The George Eliot Review: Journal of the George Eliot Fellowship 2001 No. 32

CONTENTS Notes on Contributors ........................................................................ 5 ADDRESSES Viscount Daventry: Address at the wreath-laying in the George Eliot Memorial Gardens, 18 June 2000 ................................................ 7 Jonathan Ouvry: Address at the wreath-laying in Westminster Abbey, 21 June 2000 ........................................................................... 9 Serena Evans: Address at the opening of a garden at the George Eliot Hospital in Nuneaton, 9 July 2000 .................................................. .11 Barbara Hardy: The Twenty-Ninth George Eliot Memorial Lecture, 21 October 2000...................... 13 Kathleen Adams: The Toast to the Immortal Memory: George Eliot Birthday Luncheon, 19 November 2000 .......................................... 23 ARTICLES June Skye Szirotny: Edward Casaubon and Herbert Spencer (Prize Essay) ..............................29 Kirstie Blair : Priest and Nun? Daniel Deronda, Anti-Catholicism and the Confessional ...................................................................................................45 Beryl Gray: Nobody\u27s Daughters: Dickens\u27s Tattycoram and George Eliot\u27s Caterina Sarti ..............................................................................51 Graham Handley: Middlemarch and Belinda ..................................................... 63 POEM Edwin J. MilIiken: George Eliot ........................................................ 68 LETTER TO THE EDITORS Barbara Hardy: the Jane Senior letters..................................................... 70 Editors\u27 Note: .............................................................. 70 REVIEWS Carol A. Martin: Oxford Reader s Companion to George Eliot. Ed. John Rignall .................................................................... 7

Kenyon Collegian - May 1858

Imagination, 145; The Mirrored Stars, 149; The Voices, 150; Stanzas, 153; The Baconian Philosophy: An Oration, 154; De Mortuis Nihil Nisi Bonum, 156; The Opening of Spring, 159; In the Spring, 160; A Hint to Homesick Students, 161; Translation from the Greek: Address of Democritus Abderites to the Eidola, 168; Lyrics for the Curious – A Critique, 168; Another Chapter on Words, 173; The Right Rev. Philander Chase, D.D., 181; Memorabilia Kenyonensia, 183; Editors’ Table, 184https://digital.kenyon.edu/collegian/1039/thumbnail.jp

From Shoestrings to Pursestrings: Securing Funding for Small, Open-Access Scholarly Journals

This presentation was given as part of the 2016 Library Pubilshing Forum held in Denton, Texas. It is a revision/expansion of a webinar the same authors created for a journal editor audience in 2016.Even though most open-access, library-published journals operate on a shoestring, in our experience, securing a small amount of consistent funding—to defray production and editorial costs, reduce the burden on editors, etc.—has a significant impact on the long-term success of a journal. This presentation offers a model for guiding editors and authors through the process of securing funding to support their journal. We do not propose a single business model. On the contrary, we focus on opening up options in ways that are imaginative and open-ended, empowering editors to articulate a story of meaning around their journal. We’ll address the following questions: *At Michigan, beginning in fiscal year 2017, we will start charging fees to our publishing partners. How do we prepare internally for this transition, and how do we break this news in a way that retains trust and a strong relationship with our partners? *What alternative funding options and opportunities—besides toll-access and author-pays—are available to journal editors? We’ll share some of the ideas our journal editors have come up with. *How can we help publishing partners make a strong case for the importance of their publication? What’s the best way to communicate impact? *How can we prepare ourselves and our publishing partners to manage and track their finances?http://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/120920/1/LPF Presentation.pdfhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/120920/2/LPF Presentation.pptxDescription of LPF Presentation.pdf : Presentation slides in PDF formatDescription of LPF Presentation.pptx : Presentation slides in Power Point format, including notes field

Quality Frameworks for MOOCs

The hype surrounding MOOCs has been tempered by scepticism about the quality of MOOCs. The possible flaws of MOOCs include the quality of the pedagogies employed, low completion rates and a failure to deliver on the promise of inclusive and equitable quality education for all. On the other hand, MOOCs that have given a boost to open and online education have become a symbol of a larger modernisation agenda for universities, and are perceived as tools for universities to improve the quality of blended and online education—both in degree education and Continuous Professional Development. MOOC provision is also much more open to external scrutiny as part of a stronger globalising higher education market. This has important consequences for quality frameworks and quality processes that go beyond the individual MOOC. In this context, different quality approaches are discussed including possible measures at different levels and the tension between product and process models. Two case studies are described: one at the institutional level (The Open University) and one at a MOOC platform level (FutureLearn) and how they intertwine is discussed. The importance of a national or international quality framework which carries with it a certification or label is illustrated with the OpenupEd Quality label. Both the label itself and its practical use are described in detail. The examples will illustrate that MOOCs require quality assurance processes tailored to e-learning and open education, embedded in institutional frameworks. The increasing unbundling of educational services may require additional quality processes

Reading Shakespeare's Stage Directions

Suggests that we should consider the stage directions in Shakespeare's early texts, particularly the 1623 Folio, as snippets of narrative or free indirect discourse, rather than as clues to or for performance

The structure of the Plutarchan book

This study focuses not on individual Lives or pairs of Lives, but on the book as a whole and its articulation across the full corpus. It argues that the Plutarchan book consists of up to four distinct sections: prologue, first Life, second Life, synkrisis. Each of these sections has a fairly consistent internal structure, and each has a distinct set of strategies for opening, for closure, and for managing the transition from one section to the next. Prologues provide an introduction to both Lives, and are clearly delineated from them, even though in our manuscripts they appear as part of the first Life; in fact, there is often a stronger break between prologue and first Life than there is between the two Lives themselves. Prologues usually begin with generalized reflections, to be followed only later by the naming of the subjects and a statement of their similarities. Most Lives begin with a thematically organized section (the ‘proemial opening’), which surveys the subject's life as a whole, not just their youth, and which is marked off with varying degrees of distinctness from the narrative that follows. Crucially, proemial openings do not narrate and the logic of their structure is not chronological. Closure in many Lives is signalled by ‘circularity’ and sometimes by a closural or transitional phrase, though first Lives are different here from second Lives. Synkriseis are structured both by a series of themes on which the two subjects are compared, and by a two-part, agonistic structure in which first one of the subjects is preferred, then the other. Synkriseis may also recall the prologue; both prologue and synkrisis operate at the level of the book, and between them frame and weld together the two Lives.</jats:p

Evoplex: A platform for agent-based modeling on networks

Agent-based modeling and network science have been used extensively to advance our understanding of emergent collective behavior in systems that are composed of a large number of simple interacting individuals or agents. With the increasing availability of high computational power in affordable personal computers, dedicated efforts to develop multi-threaded, scalable and easy-to-use software for agent-based simulations are needed more than ever. Evoplex meets this need by providing a fast, robust and extensible platform for developing agent-based models and multi-agent systems on networks. Each agent is represented as a node and interacts with its neighbors, as defined by the network structure. Evoplex is ideal for modeling complex systems, for example in evolutionary game theory and computational social science. In Evoplex, the models are not coupled to the execution parameters or the visualization tools, and there is a user-friendly graphical interface which makes it easy for all users, ranging from newcomers to experienced, to create, analyze, replicate and reproduce the experiments.Comment: 6 pages, 5 figures; accepted for publication in SoftwareX [software available at https://evoplex.org

The Cowl - v.13 - n.22 - May 2, 1951

The Cowl - student newspaper of Providence College. Volume 13, Number 22- May 2, 1951. 6 pages