Thanks, Nim!
Laura P. Hartman
Assoc. Vice President, Academic Affairs
Professor of Business Ethics
DePaul University, 1 E. Jackson Blvd.
Chicago, IL 60604
Ph: 312/362-6569, Fax: 312/362-6822
Cell: 312/493-9929
-----Original Message-----
From: "Razook, Nim M." <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Thu, 22 Dec 2005 08:44:54
To:[log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: other pedagogy help?
Laura - There are several works by my OU colleague, Dan Wren, that should provide a good start. Dan's a fellow in the Academy of Mgt. and widely regarded as the premier business historian. Here's a website bio page:
http://www.pamij.com/99_4_1_wrenbio.html . Hope this helps. Nim
________________________________
From: Academy of Legal Studies in Business (ALSB) Talk on behalf of Hartman, Laura
Sent: Wed 12/21/2005 10:26 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: other pedagogy help?
Thanks, Ken, wow! As long as folks might be in the sharing mood, I have to teach a new undergraduate course (at least, I mean that it is new for me!) this spring called "foundations of business thought" and it will be populated with students who probably have not yet taken any other business school course. I am desperately seeking ideas for (1) readings, (2) means of assessment and (3) ANYTHING else in terms of resources that folks think might be helpful.
Thanks, if anyone has any suggestions . . . . .
Laura
Laura P. Hartman
Assoc. Vice President, Academic Affairs
Professor of Business Ethics
DePaul University
1 E. Jackson Blvd.
Chicago, IL 60604
Ph: 312/362-6569, Fax: 312/362-6822
Mobile: 312/493-9929
________________________________
From: Academy of Legal Studies in Business (ALSB) Talk [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Kenneth Schneyer
Sent: Wednesday, December 21, 2005 10:18 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: History of Science Lectures
David and others have requested this info, so:
There are three sets of recorded lectures on the history of science produced by The Teaching Company (http://www.teach12.com <http://www.teach12.com/> ). They are:
* History of Science: Antiquity to 1700
Lawrence M. Principe, Johns Hopkins University
36 lectures, 18 hours
* History of Science: 1700 to 1900
Frederick Gregory, University of Florida
36 Lectures, 18 hours
* Science in the 20th Century: A Social-Intellectual Survey
Steven L. Goldman, Lehigh University
36 Lectures, 18 hours
I purchased all three sets at a discount, have listened to all of Principe's lectures and most of Gregory's. (Most of what I noted below came from Gregory.) I've found them enlightening and they really maintain my interest. I think Principe is a slightly better lecturer than Gregory, but they're both quite good. When I'm done I'll almost certainly re-sell them on eBay to get money to pay for my next set of recorded lectures. (This is how I feed my habit.)
Let me take a moment to praise The Teaching Company. For the last year or so I've been enjoying their lectures on a wide variety of topics, learning things about Islam, Stravinsky, the Middle Ages, Winston Churchill, etc. My first exposure was Garrett G. Fagin's 48-lecture, 24-hour series on the History of Ancient Rome, which blew me away. After I finish the history of science I'm going to start on a history of China (Yao to Mao) and another history of Russia (Peter the Great to Gorbachev). You will frequently find me unloading the used ones on eBay (my handle is "piecesofmypast") - but there many other sellers who do the same thing and you can probably get a pretty good deal.
My general observation has been that The Teaching Company lectures are all "101" or "201" level courses, so that they're great if you don't know anything about the topic but that you get rather bored if it's in your field. So, for example, our own Frank Cross does their lectures on Business Law (Torts and Contracts) and (although Frank is a terrific lecturer and I was sincerely envious of his abilities) I couldn't listen to more than a half-hour. By contrast, the eight-lecture series on "Tchaikovsky: His Life and Art", which held me spellbound, caused my wife (who is qualified in both music and cultural studies) no end of eye-rolling impatience.
Hope this is helpful to all of you ... and if anyone knows where I can pick up a cheap online (or CBT) course on Organic Chemistry, please let me know...
Ta,
Ken
-----Original Message-----
From: Academy of Legal Studies in Business (ALSB) Talk [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of David W. Opderbeck
Sent: Wednesday, December 21, 2005 4:09 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Elitist Judge (in Dover)?
This is great stuff Ken. Are these lectures on tape or something? In my view, this kind of historical context is what both extremes in these discussions need.
David W. Opderbeck
Assistant Professor of Business Law
Baruch College, City University of New York
(646) 312-3602
[log in to unmask]
Kenneth Schneyer <[log in to unmask]>
Sent by: "Academy of Legal Studies in Business (ALSB) Talk" <[log in to unmask]>
12/21/2005 04:04 PM
Please respond to "Academy of Legal Studies in Business (ALSB) Talk"
To: [log in to unmask]
cc:
bcc:
Subject: Re: Elitist Judge (in Dover)?
I've been listening to some very interesting lectures on the history of science and have learned some fascinating things related to these debates:
* Evolution was postulated long before Darwin(as early as the 17th century), and was widely believed in the scientific community in the early 19th century. Darwin's innovation was natural selection rather than evolution itself.
* During Darwin's own time, evolution was widely believed by Christian theologians as well. The only real dispute was over whether God had simply set the evolutionary process in motion (Deism), or whether He occasionally intervened in it.
* It was in the 20th century (particularly the 1920s) when the fundamentalist movement began to demand a literal reading of Genesis and began opposing the notion of evolution altogether.
* Social Darwinism, as we understand that term, isn't very Darwinistic because it implies some sort of "progress", which is definitely not predicted by the mechanism of natural selection. "Social Lamarckism" would probably be a better term.
* Science (as we currently understand the word) is a relatively new concept - i.e., mid-19th century. The field of "natural philosophy" that preceded it embraced a number of different viewpoints concerning the purposes and methods of science. Thus the definition of science for purposes of a science classroom is somewhat fluid.
Thought it might interest you all.
Ken Schneyer
|
