The classic case for why government must support science—with a new essay by physicist and former congressman Rush Holt on what democracy needs from science today Science, the Endless Frontier is recognized as the landmark argument for the essential role of science in society and government’s responsibility to support scientific endeavors. First issued when Vannevar Bush was the director of the US Office of Scientific Research and Development during the Second World War, this classic remains vital in making the case that scientific progress is necessary to a nation’s health, security, and prosperity. Bush’s vision set the course for US science policy for more than half a century, building the world’s most productive scientific enterprise. Today, amid a changing funding landscape and challenges to science’s very credibility, Science, the Endless Frontier resonates as a powerful reminder that scientific progress and public well-being alike depend on the successful symbiosis between science and government. This timely new edition presents this iconic text alongside a new companion essay from scientist and former congressman Rush Holt, who offers a brief introduction and consideration of what society needs most from science now. Reflecting on the report’s legacy and relevance along with its limitations, Holt contends that the public’s ability to cope with today’s issues—such as public health, the changing climate and environment, and challenging technologies in modern society—requires a more capacious understanding of what science can contribute. Holt considers how scientists should think of their obligation to society and what the public should demand from science, and he calls for a renewed understanding of science’s value for democracy and society at large. A touchstone for concerned citizens, scientists, and policymakers, Science, the Endless Frontier endures as a passionate articulation of the power and potential of science.

'...from time to time a study comes along that truly can be called ‘path breaking,’ ‘seminal,’ ‘essential,’ a ‘must read.’ How the Irish Became White is such a study.' John Bracey, W.E.B. Du Bois Department of Afro-American Studies, University of Massachussetts, Amherst The Irish came to America in the eighteenth century, fleeing a homeland under foreign occupation and a caste system that regarded them as the lowest form of humanity. In the new country – a land of opportunity – they found a very different form of social hierarchy, one that was based on the color of a person’s skin. Noel Ignatiev’s 1995 book – the first published work of one of America’s leading and most controversial historians – tells the story of how the oppressed became the oppressors; how the new Irish immigrants achieved acceptance among an initially hostile population only by proving that they could be more brutal in their oppression of African Americans than the nativists. This is the story of How the Irish Became White.

The responsibility for college success has historically rested with the student, but since the 1980s, educators have taken increasing ownership of this, designing structures that increase the likelihood of learning, success, and retention. These efforts have included a variety of initiatives--first year seminars, learning communities, writing-intensive courses, common intellectual experiences, service-learning, undergraduate research, and senior capstones among others--that have come to be known as high-impact practices. Although first year seminars have been widely accepted as a high impact educational practice leading to improved academic performance, increased retention and acquisition of critical 21st Century outcomes, first-year seminars tend to be loosely defined in the literature. National explorations of course structure and administration demonstrate the diversity of the curricular initiatives across various campuses. In order to determine the attributes that all of these varied courses share in common that contribute to their effectiveness, the National Resource Center for The First-Year Experience and Students in Transition at the University of South Carolina invited contributions for a book exploring effective educational practices within the first-year seminar. This collection of case studies represents a wide variety of institutional and seminar types. The authors describe the structure, pedagogy, and assessment strategies that lead to high quality seminars and they offer abundant models for ensuring the delivery of a high-quality educational experience to all entering students. The table of contents includes the following: (1) Structural Supports for Effective Educational Practices in the First-Year Seminar (Tracy L. Skipper); (2) The American University of Rome (Jenny Petrucci); (3) Cabrini University (Richard Gebauer, Michelle Filling-Brown, and Amy Perischetti); (4) Clark University (Jessica Bane Robert); (5) Coastal Carolina University (Michele C. Everett); (6) Durham Technical Community College (Kerry F. Cantwell and Gabby McCutchen); (7) Florida South Western State College (Eileen DeLuca, Kathy Clark, Myra Walters, and Martin Tawil); (8) Indiana University--Purdue University Indianapolis (Heather Bowman, Amy Powell, and Cathy Buyarski); (9) Ithaca College (Elizabeth Bleicher); (10) LaGuardia Community College, CUNY (Tameka Battle, Linda Chandler, Bret Eynon, Andrea Francis, Preethi Radhakrishnan, and Ellen Quish); (11) Loyola University Maryland (Mary Ellen Wade); (12) Malone University (Marcia K. Everett, Jay R. Case, and Jacci Welling); (13) Montana State University (Margaret Konkel and Deborah Blanchard); (14) Northern Arizona University (Rebecca Campbell and Kaitlin Hublitz); (15) Southern Methodist University (Caitlin Anderson, Takeshi Fujii, and Donna Gober); (16) Southwestern Michigan College (Christi Young, Jeffrey Dennis, and Donald Ludman); (17) St. Cloud State University (Christine Metzo); (18) Texas A & M University-Corpus Christi (Rita A. Sperry, Andrew M. Garcia, Chelsie Hawkinson, and Michelle Major); (19) The University of Arizona (Marla Franco, Jessica Hill, and Tina Wesanen-Neil); (20) University of Kansas (Alison Olcott Marshall and Sarah Crawford-Parker); (21) University of Maryland Baltimore County (Lisa Carter Beall); (22) University of New Hampshire (Neil Niman, Tamara Rury, and Sean Stewart); (23) University of North Carolina Wilmington (Zachary W. Underwood); (24) University of Northern Iowa (Deirdre Heistad, April Chatham-Carpenter, Kristin Moser, and Kristin Woods); (25) University of Texas at Austin (Ashley N. Stone and Tracie Lowe); (26) University of Texas at San Antonio (Kathleen Fugate Laborde and Tammy Jordan Wyatt); (27) University of Wisconsin-Madison (Susan Brantly and Sorabh Singhal); (28) Virginia Commonwealth University (Melissa C. Johnson and Bety Kreydatus); and (29) Conclusion: What Does It Mean to Be High Impact? (Tracy L. Skipper). (Individual chapters contain references.).

This insightful volumes the use of imitation and the modern cult of originality through a consideration of the disparate fates of two Venetian painters - the canonised master Titian and his artistic heir, the little-known Padovanino.

The first book-length critical and historical account of an ultramodern architectural movement of the 1960s that advocated "living equipment" instead of buildings. In the 1960s, the architects of Britain's Archigram group and Archigram magazine turned away from conventional architecture to propose cities that move and houses worn like suits of clothes. In drawings inspired by pop art and psychedelia, architecture floated away, tethered by wires, gantries, tubes, and trucks. In Archigram: Architecture without Architecture, Simon Sadler argues that Archigram's sense of fun takes its place beside the other cultural agitants of the 1960s, originating attitudes and techniques that became standard for architects rethinking social space and building technology. The Archigram style was assembled from the Apollo missions, constructivism, biology, manufacturing, electronics, and popular culture, inspiring an architectural movement—High Tech—and influencing the postmodern and deconstructivist trends of the late twentieth century. Although most Archigram projects were at the limits of possibility and remained unbuilt, the six architects at the center of the movement, Warren Chalk, Peter Cook, Dennis Crompton, David Greene, Ron Herron, and Michael Webb, became a focal point for the architectural avant-garde, because they redefined the purpose of architecture. Countering the habitual building practice of setting walls and spaces in place, Archigram architects wanted to provide the equipment for amplified living, and they welcomed any cultural rearrangements that would ensue. Archigram: Architecture without Architecture—the first full-length critical and historical account of the Archigram phenomenon—traces Archigram from its rediscovery of early modernist verve through its courting of students, to its ascent to international notoriety for advocating the "disappearance of architecture."