Who Says I Do ? Reviewing Judith Butler & Gayatri Chakravorty Spivak, Who Sings the Nation-State? Language, Politics, Belonging (2007)

This Book Review offers an analogy between two forms of resistance to legal discrimination by marginalized minorities: singing the national anthem in Spanish on the streets of Los Angeles in the spring of 2006 by undocumented immigrants, and possible future public marriage ceremonies by LGBT people and other marriage outlaws. Based on the conceptual grounds laid by Judith Butler and Gayatri Spivak, and earlier by Hannah Arendt, the Review uses an analogy to the public singing of the anthem in Spanish in order to argue that the performance of public marriage ceremonies by LGBT people and other marriage outlaws may achieve two significant political goals: performative contradiction and political speech acts

Hazard recognition and regulation : an asbestos chronology

One hundred years after it was first mined, several uses of asbestos were banned in the United States. The latency period that typifies asbestos-related diseases was but one factor in the delayed recognition of asbestos as a health hazard. Many other factors delayed the initiation of practical measures to alleviate the hazards. Controversies surrounding exposure to asbestos continue. Epidemiological studies have answered many questions, but many others are, and may remain, unanswered. Some of the controversies surrounding exposure to asbestos are embedded in the development of the United States of America as a country. An understanding of the historical basis for these controversies helps to explain the present relationships between business, labor, and government, and how these groups view issues of health and safety. Asbestos is an integral part of that history. It is used as the focus of this thesis, to examine the interplay of factors and forces which influenced the development of federal regulation of health and safety in the United States

The ILR School at Fifty: Voices of the Faculty, Alumni & Friends (Full Text)

A collection of reflections on the first fifty years of the School of Industrial and Labor Relations at Cornell University. Compiled by Robert B. McKersie, J. Gormly Miller, Robert L. Aronson, and Robert R. Julian. Edited by Elaine Gruenfeld Goldberg. It was the hope of the compilers that the reflections contained in this book would both kindle memories of the school and stimulate interest on the part of future generations of ILRies who have not yet shared in its special history. Dedicated to the Memory of J. Gormly Miller, 1914-1995. Copyright 1996 by Cornell University. All rights reserved

Exploring Citation Count Methods of Measuring Faculty Scholarly Impact

Margaret Kiel-Morse\u27s contribution to this volume is Exploring Citation Count Methods of Measuring Faculty Scholarly Impact. After US News & World Report\u27s announcement in 2019 that they will provide a separate ranking of law schools based on faculty scholarly impact, scrutinizing the various methods of assessing scholarly impact has been a hot topic. The various methods include reputation surveys, citation counts, and publication counts. This paper focuses on citation counts. Several methods of conducting citation counts have been circulated since the 1990s, notably Brian Leiter \u27s studies using Westlaw \u27s Law Reviews and Journals database; the Leiter study updates conducted by Gregory Sisk, et al., in 2012, 2015, and 2018; Heald and Sichelman \u27s look at HeinOnline and SSRN in Ranking the Academic Impact of 100 American Law Schools; and Ruhl, Vandenbergh, and Dunaway\u27s 2019 study using Web of Science in Total Scholarly Impact: Law Professor Citations in Non-Law Journals for interdisciplinary scholarly impact. Following the Ruhl study, faculty at Indiana University Maurer School of Law, with its strong record of interdisciplinary scholarship, were curious to learn Maurer \u27s overall scholarly impact. I reviewed existing studies of law faculty scholarly impact and then conducted a study of the interdisciplinary work of the Maurer Law faculty by duplicating the Ruhl citation count method of examining law faculty publications in non-law journals. The results illustrated that Maurer faculty are making a significant scholarly impact in interdisciplinary publications and that a true overall scholarly impact score for a law school\u27s faculty must include some measure of interdisciplinary work This article reviews a sample of the literature on measuring scholarly impact, describes the citation count method and related issues explored at Maurer, and discusses the benefits and limitations of including interdisciplinary scholarship in evaluating law faculty scholarly impact.https://www.repository.law.indiana.edu/facbooks/1304/thumbnail.jp

Special Libraries, September 1976

Volume 67, Issue 9https://scholarworks.sjsu.edu/sla_sl_1976/1007/thumbnail.jp

Against the Tide. A Critical Review by Scientists of How Physics and Astronomy Get Done

Nobody should have a monopoly of the truth in this universe. The censorship and suppression of challenging ideas against the tide of mainstream research, the blacklisting of scientists, for instance, is neither the best way to do and filter science, nor to promote progress in the human knowledge. The removal of good and novel ideas from the scientific stage is very detrimental to the pursuit of the truth. There are instances in which a mere unqualified belief can occasionally be converted into a generally accepted scientific theory through the screening action of refereed literature and meetings planned by the scientific organizing committees and through the distribution of funds controlled by "club opinions". It leads to unitary paradigms and unitary thinking not necessarily associated to the unique truth. This is the topic of this book: to critically analyze the problems of the official (and sometimes illicit) mechanisms under which current science (physics and astronomy in particular) is being administered and filtered today, along with the onerous consequences these mechanisms have on all of us.\ud \ud The authors, all of them professional researchers, reveal a pessimistic view of the miseries of the actual system, while a glimmer of hope remains in the "leitmotiv" claim towards the freedom in doing research and attaining an acceptable level of ethics in science