Dan A. Lewis – författare

Spurred first by the civil rights debates of the 1960s and 1970s, then by the culture wars of the following decades, the Chicago Historical Society (CHS) increasingly sought to give visitors and patrons a voice in retelling the city's history. In response to debates over the authority to interpret the past, CHS engaged in community outreach and sponsored multicultural exhibits and programs. Yet, in this analysis of the society's evolving relationship with its diverse constituencies, Catherine M. Lewis finds that prevailing assumptions about the museum as a commemorative site dedicated to civic pride undermined CHS's bold attempts to create a public forum.Based on more than 250 interviews with staff at CHS and museums around the country, as well as research into formerly inaccessible public and private papers, The Changing Face of Public History offers a behind-the-scenes look at the ways in which one of the most innovative museums in the United States has continually grappled with issues confronting not only museum professionals but all those concerned about the role history plays in the lives of American citizens.

In 1997, then state Senator Barack Obama sponsored legislation in the Illinois General Assembly to study the newly passed federal welfare reform and how it would affect the citizens of Illinois. He believed that a sound piece of research assessing how the new law affected the poor of Illinois would give lawmakers a way to come together and improve the law and the lives of the poor. In the highly charged times of the 1990s when ideology often trumped pragmatism, the assumptions and values of policy makers often shaped their work much to the detriment of those affected by the policies.Dan A. Lewis was selected to direct the study and report back to the legislature. For four years, Lewis and his team of researchers tracked a random group of 1,000 people who were on welfare when the new law went into effect. He reported on their income, their general well being, and the lives of their children under the new system. Gaining Ground in Illinois illuminates the findings of the study and offers advice for future policy makers. Lewis uses quantitative and qualitative data to draw clear conclusions but also to make the real experiences of the people he studied as vivid as possible. The reports allowed the legislature to debate the issue with the facts at hand.Lewis seeks a middle ground to give us a picture of how welfare reform affected the poor and to give policy makers some direction in how to improve the lives of the poor moving forward. As the current economic crisis leads to more discussion of public aid and entitlements, Lewis' work offers a starting point for the discussion about the welfare of the people of Illinois. This study will be of interest to sociologists, psychologists, anthropologists, and policy makers who are concerned with the welfare of the poor and are looking for new directions in social policy that move beyond the tired debates of the last generation.

Most studies of fear of crime assume that is rimarily induced by direct or indirect contact with a criminal event. Consequently programs designed to deal with this problem focus on either increased police protection or a number of crime prevention programs. In this study, Dan A. Lewis and Greta W. Salem raise questions both about the validity of these assumptions and the effectiveness of the programs. A five-year investigation has led the authors to challenge those theories that focus only on the psychological responses to victimizations and fail to take into account the social and political environments within which such fears are shaped and nurtured.Explicitly laying out a ''social control'' perspective which informs their research and analysis, the authors examine the fear of crime in ten neighorhoods in Chicago, San Francisco, and Philadelphia which represent the range of communities typically found in urban areas. On the basis of their analysis the authors contend that fear of crime is not related to exposure or knowledge about criminal events alone but also stems from residents'' concerns about broad changes taking place in their neighborhoods. Many people, they argue, are afraid not only because crime occurs but also because they believe that they have lost control over the environment in which they live.Lewis and Salem conclude that the eradication of fear of crime requires strategies that move beyond the traditional crime prevention programs to consider ways to restore the control that community residents feel they have lost and the possibilities for a more equitable distribution of security in urban areas.

Most studies of fear of crime assume that is rimarily induced by direct or indirect contact with a criminal event. Consequently programs designed to deal with this problem focus on either increased police protection or a number of crime prevention programs. In this study, Dan A. Lewis and Greta W. Salem raise questions both about the validity of these assumptions and the effectiveness of the programs. A five-year investigation has led the authors to challenge those theories that focus only on the psychological responses to victimizations and fail to take into account the social and political environments within which such fears are shaped and nurtured.Explicitly laying out a ''social control'' perspective which informs their research and analysis, the authors examine the fear of crime in ten neighorhoods in Chicago, San Francisco, and Philadelphia which represent the range of communities typically found in urban areas. On the basis of their analysis the authors contend that fear of crime is not related to exposure or knowledge about criminal events alone but also stems from residents'' concerns about broad changes taking place in their neighborhoods. Many people, they argue, are afraid not only because crime occurs but also because they believe that they have lost control over the environment in which they live.Lewis and Salem conclude that the eradication of fear of crime requires strategies that move beyond the traditional crime prevention programs to consider ways to restore the control that community residents feel they have lost and the possibilities for a more equitable distribution of security in urban areas.

Mass incarceration and lower crime rates have not made city dwellers feel safe. Programs designed to deal with this problem focus on increased police protection. In this study, Lewis and Salem question the validity of these assumptions and the effectiveness of this approach. Their five-year investigation challenged theories that focused only on the psychological responses to victimization and failed to take into account the social and political environments within which such fears are created.From a "social control" perspective which informs their research and analysis, the authors examined the fear of crime in ten neighbourhoods in Chicago, San Francisco, and Philadelphia which represent the range of communities typically found in urban areas. The authors contend that fear of crime is not related to exposure or knowledge about criminal events alone, but also stems from residents' concerns about changes in their neighbourhoods. Many people, they argue, are afraid of crime because they believe that they have lost control over their local communities. Their conclusions remain as valid as when this book was first published in 1986.Lewis and Salem consider ways to restore the control that community residents feel they have lost and consider the possibilities for a more equitable distribution of security in urban areas.