Higher Ed Matters
The Flourishing Law Student: Incorporating Positive Psychology into Legal Education View Digital Media
Paper Presentation in a Themed Session Heidi Brown
The humanities—including the study of law—present rich opportunities for teachers and students to explore and nurture positive ideas, feelings, and behaviors that contribute to human flourishing. The field of positive psychology emphasizes that human flourishing derives not only from hedonic well-being (a condition of feeling good) but also eudaimonia (a state of functioning well). An interesting initiative called the “positive humanities,” an interdisciplinary collaboration between the field of positive psychology and the humanities, is evolving. This paper describes a fresh pedagogical approach to legal education grounded in three positive psychology principles: (1) de-commissioning one-size-fits-all legal training and instead inaugurating an ethos honoring the value of individuality (within the context of community), (2) championing students’ individual and collective strengths, rather than stigmatizing purported weaknesses, (3) prioritizing inclusion, meaning, mattering, and purpose—to ensure that all law students (and future lawyers) can flourish. Before admission to the legal profession in the United States, law students and lawyers are required to demonstrate “character and fitness” to practice law. However, law schools in America seem to treat “character and fitness” as assets a law student either has or doesn’t have, rather than virtues students can cultivate through education and self-discovery. This paper offers a two-pronged curriculum: (1) teaching law students to explore and capitalize upon their unique constellations of 24 character strengths identified and studied by positive psychologists; (2) teaching law students about multi-dimensional “fitness” for lawyering, through nurturing ten dimensions of well-being: physical, emotional, social, spiritual, intellectual, occupational, artistic/creative, cultural, moral/ethical, and caring/caregiving.
The Legitimacy of Knowledge in the Arab Academia View Digital Media
Paper Presentation in a Themed Session Ayman Bakr
According to Jean Francois Lyotard, there are two types of legitimizing knowledge in developed countries: narrative and scientific. Thus, the main question of this research is: Within the field of Human Sciences, how can we describe the legitimacy of knowledge in the Arab world?. In other words, what are the conditions for producing knowledge in the fields of the Human Sciences within Arab cultures compared to Western criteria? This question is mostly related to the legitimacy problem in Arab academia, as universities are the main institutions that produce knowledge. What norms, especially embedded ones, regulate the accepted and the unaccepted research work? Moreover, what changes could affect these norms? What expected development might take place in the field of knowledge production in the human sciences, especially after the cultural/political events of the last decade in the Middle East? Since the academic institution was considered the main producer of knowledge, this research explores, as a point of departure, the beginning and organizing principles of the university in the Arab world.
Addressing Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion in Higher Education in the USA View Digital Media
Paper Presentation in a Themed Session Tammie Cumming, David Miller, Anthony Brown, Isana Leshchinskaya
Accreditation authorities recently focused on standards regarding diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) and the concomitant need to measure initiatives. DEI assessments have been historically developed to elicit data about the institution, but measure the individual level (faculty or student) based on individual opinions/perspectives. These individual perspectives are aggregated to describe the institution. We believe that assessment at the institution level is needed to more effectively understand the institutionalization of DEI initiatives. Our research began with the development of a DEI assessment at the institutional level with input from university presidents, chief diversity officers and assessment specialists. DEI initiatives were identified in nine areas and an assessment developed to measure: Institutional Leadership & Infrastructure; Institutional Policies and Programs; Faculty and Staff Recruitment; Faculty and Staff: Retention; Student Admissions/ Recruitment; Student Retention/ Persistence/Completion; Student Support; Curriculum; and Budgetary Policies and Procedures. This assessment can be used for institutional planning and accountability. A national study was conducted (2021) with this assessment where findings revealed a wide variety of approaches to addressing DEI. For example, while most institutions included DEI explicitly in their missions (73%), less than 25% indicated they were meeting DEI expectations, providing supportive methods to retain faculty of color and reviewing their curriculum. While it was noted that the local context is an important factor, institutions were in agreement that engaging in discussions of methods of institutionalizing DEI led to a better understanding of their campus DEI strengths and challenges.
