Years Of Graduate Work Research Articles

Working Against the Grain: Rewards and Consequences of Developing a Personal Voice in Academia

As a topic for my dissertation, I conducted a two-year study toexplore the experiences of women who achieved highly inacademics and who were also disadvantaged as children(LePage-Lees, 1997a). The women were considered highachievers since they had earned advanced degrees or werecurrently enrolled as advanced graduate students with at leasttwo years of graduate work completed. Women wereconsidered disadvantaged if they were raised in low-incomehomes, were first-generation college students, and had facedstress as children (e.g., family dysfunction or instability, illness,or death, etc.). From this definition, the women's resources hadbeen limited in three categories: financial, informational, andemotional.

Humanities, Inc.

Humanities, Inc. Timothy Aubry (bio) During the 1950s, senior executives at AT&T briefly hoped that the humanities could revitalize their company. Trained mostly in technical subjects such as engineering or business, their midlevel employees, they feared, were narrow in their interests and knowledge, mechanical in their approach to problems, and incapable of independent thought. Thus CEO Cleo Craig initiated a pilot program, The Institute of Humanistic Studies for Executives, designed to enrich and broaden the minds of a select number of employees. Each year starting in 1953, AT&T relieved approximately twenty managers of all work duties for ten months and sent them to the University of Pennsylvania to receive a liberal arts education, free of charge. Participants not only read more than a typical PhD student in a year of graduate work, they visited museums, attended classical music concerts, and mingled with prominent intellectuals over cocktails. AT&T had tried out a similar initiative in the 1920s. Then president of New Jersey Bell Chester Barnard sent hundreds of his employees to the University of Pennsylvania for several one-week periods to study the humanities, but he decided that the program, to be successful, would need to provide a lengthier, more rigorous experience. By the 1950s, AT&T was finally making the ample profits that Barnard’s vision necessitated, and so, under Cleo Craig’s recommendation, the president of Pennsylvania Bell Wilfred D. Gillen and his Vice President of Personnel John Markle II reinstituted Barnard’s program.1 Morse Peckham, a professor of English at the University of Pennsylvania, devised [End Page 5] the curriculum, which consisted of courses in philosophy, literature, arts, and science, and guest lectures from major intellectuals including Lewis Mumford, W. H. Auden, Delmore Schwartz, Henry S. Commager, and David Riesman.2 Click for larger view View full resolution Figure 1. Industrial Psychologist Morris Viteles (second from left, front row) with several participants from the Institute of Humanistic Study (date unknown). [Box No. V68, Folder No.8, Morris Viteles papers] Archives of the History of American Psychology, The Center for the History of Psychology, The University of Akron. The Bell employees appreciated certain aspects of the program more than others. Some preferred learning about politics and economics to learning about art and literature. But they were, on the whole, determined to understand as much as they could of what they encountered. One participant became so frustrated during the several hours he spent trying to make sense of Ezra Pound’s The Pisan Cantos that he had to take an aspirin and a sedative at two in the morning in order to sleep.3 And practically everyone, apparently, struggled and fretted tirelessly over the presentations they were required to give on individual chapters of James Joyce’s Ulysses; one musically inclined presenter, seduced by the Sirens episode, devoted forty-two hours to tracing its themes and motifs.4 All participants relished the opportunity to meet famous thinkers; getting to “walk with the greats” was an “ego-building experience,” according to one survey of the program.5 And generally speaking the reviews were extremely [End Page 6] favorable, with many alumni calling the ten-month period the most significant and memorable of their entire life.6 The program’s popularity, of course, was not enough to justify its substantial costs. Its administrators also needed to demonstrate that it would serve the interests of AT&T. To that end, they put forth a series of arguments, in committee reports, at conferences, and in internal memos, designed to establish the usefulness of the humanities to business. They also hired industrial psychologist Morris Viteles and the consulting firm Douglass Williams Associates to study the effects of the program; both gave the Institute positive reviews. AT&T was initially pleased with the results and instituted similar, though less extensive programs at Swarthmore, Williams, Dartmouth, and Northwestern. But support for the program gradually waned, and the new CEO at AT&T Frederick R. Kappel, who took office in 1956, was unconvinced of the Institute’s effectiveness and discontinued it four years into his tenure. Why was AT&T’s experiment confined to the 1950s? One key factor was the cold war: during...

New forms of Design Education

Design has been in a period of change for the last decade, but design education and more specifically design educators haven’t kept up with these transformations. As a result, design students continue to learn outdated methods and techniques. A designer needs to understand processes, methods, and mediums of design. At all of these levels, the process is the same, while methods may change slightly and the medium differs dramatically. Without expertise in mediums, a designer is only able to facilitate what others do; they become a means or a manager, a step in communication, repeating existing content without adding value. This makes such an individual easily replaceable.Design education usually places an emphasis on medium, usually at the expense of methods and processes. Students learn a process, but they quite often learn without comprehending. They are unable to negotiate the steps necessary to adjust to the realities of the environment and in the end, that reality may be troubling for such an idealistic student. Without understanding the design process, design students have no way of understanding a design problem, or how to add constraints in order to better shape the problem into something that is manageable.We need to find a way to educate future designers, providing them with a firmer grasp of design processes and a variety of methods - in other words, comprehensive expertise of a medium. This implies a longer course of study than a simple undergraduate degree and a few years of graduate work; most professionals receive this training more by actually doing design work and skipping formal design education.While some of the inability to keep up with changes is due to the difficulty of revising the curriculum, the largest issue appears to in terms of subject matter, methods, theory, and the reluctance of educators to give up what they learned and have been teaching for decades so that they can make room for new material.Design students of the future must learn design during their formative years, studying both the abstract and tactical. This approach challenges the traditional system in which educators who have repeated the same tired exercises for years may find themselves teaching something that it is without an audience, and as a result they may well find themselves without a role to play. But the new approach will create a cadre of competent designers for industry, government, and the non-profit sector, where design thinking and detailed, knowledgeable design is fundamental to address the complex and dynamic qualities of our world.

The unexplored potential of the pentose phosphate pathway in health and disease

The paper of Wamelink et al (2008) represents the culmination of four years of graduate work by Mirjam Wamelink in the laboratory of Professor Cornelis Jakobs, as well as the mentorship provided by other investigators and colleagues at the VU University Medical Center, Amsterdam. It is a beautiful review of both her work and the emerging field of polyol metabolism. In this paper, she reviews the pentose phosphate pathway (PPP) and its critical role in providing NADPH which helps regulate the cellular redox potential via maintenance of the reduced glutathione pool, a major anti-oxidant defense. In addition, Wamelink et al discuss the two ultra-rare heritable disorders of the PPP, ribose-5-phosphate isomerase (RPI) deficiency and transaldose (TALDO) deficiency. The former, a leukodystrophy with elevated ribitol and arabitol and decreased myo-inositol in brain, was first described by van der Knaap et al (1999), while the latter, a rapidly progressive liver disease with congenital developmental lesions, was first described by Verhoeven et al (2001). These rare experiments of nature are of great interest and raise new questions and hypotheses. For example, is cellular osmoregulation of cyclic and acylic polyol content linked to the redox potential especially in cells in which the NADPH/NADP and NADH/NAD couples interdigitate via the malic enzyme and mitochondrial oxidative metabolism? Wamelink_s major contribution to this field was to develop novel analytical methods, including LC-MS/MS, for the sensitive and accurate measurements of polyols and sugar phosphates in body fluids. These methods may be applical to many other human diseases as the PPP interfaces with cancer metabolism and hypoxic-ischemic injury. As exemplified by this outstanding review, the JIMD has created a wonderful opportunity for graduate students from around the world to showcase their work, as well as honour the mentors and collaborators who have provided the framework for their success. The publication of a review of a student_s thesis work is very welcome and an indication of the singular intent of the JIMD to advance our field of metabolism.

Jesse Stuart and Don West

Jesse Stuart and Don West James M. Gifford (bio) and Erin R. Kazee (bio) The relationship between Jesse Stuart and Don West ran both historical and emotional gauntlets. Set against the backdrop of the Depression, World War II, unionization, desegregation, and a growing concern for the underserved and underprivileged, their writings reflected vastly different world views: West politicized his literature; Stuart romanticized his. The result was the dissolution of a strong friendship between two men who, for all their diverging opinions, were more similar than they wanted to admit. In their undergraduate days, they were closer than brothers, until politics, literature, and life split their friendship. As older men, they tried to reclaim—or at least remember—their affection for one another. Both were born in 1906 on hillside farms—Stuart in W-Hollow, Greenup County, Kentucky, and West in Devil’s Hollow, Gilmer County, Georgia. Both were raised in extended, traditional mountain families and received their early education in one-room schools. When they met as freshmen at Lincoln Memorial University in 1926, poor and willing to accept any job they could find, their similar backgrounds and self-confident personalities cemented their camaraderie. They milked cows, hoed corn, dug ditches, and delivered laundry, but they put their hearts into writing and honing the philosophies that would ultimately tear them apart. At the time, Stuart’s letters to his family were filled with praise for West’s character and accomplishments. The “two old Bulls from the woods” hiked, ran track, and commiserated together. Although he had his own financial and personal difficulties, Don loaned Jesse money and offered advice on topics that ranged from dating to religion. When Don secretly eloped with lmu coed Connie Adams, Jesse served as the best man at the ceremony. Later, University officials discovered the marriage and Stuart wrote in a letter, “took Connie’s scholarship away from her. At the same time, [Don] was expelled for participating in a student strike that closed the campus down for a couple of weeks.” Stuart’s letter maintains that with help from Stuart and others, he was reinstated and eventually [End Page 31] graduated. In 1929, Don West hitchhiked to Vanderbilt to enter the Divinity School. Jesse followed a few years later when he decided to pursue an M.A. in English for the 1931–1932 school year. Don was studying religion, and they often discussed his role in the socialist movement. Although Jesse felt that Don did not articulate his ideology very clearly, he still respected him as “a natural born leader” and predicted that “if the socialists ever do get in power, West is liable to be president of the United States.” Jesse “went through hell” at Vanderbilt and “would have starved” without Don West, who purchased a meal ticket for Stuart that provided one meal per day. Furthermore, he often brought Jesse food when they visited. Stuart completed a year of graduate work and returned home after the 1932 spring semester ended. That fall, he became Kentucky’s youngest superintendent. Meanwhile, Don West was making significant progress, too. He taught briefly at the Hindman Settlement School in Knott County and then opened the famous Highlander Folk School at Monteagle, Tennessee, with Myles Horton. Throughout the 1930s, Jesse and Don spent a great deal of time explaining and defending themselves to one another. “Stuart, you still have a great misunderstanding of me and my work and purpose … [but] I make no more personal fights,” West wrote. Nonetheless, he felt that if Jesse “could ever get away from being so damned self-centered [he] could be a power for the cause.” Jesse, in his own way, also tried to acknowledge and look past their differences, saying simply, “I think he is very wrong and of course he thinks I’m wrong.” Still, their political opinions often colored their literary analyses. For example, in January 1933, Don West expressed disappointment that Stuart had “not yet grasped the simplest elementary principle of social consciousness” and hoped that he would “get away from the romantic sentimentalizing about the mountains.” That was a year of financial suffering for both of them. West asked Stuart to loan him one–hundred dollars...

Your Tax Dollars at Work: The State of Queer Youth Studies

Your Tax Dollars at Work: The State of Queer Youth Studies Jes Battis (bio) On 12 October 2007, I received an email from the chief media officer at sshrc, which let me know that a reporter for the National Post was writing an article on my research. My response was “sounds great!” I was thrilled by the coverage, although a bit confused as to why a generally conservative periodical would be interested in profiling my work on lgbt youth cultures. Robert Fulford did attempt to contact me, but I wasn’t able to return his call until the deadline had already passed. When the article appeared, my reaction was, “Oh.” I got it. The article wasn’t about my research—it was about “people like me” (i.e., the oft-cited special interests groups) who suck money from the Canadian economy for “pointless” scholarship. I am, indeed, part of a “special-interest” group. I am especially interested in the continued survival of lgbt youth around the globe who may feel invisible when they turn to popular culture for any sort of ethical representation of their lives. After Ricky Vasquez on My So-Called Life (1994), teen audiences had to wait seven years until the arrival of Marco Del Rossi on Degrassi: The Next Generation (2001) to see anything close to a “realistic” portrait of a gay teen. I am interested not simply in charting the development of literature and media aimed at gay teens, but in collecting and analyzing work written by gay teens. Scholastic has an imprint, [End Page 18] Push, edited by David Levithan, which solely publishes teen novels and poetry. Why isn’t anyone else writing about this? Scholars will admit that the gay memoir—particularly of the Edmund White variety—“had its place” in the development of lgbt literature, but what about teens writing now about their experiences of homophobia versus their attempts at community building? Hundreds of teens write letters to publications like XY, which is then criticized because it includes sexy pictures of gay youth. Why are recollected sex-scenes by older gay men considered academically interesting, while teen participation in visual sexuality today is considered exploitative and scholarly vapid? Are teens too stupid to construct themselves as objects of discourse, or as cultural organizers? The growing emergence of gay-straight alliances in North America seems to suggest the opposite. Academics are supposed to be ornery and polemical—we’re supposed to like arguing—but it’s not often that we get the chance to respond, in print, to an outright attack on our scholarly and cultural lives. So I’m going to use every bit of my one thousand word limit here to make a point. I am sick and tired of being called a pampered doll because I work in queer studies, as if lgbt research has become so mainstream that any attempt to address its marginalization is now pointless and reactionary. I completed six years of graduate work at Simon Fraser University in Vancouver, British Columbia—supposedly one of the most queer-friendly cities on the planet—and during that time I was one of only three openly gay students within my department. I was never given the chance to participate in or ta for an lgbt studies class, since none existed. I was consistently told that I should “broaden my focus” and “not just deal with queer issues.” I attempted to start an lgbt grad student network and was met with almost perfect apathy from the school’s graduate community. I watched numerous tenure-track positions appear, but none that focused on queer studies or, even, on sexuality in general. I received generous and unqualified support from my supervisor, but aside from that, I felt adrift. I am tired of being told by colleagues, by publishers—and even by strangers—that queer studies are passé, that they’re already well funded, that they don’t require further attention, that I should just shut up. Every day I try my best to identify as a queer man who’s never entirely sure where his politics lie, who’s not completely certain what he wants to “do” with this cultural capital, but...

MARSHALL R. URIST

In 1965, Marshall R. Urist discovered that the intramuscular implantation of demineralized bone matrix elicits new bone formation. This discovery, made in the Bone Research Laboratory of the University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA), marked the beginning of the development of knowledge concerning bone morphogenetic proteins (BMPs). Stimulated by Urist's observations, research on BMPs was undertaken in laboratories throughout the world, and, in the last decade, the advance of knowledge pertaining to the capacity of BMPs to induce the healing of segmental bone defects has been phenomenal. This article briefly describes Marshall Urist's career as a scientist and orthopaedic surgeon, his life, his family, and his friends. Marshall R. Urist was born on June 11, 1914. He was raised in South Haven, Michigan. He attended the Crane Technical High School and had an abiding interest in architecture. He continued his studies at the University of Michigan, where he came under the influence of Professor Alfred H. Stockard, and graduated in 1936. Armed with a recommendation from Dr. Stockard, he pursued a year of graduate work in the laboratory of Franklin C. McLean at the University of Chicago and received his MS degree in 1937. During this year in Chicago, he began his lifelong friendship with Franklin McLean and Charles B. Huggins, who was well known for his work on epithelial osteogenesis and prostate cancer. Marshall Urist entered the Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine in 1937 and received his MD degree in 1941. After a year of residency at the Children's Hospital in Baltimore, Urist joined the war effort in 1943. He was Chief of Orthopaedics in the 22nd General Hospital Division in England and the 97th General Hospital Division in Germany. He completed his residency in orthopaedic surgery at Massachusetts General Hospital in 1947 and became an instructor in …

My First Year as a School-Based Clinician

My First Year as a School-Based Clinician

Report to the elders (A discourse on semantic relativity)

Doht'aa le'aa kkaa hen zaadletl'ee ne? My dear uncles, I expect you will be surprised by the postmark on this letter — if you have gotten it at all, that is. The captain of the ship on which I am working my way towards Northwestern Australia has promised that he will post it for me when he goes ashore tomorrow in Pago Pago to negotiate supplies for the next leg of the journey. But he drinks too much when he is in port and can sometimes be forgetful. Anyway, if you are, as I hope, reading this, I apologize for the long delay since you last heard from me. Let my mother know that I am well and that I have not given up my studies at Stanford. I still hope to complete my MA. I have not forgotten the generosity you have shown me in nominating me for a special community scholarship — nor the great responsibility it bears with it. I am not running away from that responsibility, you must believe me. But I can not in all conscience complete my training as a ‘linguist’ — and thus repay your generosity — until I understand within myself what it is exactly I am expected to bring back to you. I cannot simply hand in a Masters thesis which is a mixture of half-truths and speculations. Please forgive me too that I am writing to you in English and not in our native Koyukon (which I so miss hearing spoken around me). This is not out of disrespect or laziness because I know you all understand English. On the contrary, I am writing of things here that are truly alien to what we are used to communicating about, and it would distort our tongue to force it to express them. This is then the report that you asked me to send you at the conclusion of my first year of graduate work. I do not need more money, I just beg for a little more patience.

Extension and Contraction

David Starkweather is the cellist on the faculty of the University of Georgia. He grew up near San Francisco, then attended the Eastman School of Music. This was followed by four years of graduate work at the State University of New York at Stony Brook, where he studied cello with Bernard Greenhouse. In 1985, Starkweather spent half a year in Switzerland for intensive work with Pierre Fournier, earning the famous French cellist's accolade as “one of the best cellists of his generation.” He was awarded a certificate of merit as a semi-finalist in the 1986 Tchaikovsky Competition. Starkweather has been featured on the National Public Radio show Performance Today and in. a PBS one-hour recital program televised nationwide. A review in the Atlanta Constitution praised his “sensitive phrasing and Starkweather's obvious technical facility.” His previous articles for AST were “Methods of Shifting” (Winter 1988) and “Choice of Fingerings” (Summer 1990).

George G. Simpson (1902-1984): Getting Started in the Summer of 1924

In the middle of his first year of graduate work in vertebrate paleontology at Yale, George Gaylord Simpson began looking about for employment for the coming summer. He needed a job that would not only further his paleontological education, but also, with a wife and infant daughter to support, one that would pay him a salary, however modest. He eventually obtained a position prospecting for Tertiary mammals in Texas and New Mexico as a field assistant to William Diller Matthew of the American Museum of Natural History. By the end of the summer, Simpson established himself as an energetic and highly successful field man, having made two major fossil discoveries, thereby impressing both Richard Swan Lull, his major advisor at Yale, and Matthew, whom he would eventually succeed at the American Museum as curator of fossil mammals. When Simpson returned to Yale in the fall, Lull, despite his earlier refusal, permitted him to study the Marsh Collection of Mesozoic mammals for his dissertation. Matthew, too, was enthusiastic about Simpson's demonstrated abilities for he became Simpson's mentor, acting as informal off-campus advisor for his dissertation and eventually an advocate for Simpson's appointment at the American Museum. Simpson also learned, the hard way, about scientific protocol and professional territoriality when a short paper he wrote describing the geologic results of his work in New Mexico was suppressed by Childs Frick, honorary curator of the Department of Vertebrate Paleontology who had supported the New Mexico (and Texas) excursion with his own funds. Frick's financial support of the Museum apparently gave him greater influence than Matthew who, as chairman of Vertebrate Paleontology, had initially approved Simpson's paper for publication in the Museum Bulletin.

Nunc Dimittis

Robert M. Smith, emeritus professor of animal sciences (poultry), University of Arkansas, Fayetteville, Arkansas, died April 28, 1981. Smith was born in Memphis, Missouri, November 7, 1901. He received a B.A. degree in 1924 and the M.A. degree in 1926 from the University of Missouri. He also did an additional year of graduate work at the University of Wisconsin in 1937 to 1938.In 1924 to 1925, he was an instructor in high school at Hopkins, Missouri. Then from 1926 to 1927, he was a research assistant at the Ralston Purina Company in St. Louis, Missouri. He joined the Animal Industry and Veterinary Science Department at the University of Arkansas in 1927 as an instructor, becoming assistant professor in 1942, associate professor in 1944, and professor in 1950. At retirement in 1968 he had served the University of Arkansas for 41 years.Professor Smith's service to the University of Arkansas .

Authors

Authors

Gift

Something that has not been mentioned yet in the appeal for gifts to AGU is the possibility of funding a scholarship that would be administered by the AGU. To keep geophysics an alive and vital discipline, we must continue to attract the best young minds to the field. If we established a well endowed fund with sufficient resources to more than adequately fund a graduate student through 2 or possibly 3 years of graduate work, the attendant publicity and nationwide attention could do much to attract these good young minds to our field.In your talks with potential donors I urge you to keep the possibility of scholarship endowments in mind.

James Meade's Contribution to Economics

James Edward Meade was born June 23, 1907, in Swanage, Dorset, and educated at Malvern College and Oriel College, Oxford, with a year of graduate work at Trinity College, Cambridge, 1930-31. He was Fellow of Hertford College, Oxford, and Lecturer in Economics, 1930-37; economist for the League of Nations and editor of the World Economic Survey, 1937-40; a member of the Economic Section of the Cabinet Offices (Secretariat) 1940-45 and Director of the Economic Section 1945-47; Professor of Economics, London School of Economics, 1947-57; Professor of Political Economy, Cambridge University from 1957, retiring in 1969 five years before the statutory age of retirement, after which he became a Senior Research Fellow of Christ's College, Cambridge. He was a Visiting Professor at Australian National University in 1956, and Chairman of the Economic Survey Mission to Mauritius in 1960. While any detailed biographical analysis would be out of place in an evaluation of this kind, certain points are worth noting. Professionally, his year at Cambridge brought Meade into early contact with Keynes and the Keynesians; his initial period in the Economic Section got him involved (with J. R. N. Stone and others) in the early stages of development of British national income accounting; his visit to Australia got him interested in Japan and its relations with G.A.T.T.; and his service on the Mauritius Commission introduced him to a prime example of the classic Malthusian population problem, which among other things led to a revision of his book on economic growth. His service with the League of Nations, and his continuing interest in N.A.T.O. and subsequently in the E.E.C., betoken his enduring concern with world

A STUDY OF THE PREDICTIVE VALIDITY OF THE TESTS OF SCIENTIFIC THINKING*

ABSTRACTThe “Tests of Scientific Thinking” (TST) are free‐response job‐sample tests intended to measure aspects of scientific problem solving that require some degree of imaginativeness and ingenuity and that might therefore be used as dependent measures in research on “creativity.” The present study was designed to provide some preliminary evidence as to the validity of measures derived from these instruments. The TST and the GRE tests were compared with regard to their relationships to interests, self‐appraisals, and accomplishments of students during their first year of graduate work in psychology. These criterion variables were obtained from a questionnaire mailed to students near the end of the Spring, 1975, academic semester. Subjects were students who had taken the tests in October of 1973 for a study of the psychometric properties of the experimental tests.Difficulties in data analysis were created both by the item‐sampling character of the experimental test data, and by a relatively small rate of return of questionnaires from students who were actually attending graduate school in psychology. The estimated correlations for individual variables, therefore, reflect a substantial amount of error and can be regarded only as suggestive. It was possible to show, however, that the correlations do exhibit appreciable nonchance variance with regard to consistency across tests and across related questionnaire variables.The means, standard deviations, and reliabilities of the TST scores were in general about the same as those obtained in the psychometric study, as were correlations with GRE scores. The GRE tests were found to be more effective than the experimental instruments in predicting quality of the department attended, but the experimental tests were more effective in two other domains: (1) self‐appraisals of knowledge of psychology and skills in psychological activities, and (2) professional accomplishments such as research, publication, teaching, and tutoring. Of the several scores obtained from the new tests, those for number of Unusual responses and for number of Unusual‐High quality responses were the best predictors. The evidence is judged to justify further investigation of the validity of the experimental tests by other methods.

Popper and the non-Bayesian tradition: Comments on Richard Jeffrey

My first serious encounter with Popper's work occurred after several years of graduate work in philosophy which in turn had been preceeded by several years of graduate work in physics. Like many scientists who read Popper, including such notables as Herman Bondi and John Eccles, I found that many of Popper's views harmonized well with my previous scientific experience. In fact, so favorable was my impression of his work that I began a dissertation on Popper's Philosophy of Science. I soon found, however, that the arguments Popper offered for those intuitively appealing views did not measure up to my newly acquired philosophical standards. Moreover, it also became clear that Popper had misunder stood, or at least misrepresented, his opponents, especially Carnap. Indeed, the misrepresentation often seemed so great as to be perverse, even willful. I abandoned the proposed dissertation on Popper. The point of these autobiographical remarks is to show the basis of my personal sympathy with Professor Jeffrey's feelings of frustration in dealing with Popper and his followers. Moreover, I wish to indicate my approval of his attempt to make clear in public how some of these feelings were generated. Nevertheless, while I reject the details of most of Popper's views and would not employ his arguments, much less his mode of argumentation, there is a serious sense in which I think that Popper's general position must be defended against the arguments in the latter parts of Jeffrey's paper. This is because Popper represents an important tradition in epistemological thought. Indeed, this tradition constitutes the major alternative to the tradition now represented by a Bayesian verifica tionism of the sort Jeffrey advocates. In what follows, therefore, I will first indicate some major components of the two traditions, one Bayesian, one non-Bayesian. It will be clear, I think, why Jeffrey and Popper are on opposing sides. Having distinguished the two traditions, I will then at tempt to show that the general Popperian insights which Jeffrey recasts

History of the Riemann Mapping Theorem

The Riemann mapping theorem, that an arbitrary simply connected region of the plane can be mapped one-to-one and conformally onto a circle, first appeared in the Inaugural dissertation of Riemann (1826-1866) in 1851. The theorem is important, for by it a result proved for the circle can often be transformed from the circle to a more general region. The proof is difficult, as involving both behavior of a function in the small (conformal mapping) and behavior in the large (one-toone mapping). Riemann's proof was open to criticism and in the following decades numerous mathematicians sought for a proof, e.g., H. A. Schwarz (1843-1921), A. Harnack (1851-1888), H. Poincare (1854-1912), etc., until the first rigorous proof was given in 1900 by W. F. Osgood. The proof of Osgood represented, in my opinion, the coming of age of mathematics in America. Until then, numerous American mathematicians had gone to Europe for their doctorates, or for other advanced study, as indeed did Osgood. But the mathematical productivity in this country in quality lagged behind that of Europe, and no American before 1900 had reached the heights that Osgood then reached. William Fogg Osgood (1864-1943) was born in Boston in 1864, graduated from Harvard College in 1886, stayed in Cambridge for a year of graduate work, and then went to Gottingen with a Harvard fellowship for further study, especially with Felix Klein (1849-1925). According to gossip, Osgood became so enamored of a Gottingen lady that his work suffered and Klein sent him to Erlangen for his doctorate. In any case, he was accorded the degree from Erlangen in 1890 for a thesis on Abelian integrals, and one or two days later he married the girl in G6ttingen, and one or two days still later they sailed for the United States of America. His

RMMLA Past Presidents, IV: Thomas Bond Burnam, 1953-1954

RMMLA PAST PRESIDENTS, IV: THOMAS BOND BURNAM, 1953-1954 Versatility and a keen intellectual curiosity are the outstanding characteristics of Professor Thomas Bond Burnam who was president of the RMMLA in 1953-54. Indeed, these are probably the outstanding characteristics of most fine scholars, creative writers, and teachers. Dr. Burnam was born in Swan Lake, Montana, and was reared in the Northwest , taking his A.B. and M.A. degrees from the University of Idaho, and his Ph.D. from the University of Washington in 1950. During his last year of graduate work at the University in Seattle, he advanced from part-time acting associate instructor to instructor, teaching composition and elementary creative writing, and later teaching courses in advanced creative writing, the structure of fiction, and introduction to literature. He also served as secretary of the Advanced Writing Staff under Porter Perrin at the University of Washington in 1949-50. His major fields were American literature and creative writing; his special interests, Shakespeare, linguistics, and the drama since Ibsen. He came to Colorado State College in 1950 as assistant professor of English, was advanced to associate professor in 1953, and to professor of English in 1956. In 1963 he returned to the Northwest, where he has remained as professor of English at Portland State College. Professor Burnam had an especially fruitful year in 1961 when, on leave from Colorado State College, he served as Fulbright Professor of American literature at the University of Helsinki. While in Scandinavia he also lectured at the American Studies Seminar for Teachers of English and at the American Scandinavian Seminar at Leangkollen, Norway. During the same year, at the invitation of the U.S. Educational Commission for France and the Faculté des Lettres at the University of Caen, he lectured on the American short story. The first scholarly appearance of Dr. Burnam in the Rocky Mountain region was his presentation, in May of 1951, of a paper entitled "Hemingway 's 'Primitive Men' " before the Colorado-Wyoming Academy of Letters, the forerunner of the RMMLA. His first published short story, appropriately entitled "First Sale," appeared in the Empire Magazine of The Denver Post in November, 1951. Since this first appearance in print, Professor Burnam 120 RMMLA Past Presidents121 has published more than seventy articles, short stories, and poems in leading magazines and journals. Reflecting his scholarly interests, his critical articles have dealt with Mark Twain, F. Scott Fitzgerald, Shakespeare, and linguistics . Perhaps his most successful story has been "The Decision," which appeared first in Harper's Magazine in 1957 and has since been reprinted in Literary Cavalcade, Argosy (London), Hjemmet (Copenhagen), and in All Story Braille Magazine. This story has also been anthologized in three collections of short stories, and is soon to appear in a fourth. At least two of Burnam's short stories have been listed in the Roll of Honor of Distinctive Short Stories in American Magazines and in annual volumes of The Best American Short Stories. Burnam has published in the following magazines and journals: Harper's, Saturday Review, Colorado Quarterly, Georgia Review , Argosy, The Reporter, College English, Empire, New Mexico Quarterly , American Quarterly, CEA (College English Association), Critic, Western Humanities Review, Esquire, Word Study, English Journal, Arizona Quarterly , Modern Fiction Studies, Pacific Spectator, The Writer, Texas Quarterly, and others. He is currently finishing a book left incomplete by Porter Perrin which will be published by Scott, Foresman and Company. Professor Burnam will appear as co-author of the volume. Professor Burnam has had many honors in addition to the presidency of the RMMLA. He was one of the founding members and first president of the Rocky Mountain American Studies Association in 1954-55. He is now a member of the Modern Language Association, the Philological Association of the Pacific Coast, the American Studies Association, and the National Council of Teachers of English. He is well known in the Rocky Mountain region for his fine sense of humor, his marvelously inconsistent golf game, and his hobbies which are amateur (but skilled) carpentry and photography. His present home address at Portland State College is 2765 S. W. Park Road, Lake Oswego, Oregon. — From Neajl Cross Colorado State College ...

In Memoriam: Hugo Leander Blomquist, 1885-1964

Hugo Leander Blomquist, Professor Emeritus of Botany at Duke University, died at his home in Durham, North Carolina on November 28, 1964. He was born in Sorsele, Sweden, on June 5, 1885, but emigrated with his parents to Kulm, Nolrth Dakota, in 1892 when he was seven. He spent the remainder of his childhood on his parents' farm where he developed a lifelong love for the soil and the out-ofdoors. He became a naturalized citizen in 1900 and, after completing his secondary education in the public schools of North Dakota, entered the University of Chicago. He received the B.S. degree from that institution in 1916 after a two-year interruption from 1912 to 1914 when he served as principal of the high school in Deering, North Dakota. After a year of graduate work at the University of Chicago, he enlisted in the U.S. Army and served as musician first class during World War I from 1917 to 1919. After the armistice, he remained in Paris for a number of months and studied biological chemistry at the Pasteur Institute.