Lionel S. Lewis - Böcker

"It is often said that the American academic, protected by tenure, is free to do pretty much as he or she pleases. Lewis argues that this freedom is largely an illusion. Faculty actions are greatly limited by governing boards and the academic administrators they appoint, who control institutional resources. Although ostensibly independent professionals, in many ways faculty have no more autonomy than most employees. Indeed, what power they have derives from faculty-student relationships. Lay governing boards ultimately control how money is spent and who spends it. This volume addresses issues relating to current debates over the most appropriate and effective method of academic governance.When Power Corrupts details the conflict between the governing board and administration and faculty at Adelphi University in Garden City, New York, between 1985 and 1996. This conflict culminated in the removal of the Board of Trustees by the New York State Board of Regents. The new trustees in turn removed the president. Although the book focuses on board administration-faculty relations at one university, its findings have implications for almost all other institutions of higher learning in the United States. Lewis draws on the nearly 8,000-page transcript of the hearings of the Regents. These eleven volumes of exhibits include hundreds of documents obtained from individuals and organizations.Lewis suggests that academic administrators have more control of governing boards than is generally recognized. Besides influencing who is asked to join a board, administrators may largely determine the information boards receive and on which they must make decisions. When faced with decisions, boards often defer to academic administrators or acquiesce to a campus president's suggestions. Because conflict over governance all too often takes precedence over academic work on American campuses, the implications for higher learning are profound. Faculty, academic administrators, members of governing boards, college students and their parents, and general readers concerned about problems relating to American higher education will find this book provocative and informative.Lionel S. Lewis is professor emeritus of sociology and adjunct professor of higher education at SUNY/Buffalo. He has written more than 150 research articles, essays, and reviews. He is the author of Cold War on Campus: A Study of the Politics of Organizational Control and The Cold War and Academic Governance: The Lattimore Case at Johns Hopkins.

The essays in this groundbreaking volume significantly advance our understanding of the process by which an elite school education provides graduates with distinctly favorable life chances. The authors examine the contemporary issue and controversy in the field of education (and society) which focuses on both the advantages and disadvantages of public versus private schooling. Those interested in issues of social stratification and its impact in the educational context will find this a useful and important contribution to the literature in the field.

This book examines the harassment of the Johns Hopkins University sinologist Owen Lattimore during the height of the Cold War on campus. It moves from detailing the specifics of Lattimore's case to a discussion of the broader themes of academic governance that the case exposed. With his meticulous dissection of this major event in United States academic history, Lewis shows us much about the workings of academic governance.

Bernard Madoff's financial fraud was global, an enormous amount of money was involved, and thousands of people and hundreds of institutions were swindled. Madoff's con game was a Ponzi scheme an investment that pays returns to early investors from money acquired from subsequent investors.This case study of the Madoff scheme looks at the effects of his crimes on the victims. Elements from a theoretical framework put forward by Erving Goffman provide a perspective for understanding the development and the aftermath of Madoff's con. For example, as Goffman would have put it, Madoff's "marks were not cooled out." Many did not accept the fact that they were victims of a con game and publicly clamored for sympathy, restitution, and for public officials to share their perspective.Inside men, ropers, outside men, and victims are at the core of con games. Lionel S. Lewis emphasizes that it is important to understand a con game's characteristics so as to grasp how it operates. The Madoff fraud includes elements of a variety of con games. For a comprehensive study of this economic crime, the "case study" must be seen as part of the broader social system. Considerably more is known about the dynamics of con games than about Ponzi schemes, and this fact frames this book's approach. To better understand what Madoff did, who was central in keeping his scheme alive, whom he defrauded, and how they reacted, this work is as invaluable as it is illuminating.

In the American university system for most of this century, the academic reward system has been blamed for both the neglect of teaching and a glut of uninspiring research. The salaries for faculty at institutions that place special emphasis on teaching are lower than those for faculty at institutions where both teaching and research are expected. In Marginal Worth, Lionel S. Lewis examines the contemporary academic labor market to explain why teaching which is almost universally acknowledged both off and on campus to be at the center of the American educational experience is not at the center of the academic labor market, and why it is only modestly rewarded.The evidence collected and analyzed by Lewis suggests that this is the case because teaching is not a particularly productive activity, and its quality is hard to measure. Teaching does not generate automatic prestige, most students do not learn a great deal, and in many instances other matters absorb the attention of faculty. Fifteen anonymous academic administrators and faculty members from around the country provided Lewis with the many letters, reports, and other documents he used in his analysis. By examining the material justifying merit salary awards, he reveals how merit is defined in academia. The focus of the letters is on teaching, research, administration, and service; teaching is not always seen as central to the academic role.For several years and from all sides, American institutions of higher learning have been called to account for a variety of failures. Significantly, the one indictment most often heard is that classrooms have been abandoned for laboratories and libraries, where faculty pursue interests to further their careers. Lewis argues that restoring the balance between teaching and research is too simple a solution to the problem. We need to better understand how disciplinary and institutional reward structures affect teaching, how and why faculty allocate their tune, and why teaching appears to be neglected and underappreciated. Lewis applies tenets of the neoclassical labor market model to the academy, and considers what might be done to strike a better balance between expectations and circumstances in the academic marketplace. This candid look into the political economy of higher education will be enlightening reading for all concerned with the future of American higher education: professors, administrators, students, and parents.

"It is often said that the American academic, protected by tenure, is free to do pretty much as he or she pleases. Lewis argues that this freedom is largely an illusion. Faculty actions are greatly limited by governing boards and the academic administrators they appoint, who control institutional resources. Although ostensibly independent professionals, in many ways faculty have no more autonomy than most employees. Indeed, what power they have derives from faculty-student relationships. Lay governing boards ultimately control how money is spent and who spends it. This volume addresses issues relating to current debates over the most appropriate and effective method of academic governance.When Power Corrupts details the conflict between the governing board and administration and faculty at Adelphi University in Garden City, New York, between 1985 and 1996. This conflict culminated in the removal of the Board of Trustees by the New York State Board of Regents. The new trustees in turn removed the president. Although the book focuses on board administration-faculty relations at one university, its findings have implications for almost all other institutions of higher learning in the United States. Lewis draws on the nearly 8,000-page transcript of the hearings of the Regents. These eleven volumes of exhibits include hundreds of documents obtained from individuals and organizations.Lewis suggests that academic administrators have more control of governing boards than is generally recognized. Besides influencing who is asked to join a board, administrators may largely determine the information boards receive and on which they must make decisions. When faced with decisions, boards often defer to academic administrators or acquiesce to a campus president's suggestions. Because conflict over governance all too often takes precedence over academic work on American campuses, the implications for higher learning are profound. Faculty, academic administrators, members of governing boards, college students and their parents, and general readers concerned about problems relating to American higher education will find this book provocative and informative.Lionel S. Lewis is professor emeritus of sociology and adjunct professor of higher education at SUNY/Buffalo. He has written more than 150 research articles, essays, and reviews. He is the author of Cold War on Campus: A Study of the Politics of Organizational Control and The Cold War and Academic Governance: The Lattimore Case at Johns Hopkins.

Following in the tradition of Thorstein Veblen's Higher Learning in America, Lionel S. Lewis has amassed solid evidence to support his conclusions about what leads to success in Scaling the Ivory Tower. As background to his consideration of academic freedom, sexism, merit, tenure, and other such highly charged subjects, Lewis examines the attitudes of those in universities toward academic qualification. The modern rule of thumb has become publish or perish. According to Lewis, however, research and publication may not be such prime considerations after all.Two thought-provoking chapters are devoted to an examination of letters of recommendation as important factors in hiring and promoting in the academic world. Lewis also scrutinizes academic freedom cases from the archives of the American Association of University Professors. Other intriguing issues examined by Lewis are: how spouses and significant others factor into whether or not a professor gets a promotion; a typical day in the life, both academic and personal, of a professor; how the celebrity syndrome has spread to campus; discrimination against women; and bureaucracy as a contributing factor to campus unrest.In the new introduction, Lewis affirms that the most apparent changes in higher education since Scaling the Ivory Tower was initially published have actually made the campus less meritocratic, and less a place where quality academic work is recognized and rewarded. One contributing factor is the necessity to consider age, gender, ethnicity, and race in personnel decisions. Because many on campus are convinced that academic life can only be improved when the demographics of faculty reflect those in the larger society, departments are routinely expected to explain why they did not fill an opening with someone from an underrepresented group. While showing some irreverence toward academia, Scaling the Ivory Tower should also provoke sober consideration of where our colleges and universities are headed. This is a significant volume for university administrators, academics, and graduate students.

Bernard Madoff's financial fraud was global, an enormous amount of money was involved, and thousands of people and hundreds of institutions were swindled. Madoff's con game was a Ponzi scheme—an investment that pays returns to early investors from money acquired from subsequent investors.This case study of the Madoff scheme looks at the effects of his crimes on the victims. Elements from a theoretical framework put forward by Erving Goffman provide a perspective for understanding the development and the aftermath of Madoff's con. For example, as Goffman would have put it, Madoff's "marks were not cooled out." Many did not accept the fact that they were victims of a con game and publicly clamored for sympathy, restitution, and for public officials to share their perspective.Inside men, ropers, outside men, and victims are at the core of con games. Lionel S. Lewis emphasizes that it is important to understand a con game's characteristics so as to grasp how it operates. The Madoff fraud includes elements of a variety of con games. For a comprehensive study of this economic crime, the "case study" must be seen as part of the broader social system. Considerably more is known about the dynamics of con games than about Ponzi schemes, and this fact frames this book's approach. To better understand what Madoff did, who was central in keeping his scheme alive, whom he defrauded, and how they reacted, this work is as invaluable as it is illuminating.

This is the first detailed study of how Bernard L. Madoff and his accomplices perpetrated a Ponzi scheme of epic proportions—what has been referred to as the "con of the century."In December 2008, Bernard L. Madoff was arrested for perpetrating a protracted Ponzi scheme of inconceivably huge proportions that defrauded clients of his securities company of nearly $20 billion—and was consequently sentenced to 150 years in jail. How did Madoff pull this off for years, even returning some or all of clients' money when they asked, while in actuality was financing the lavish lifestyles of himself, his family, and his accomplices with the stolen funds? And why didn't anyone in the highly regulated investment industry catch on sooner?Bernard Madoff and His Accomplices: Anatomy of a Con examines Bernard L. Madoff's unprecedented confidence game (con game), drawing back the curtain on what actually went on at his investment firm, Bernard L. Madoff Investment Securities, and exposing the day-to-day activities of his accomplices that enabled the elaborate con to succeed for as long as it did. Through the examination of court testimony and other court documents, the mechanics of the con game become clear, elucidating how Madoff's friends and employees hustled money from investors; the methods by which false records, monthly statements to investors, and other documents were manufactured and mass-produced; and how a multitude of felonies and the highest levels of fraud became everyday practices.

In the American university system for most of this century, the academic reward system has been blamed for both the neglect of teaching and a glut of uninspiring research. The salaries for faculty at institutions that place special emphasis on teaching are lower than those for faculty at institutions where both teaching and research are expected. In Marginal Worth, Lionel S. Lewis examines the contemporary academic labor market to explain why teaching—which is almost universally acknowledged both off and on campus to be at the center of the American educational experience—is not at the center of the academic labor market, and why it is only modestly rewarded.The evidence collected and analyzed by Lewis suggests that this is the case because teaching is not a particularly productive activity, and its quality is hard to measure. Teaching does not generate automatic prestige, most students do not learn a great deal, and in many instances other matters absorb the attention of faculty. Fifteen anonymous academic administrators and faculty members from around the country provided Lewis with the many letters, reports, and other documents he used in his analysis. By examining the material justifying merit salary awards, he reveals how merit is defined in academia. The focus of the letters is on teaching, research, administration, and service; teaching is not always seen as central to the academic role.For several years and from all sides, American institutions of higher learning have been called to account for a variety of failures. Significantly, the one indictment most often heard is that classrooms have been abandoned for laboratories and libraries, where faculty pursue interests to further their careers. Lewis argues that restoring the balance between teaching and research is too simple a solution to the problem. We need to better understand how disciplinary and institutional reward structures affect teaching, how and why faculty allocate their tune, and why teaching appears to be neglected and underappreciated. Lewis applies tenets of the neoclassical labor market model to the academy, and considers what might be done to strike a better balance between expectations and circumstances in the academic marketplace. This candid look into the political economy of higher education will be enlightening reading for all concerned with the future of American higher education: professors, administrators, students, and parents.