then the American Tradition Institute sought the e-mail correspondence of Michael Mann, formerly of the University of Virginia.
At the time, the tactic was new, and experts speculated on the potential effects on academic freedom. However, those ideas remained largely speculative. The University of Wisconsin withheld messages sent to and from Cronon if they were “records related to professional organizations” or “intellectual communications among scholars.” And a Virginia court held that Mann’s e-mails were exempt from disclosure based on Virginia’s exclusion of “Data, records or information of a proprietary nature produced or collected by or for faculty or staff of public institutions of higher education…in the conduct of or as a result of study or research on medical, scientific, technical or scholarly issues.
These decisions limited the impact of the requests. But two more recent cases in states with less nuanced public records laws show how little privacy faculty at public universities may expect.
The colleges of the country are sinking in tone, lower & lower, in accordance with the opinion & manners of the people—I mean of what is considered even the best educated portion of the people. Practical ability, physical science, knowledge that may promote success in the great & absorbing ambition of all—making money—are now immensely prized & preferred to literature, philosophy, & art. Parents wish to see their sons successful men of business, not scholars & gentlemen, & to gratify this desire the colleges are reducing their standard of excellence & admitting the natural sciences to the foremost place among the studies prescribed.
Sidney George Fisher, 18 December 1869
A Philadelphia Perspective: The Diary of Sidney George Fisher, edited by Nicholas B. Wainwright (Historical Society of Pennsylvania, 1967), 556.
Maybe it’s that time of summer, but historians seem to be thinking about the tools they use to conduct research. The AHA has set up a Pinterest board called A Digital Tool Box for Historians, my new colleague Stephen Robertson has posted an essay about moving to digital sources, and Nate Kogan has written about his use of Zotero, Word, Scrivener, and Papers 2, though he tweets that I showed him something of Filemaker Pro back in the day.
I figure I’ll throw my hat in with a description of my current process, ugly as it is. I offer this information both to offer and seek help, since I think I am doing some things right but could be doing other things more efficiently.
Back in February, I fretted that the draft vision document for George Mason University did not list freedom as one our core institutional characteristics, as one of our values, or as one of our commitments.
Happily, this has been corrected. The latest draft statement of Values proclaims:
We Honor Freedom of Thought and Expression. We protect the freedom of all members of our community to seek truth and express their views.
Mason Vision Working Groups have posted a “draft Vision document” for George Mason University. I offer my comments below.