Hello Educational Problems Division Members, I hope you had a productive academic year and that you are enjoying your summer. This summer's newsletter is dedicated to the important topic of immigration which affects youth who are trying to access educational opportunities to improve their lives and to contribute to this country. The current backslash on immigrants has prompted local governments to act on their own, as was the case in the state of Arizona and its enactment of Senate Bill 1070. The bill, signed by the governor on April 23, 2010, is designed to identify, prosecute, and deport undocumented immigrants (NY Times, 2010). Our Board of Directors of the SSSP acted promptly and agreed to send a statement to the Governor of Arizona condemning the bill and calling for its rescission. I encourage you to visit the SSSP website for more ideas about how to get involved to stop this type of legislation from being enacted. On a more positive note, I want to announce the winner of the Educational Problems Division Student Paper Competition, Kristin Marie Jordan. Kristin is from the Department of Sociology at Indiana University. Her paper, "A Competitive Edge in College Admissions: The Impact of Cultural Capital and College Admissions Preparations on College Destinations” is an excellent example of the contributions our junior colleagues are making to the field of Education and to Social Justice. We had several excellent papers submitted this year and as always, we are pleased to see the quality and scope of the contributions of our future leaders in the field and in SSSP. I want to express my gratitude to our reviewers, Heather Dalmage, Professor of Sociology and Director of the Social Justice Institute at Roosevelt University and Gideon Sjoberg, Professor Emeritus at the University of Texas-Austin. I also want to take this opportunity to thank you for your support during my first year as Chair of the Educational Problems Division. I am particularly grateful to Maria E. Luna Duarte for her assistance and hope that you have the chance to meet Maria in Atlanta. I hope to see all of you during this year’s meeting in Atlanta, Georgia. Your participation will make the meeting a great success. We will continue to solicit your comments and suggestions about how to improve our division and to increase involvement. Please feel free to use the listserv or the newsletter to submit your ideas, comments, etc. Thanks to those of you who have already commented. Please know that we appreciate your input and that your ideas will be presented to our membership. Working in a department with an explicit focus on social justice I am particularly excited about our upcoming meetings in Atlanta and I hope you are as well. We have some great sessions planned and I want to thank colleagues who have agreed to serve as organizers for these sessions. I hope the summer is treating you well and that you are busy, feeling productive in your work and hopeful for our future. I look forward to working with you and seeing you at the meetings! Best wishes, Pamela Pamela Anne Quiroz, Ph.D. Professor of Educational Policy Studies & Sociology University of Illinois-Chicago Division Chair, 2009-2011 Education or Punishment: Unauthorized Students in the Crosshairs Special Contribution of: Dr. Leonard Ramirez, University of Illinois at Chicago The signing of SB 1070 by Arizona Governor Jan Brewer has put into effect a law that exposes people of color, especially Mexicans and Latinos as a whole, to racial profiling. Despite conservative justifications that offer an idealized, racially-neutral scenarios for SB 1070 implementation, many people across the country believe that a law that encourages police officials to verify the legal residency of “suspicious persons” opens the door to widespread abuse, undermines personal freedoms, and adopts police-state methods as a means to curb the growth of undocumented immigrants. The law may ultimately be found to be unconstitutional. However, conservative initiatives such as SB 1070 contribute to the “bipolar” policy environment that affect school-age immigrants, which has simultaneously focused on extending opportunities to unauthorized youth on the one hand and constructing barriers to their enrollment in higher education on the other (Flores & Chapa, 2009; Gilroy, 2007; Olivas, 2009; Russell, 2007). The attack on the children of undocumented immigrants has been occurring at least since 1975 when the State of Texas attempted to make the enrollment of children in public schools illegal. This issue was eventually settled by the Supreme Court in Plyerv. Doe (1982), which provided free K-12 access to all students regardless of citizenship status (Olivas, 2009). Linda Greenhouse (2010), a columnist for the New York Times and lecturer in law at Yale, identifies three fundamental arguments embedded in critical court cases that have guided progressive policy perspectives related to educational access for the children of the undocumented. A different standard should be used when addressing the situation of those not responsible for entering the U.S. illegally. As stated by Justice Brennan, “a lifetime hardship on a discrete class of children not accountable for their disabling status” should not be imposed. A second argument relates to the prioritization of the nation’s interested regarding the idea that the nation that would be better served by increasing the educational levels of the population and avoiding the creation of what Justice Powell referred to as “an underclass of future citizens and residents.” Finally, local attempts to restrict illegal immigration such as the implementation of housing restrictions as in the infamous Hazelton, Pennsylvania case resulted in the reaffirmation that immigration policy is the purview of the federal government (Greenhouse, 2010). However, Plyer v. Doe did not extend to institutions of higher education (Flores & Chapa, 2009; Olivas 2009; Russell, 2007). Therefore, the postsecondary arena has increasingly been the site where conservatives have challenged the assumptions outlined by Greenhouse, especially since the beginning of the decade when states began to pass legislation facilitating college attendance for undocumented youth. According to the Pew Hispanic Center, approximately 12 million undocumented immigrants reside in the U.S. The Urban Institute estimates that 65,000 unauthorized students graduate from high schools every year (Russell, 2007). In order to encourage the college attendance of these students, “As of 2009, only ten states (California, Illinois, Kansas, Nebraska, New Mexico, New York, Texas, Utah, Washington, and Wisconsin) had policies allowing students who attend and graduate from in-state high schools to qualify for in-state tuition regardless of immigration status. Four other states have laws that ban undocumented students from receiving in-state tuition (Arizona, Colorado, Georgia, and North Carolina), while two states (Alabama and South Carolina) ban undocumented students from attending community colleges all together” (Diaz-Strong, et. al, 2010). Although federal law does not restrict states from providing benefits to undocumented students, The Higher Education Act of 1965 restricts undocumented students from obtaining federal financial aid such as Pell Grants while the 1996 Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act (IIRIRA) and the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act (PRWORA) allow for states to pass legislation to grant unauthorized youth in-state tuition while prohibiting the provision of benefits to undocumented students not offered to citizens (Biswas, 2005; Olivas, 2009; Russell, 2007). These in-state tuition policies have contributed to the increased enrollment of undocumented youth in higher education (Flores, 2010; Flores & J. Chapa, 2009). The Development, Relief, and Education for Alien Minors Act (DREAM Act) seeks to create a national policy that would allow for unauthorized students to receive in-state tuition and other forms of state and federal financial assistance (excluding Pell Grants) as well as offering a route to citizenship for undocumented youth that serve in the military or attend higher education for a certain number of years. Conservatives and critics have tried to undermine assumptions at the national level have guided public policy regarding educational access for unauthorized youth. They attempt to refocus the debate on the need to penalize immigrant children arguing that granting educational benefits to unauthorized students rewards unlawful behavior and serves as an incentive to increase illegal immigration. States like Georgia and Arizona have prohibited the granting of in-state tuition for undocumented college students. Legislation has been introduced in state houses to deny the admission of these students to state universities while politicians have urged academic institutions to bar the admission of unauthorized youth. States have also sought to make colleges and universities adjunct enforcers of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), pressuring higher education institutions to validate U.S. residency. Colleges have resisted this imposition citing complications related to training and administrative inexperience as well as the added expense associated with expanding their responsibilities precisely when public education is facing shortfalls in state appropriations and severe budget cuts. Those attempting to shift the policy axis have benefited from the fear and xenophobia arising after 9/11. Economic recession and high rates of unemployment further erode racial and cultural tolerance as evidenced by Arizona legislation drafted after SB 170 that places restrictions on ethnic studies (HB 2281) and policies such as that of the Arizona Department of Education that targets those with accents for exclusion from teaching in the public schools. Right wing radio, TV, and Internet bloggers have fanned the flames of emotions and kept immigration in the spotlight. The rancorous environment is ripe for grandstanding and Republican politicians across the country have sought to ride the jingoistic wave into political office. Often lost in the scuffle is the basic wisdom inscribed in Plyer v. Doe that treats children differently and prioritizes the interests of the nation. We are all served by an educated population that is healthier, wealthier and capable of paying higher taxes that will support an aging population (Flores, 2010). In other words the politics of bitterness may be short sighted and less cost effective in addition to being less humane. References Diaz-Strong, D., Gomez, C., Luna-Duarte, M.E., & Meiners, E.R. (2010). Dreams deferred and dreams denied. Academe, 6(3), 28-31. Biswas, R.R. (2005). Access to community college for undocumented immigrants: A guide for state policymakers. Retrieved from http://www.jff.org/publications/education/access-community-college-undocumented-im/152 Flores, S. M. (2010). State Dream Acts: The effect of in-state resident tuition policies and undocumented Latino students. The Review of Higher Education, 33 (2), 239-283. Retrived from http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/review_of_higher_education/summary/v033/33.2.flores.html Flores, S. M. & Chapa, J. (2009). Latino immigrant access to higher education in a bipolar context of reception. Journal of Hispanic Higher Education, 8(1), 90-109. Retrieved from http://jhh.sagepub.com/cgi/content/short/8/1/90 Gilroy, M. (2007). Battle continues over in-state tuition for illegal immigrants. Retrieved from http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1P3-1572181931.html Greenhouse, L. (2010, April 26). Breathing while undocumented. The New York Times Opinionator. Retrieved from http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/04/26/breathing-while-undocumented/ Olivas, M. (2009). Undocumented college students and financial aid: A technical note. The Review of Higher Education 32(3), 407-416. Retrieved from http://muse.jhu.edu/login?uri=/journals/review_of_higher_education/v032/32.3.olivas.pdf Russell, A. (2007). In-state tuition for undocumented immigrants: States’ rights and educational opportunity. Retrieved from http://www.aascu.org/media/pm/pdf/in-state_tuition07.pdf On working with undocumented students... When working with diverse student populations, sometimes as faculty and staff in institutions of higher education, we often times do not think of a one of the most vulnerable populations, undocumented students. Many times, these students are dealing with various issues like working two or three jobs while going to school, on a part-time basis or full-time basis to pay for their tuition because they want to improve their lives and contribute to the United States of America. They are also dealing with the fear of being deported at any time, with depression and anxiety issues because of their status in this country. Some are also dealing with the emotional stress of wanting to stay in the United States a country that has seen them grow and is dear to their hearts, at the same time that their lives are full of uncertainty. The following are some tips on how to help undocumented students for educators: • “Know your institutional policies: try to know your state laws, your local and national advocacy organizations that are working for comprehensive immigration reform, and your state and federal representatives. • If you live in a state that offers in-state tuition for undocumented students, advocate for clear communication of policies to faculty, staff and students, and feeder high schools. • Work with your college or university foundation to open up existing scholarships to undocumented students and to create additional scholarships specifically for undocumented students. • Do not provide legal advice, but do connect students to community organizations that can. • Connect students to on-campus advocates, students groups, and resources; support these groups.” NOTE: A full list of tips on how to help undocumented students and to read the article where this information appeared you can look up the following article - Diaz-Strong, D., Gomez, C., Luna-Duarte, M.E., & Meiners, E.R. (2010). Dreams deferred and dreams denied. Academe, 6(3), 28-31. ANNOUNCEMENTS EDUCATIONAL PROBLEMS DIVISION STUDENT AWARD WINNING PAPER “A Competitive Edge in College Admissions: The Impact of Cultural Capital and College Admissions Preparations on College Destinations,” Kristin Marie Jordan, Indiana University, 1st place Winner of the Educational Problems Division’s Student Paper Competition Congratulations on a job well done! CALL FOR SSSP NOMINATIONS Nominations are open for candidates to run in the 2011 General Election. We will be electing a President-Elect, a Vice-President Elect, regular and student members of the Board of Directors, members of the Budget, Finance, and Audit Committee, Committee on Committee, Editorial and Publications Committee, and the Membership and Outreach Committee. Please consider nominating a colleague or yourself for one of these offices by completing the online nomination form that can be found at: http://www.sssp1.org/index.cfm/pageid/1082/. Nominations should include a brief description of the nominee's SSSP involvement and other relevant experiences. The Nominations Committee will meet at the Annual Meeting in Atlanta, GA. All nominations should be submitted prior to July 15, 2010. The Board of Directors will approve the slate of candidates for the 2011 General Election on August 15, 2010. If you have any questions, please contact Stephani Williams, at stephani.williams@gmail.com, with subject (call for nominations) directly. NOMINATIONS FOR SERVING ON THE SSSP AD HOC STRATEGY COMMITTEE Nominations are open for candidates to run in the 2011 SSSP Ad Hoc Strategy Committee. Please consider nominating a colleague or yourself for one of the various elected positions (e.g., President, Vice-President, Board members, etc.). Please complete an online nomination form at http://www.sssp1.org/index.cfm/pageid/1082/ for each nominee. Nominations for the 2011 SSSP General Election positions are due no later than midnight (EST) on July 15, 2010. If you have any questions, please contact Nancy Mezey at nmezey@monmouth.edu. SOCIETY FOR THE STUDY OF SOCIAL PROBLEMS ANNUAL MEETING If you have not registered for the Society for the Study of Social Problems’ (SSSP) 60th Annual Meeting in Atlanta at the Sheraton Atlanta Hotel, August 13-15, 2010. Please plan to join us for an exciting program of scholarly presentations and films related to this year’s theme “Social Justice Work.” You may find the 2010 preliminary program: www.sssp1.org/index.cfm/m/376 Make your hotel reservations now: www.starwoodmeeting.com/Book/sssp2010 (Reservations must be confirmed by Wednesday, July 21, 2010 to guarantee the SSSP negotiated group rate of $149 plus tax, per night. Reservations received after July 21 or after the room block is filled, whichever comes first, are subject to availability and rate increase). ANNUAL SSSP MEETING: EDUCATIONAL PROBLEMS DIVISION SESSIONS Friday, August 13, 12:30pm Session 23: Race and Public Education I: Racial and Ethnic Inequalities Room: Georgia 9 Sponsors: Educational Problems Racial and Ethnic Minorities Organizer & Presider: Erica Chito Childs, Hunter College/CUNY Papers: “Disentangling the Effects of Race, Ethnicity, and Immigration Status on Teachers’ Evaluations of Students of Color,” Yasmiyn Irizarry and Melissa Quintela, Indiana University “Educating the ‘Low-End’ Kids: Pedagogy, Engagement, and Discipline in a Public Highschool,” Jane C. Hood, University of New Mexico “Four Dimensions of Social Capital in the Interplay of Ethnicity and Inequality: A Network Perspective,” Baiqing Zhang, University of Kentucky Friday, August 13, 2:30pm Session 31: Race and Public Education II: Unequal Schooling Room: Georgia 9 Sponsors: Educational Problems & Racial and Ethnic Minorities Organizer, Presider & Discussant: Erica Chito Childs, Hunter College/CUNY Papers: “Education Reform: Race and Class as Factors,” Omari Jackson, Wayne State University “Urban Living, Urban Schooling: Class and Race in the Urban Public School,” Shelley M. Kimelberg and Chase M. Billingham, Northeastern University Saturday, August 14, 8:00am 8:00am – 9:40am Sessions THEMATIC Session 42: Education and the New Politics of Desegregation Room: Georgia 2 Sponsor: Educational Problems Organizers: María E. Luna-Duarte, University of Illinois at Chicago Pamela Ann Quiroz, University of Illinois at Chicago Presider: Pamela Ann Quiroz, University of Illinois at Chicago Papers: “From Prison to the Military: Latino Students Out of Higher Education,” Erica Meiners and Christina Gomez, Northeastern Illinois University, María E. Luna-Duarte, University of Illinois at Chicago, Luvia Valentin, Northeastern Illinois University and Diaz Strong Daysi, Elgin Community College “Identity Work Among Teachers of Immigrant and Refugee Students,” Emily R. Cabaniss, North Carolina State University “Student Assignment, School Composition, Teachers and Resources in Wake County and Charlotte-Mecklenburg Schools,” Stephanie Southworth, Clemson University, Sonya Conner, University of Oklahoma and Anthony Greene, University of North Carolina at Charlotte “The ASA Task Force Report on Hate and Bias Acts on College and University Campuses: Addressing the Policy Issues of Cultural Diversity and Academic Freedom,” Leonard Gordon, Arizona State University “Transforming Racist, Sexist and Homophobic Attitudes in the University Classroom,” Jerome Rabow, University of California in Los Angeles SUNDAY, AUGUST 15 8:30am – 10:10am THEMATIC Session 82: Social Justice and Community Learning: Voices from the Academy - THEMATIC Room: Georgia 2 Sponsors: Community Research and Development Educational Problems Racial and Ethnic Minorities Organizer, Presider & Discussant: Theo J. Majka, University of Dayton Papers: “A Qualitative Study of the Urban Scholars program at UMass Boston: Early Findings,” Jill M. Smith, Brandeis University “Constructing Social Justice,” Anne Marie McLaughlin, University of Calgary “Putting the ‘Community’ in Community Technology: An Investigation of Youth, Technology, and Community Engagement,” Johanna Pabst, Boston College “The Newspaper Rep of N. Koreans in Kor-Am Comm.,” Hien J. Park, University of California, Irvine Sunday, August 15, 12:30pm THEMATIC Session 102: Teaching Human Rights as Active Research Room: Georgia 5 Sponsor: Educational Problems Organizer, Presider & Discussant: Otis B. Grant, Indiana University South Bend Papers: “Viewing Sex Offenders as Human: Altering Perception on Human Rights in a Sex Crimes Course,” Lisa Anne Zilney and Venezia Michalsen, Montclair State University “Incorporating Human Rights in the Pedagogy: The Utilization of a ‘Sociology of the Black Experience’ Class to Study Restorative Justice,” Natalie P. Byfield, St. John’s University “Critical Pedagogy and Reflective Intelligence in a Human Rights Course: The Case for Psychodynamic Metacognition,” Otis B. Grant, Indiana University South Bend Sunday, August 15, 2:30pm Session 109: Law and Education Room: Georgia 5 Sponsors: Educational Problems & Law and Society Organizer, Presider & Discussant: Emily B. Horowitz, St. Francis College Papers: “Gendered Preparations for Teaching: The Impact of Traditional Gender Ideologies on Processes of Teacher Education,” Judson G. Everitt, Loyola University Chicago “Nontraditional Students, Retention Rates, and Deliberative Democracy: Does Process Matter?” David Foster Steele, Tucker Brown and Matthew Kenney, Austin Peay State University “Pedagogy in Court: Student Ratings, Student Rights, and the Regulation of Faculty,” Jordan J. Titus, University of Alaska Fairbanks “Who Deserves Good Schools? Cultural Categories of Worth and Education Reform,” Julie Swando and Emily Meanwell, Indiana University Sunday, August 15, 4:30pm THEMATIC Session 115: Educational Challenges to Diversity in Post Civil Rights Society Room: Georgia 5 Sponsor: Educational Problems Organizer & Presider: James Ainsworth, Georgia State University Papers: “Teaching Race in The Academy: Transformation or Preservation of Racism,” Jerome Rabow, University of California in Los Angeles “Should Everyone Go to College? A Discourse Analysis of the Question of College Access,” Karl J. Jones, Vanderbilt University Community Research & Action Program “One of the Guys: Breaking through in a Male Dominated College,” Laurie L. Gordy, Daniel Webster College Immigration and the Imagination Debbie Sonu, Assistant Professor of Education, Department of Curriculum & Teaching Hunter College, Cuny Then she spoke to the person next to her. And then, something funny happened, she started to change right in front of me. It was like a video effect where slowly everything dissolves into an alternate reality where everything is slightly different. I felt it happening, and was somehow able to hold onto it – to slow it down and watch it happen, still holding onto the past reality even as the new one set it. When it was over, she was something else. The immigrant was gone. Her outfit probably came from JC Penny, still unassuming, but now the uniform of a different tribe. She didn’t seem so backwater. I wondered how often I’d made that mistake. I wondered how often people make that mistake about me. George M. Framing the dispossessed as a population of social marginality is an act of the imagination -- real in its permutations yet fantastical in its ability to reason and justify. To limit agency by leveraging political and economic legislation, in this case upon the criteria of citizenship, requires a certain belief in a constituted image both overt and subtle, manifested in time and place. In our most recent incarnation of the imagined immigrant, in the backdrop of national anxiety over environmental devastation and financial crises, the nation’s gaze has been set upon Arizona and its punitive action in the face of a national and psychological threat. Let us explore here the place of imagination in constructing a perception of the immigrant, and secondly, in the design of an essentially imaginary sense of home and homeland. As hinted to above, the imagination is what happened to George M, (personal communication, 2010), a refashioned story with a toppled misinterpretation. A recent piece in the New Yorker by Peter Hessler titled “Go West” tells a similar story about the power of imagination in the case of Chinese citizens in relation to the United States. Hessler’s story illustrates how the Chinese imagine the United States to be. In layering these stories, three separate conjoined stories, what we may learn about the creative ventures of the mind, the human capacity to configure what may be the safe neighbor, the safe home, and the safe, or saved self. George stepped into the crowded New York subway and entered the melodic din of orchestrated conversations typical to the underground scene. He merged into the united auditory front bombarded by its multiple accents, dialects, languages, voices, and tones. From across the florescent-lit compartment, his eyes landed on a couple whose portrait ignited in his imagination an array of knowledge. He told himself her story using the details of the woman’s Asian face, her seeming “bumpkin smile,” and the “lack of sophistication” in her clothing, the “sort of outfit so many times on the women who worked in the garment district -- faded blue jeans, white tennis shoes, neat but unfashionable button-up top, cap.” Through the power of George’s imagination, he decides that he already knows, until he becomes baffled by her seamless American accent and morphs her into another narrative of another Asian woman in another JC Penney jacket. In a world of wonder, imaginary stories such as these linger just below the conscious surface of every individual. In some ways they can be construed as critical points of human relation, sometimes even more personal or salient or recurrent than any word spoken communicated among people. In the silent creation of neighbors, imagination becomes freed to wander without ramification or accountability. In such circumstances, a sense of knowing the other is an endeavor to embark on carefully, but it is both necessary and dangerous, knowing that all stories are examples of mistaken identity. Therefore, any legislation such as SB 1070 that appropriates the imagination by assigning the public to prejudicially interrogate national legitimacy is not only a cause for concern over justice and ethics, but also fundamentally flawed and ineffective. While the stranger may be in part a manifestation of imaginative play for other individuals, so may be the geographical and nostalgic representation of the nation-state as a home and homeland. As an expatriated American living in China, Hessler (2010) writes about the fantastic rumors about the United States that are “always being created in [locale Chinese] people’s minds, and in that sense more personal for them than it was for me” (p. 50). Here, the imagination becomes fixated fantasy, extremes of both good and bad, “combinations of truths and exaggerations,” a frustration, claims Hessler, that there was no nuanced perspective. “Are American farmers so rich they use airplanes to plant their crops?” he recalls being asked. I have always had a looming sense that as an Asian female in a sea of blonde and blue, ethnic normativity would always be beyond reach, and despite my unfamiliarity with South Korea, as I was born and raised in the States, I imagined this homeland would warmly fold me into the natural ebbs and flows of its masses. Feeling simple and naïve, I flew there at the age 17 and exited the plane to see my imagined façade melt into an unexpected foreignness. With little solace in my search for homeland, I was indeed, again, the exotic stranger, both here in South Korea and likewise back on American soil. In a state of disconcerted limbo, I longed for a place that collapsed social and temporal borders and transgressed geographical and physical sites, non-existent in the plane of reality, yet wholly tangible in the corners of the mind. This “does not refer exclusively to the physical place of a home or the country of origin, but includes the desires, dreams, and memories of that space, with the hopes, needs, and wants associated in the imaginings of a home-and-homeland”(Sonu & Moon, 2010). Of course, as seen currently and recurrently in history, the imagination of home, as territorial ego space, has become refashioned to decide inclusivity along the political nation-state line, leading to circumstances that pain the heart and spirit. I believe imagination plays a critical role in the conceptualization of immigration and the immigrant. In a country with such ethnic diversity, the creative capacity to dream interpersonal relationships strips bare the core beliefs one individual may hold upon and against another. In the case of George, a more intimate encounter with sound dissolved his immigrant impressions; for Hessler, the imagination recursively established a fantastic America for local Chinese; for me, I mourned the loss of a homeland, once imagined, yet now I exist anew. All three narratives trouble the predetermination written into SB 1070 and instead call for focus on the shifting dunes of the imagination in shaping immigration. This requires a move away from the fixed rigidity of perceived identity. Such profiling has led to mothers deported and taken away from their children, teachers under fire for speaking with accents, and whole sections of U.S. history torn from school textbooks. In a present time when issues of tragedy, trauma, and outright injustice rise to visible status, the possibility to begin examining such questions, to understand how we relate to the other, and how we can do so in ways more just and ethical become not only more urgent, but also more accessible. Yet, as George M. learned, the precondition for this kind of education is dependent on the capacity to listen to the stories of others, and maybe even to lay our imaginations to rest. JOBS JOBS JOBS JOBS Professor & Director, Center for Women & Work School of Management and Labor Relations Labor Studies and Employment Relations Department Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey Rutgers University, School of Management and Labor Relations, invites applications for a senior scholar and Director, Center for Women and Work, to begin fall 2011. Interested candidates should send a cover letter, vita, and the names and contact information for three references to Professor Adrienne Eaton, SMLR, Rutgers University, 50 Labor Center Way, New Brunswick, New Jersey, 08901 or eaton@work.rutgers.edu. We will begin to review applications October 15, 2010; however, applications will be accepted until the position is filled. Postal Address: University Human Resources Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey 56 Bevier Road Piscataway, NJ 08854-8010 Phone: 732-445-3020 Fax: 732-445-3407 Sociologist/Director of Applied Research and Education Center Indiana University Southeast (IUS) is pleased to announce a search for a Sociologist/Director of its Applied Research and Education Center (AREC) (http://www.ius.edu/arec). Review of candidates will begin on October 1 and continue until the position is filled. Please send a letter of interest indicating your qualifications for the position as well as an up to date curriculum vitae, official undergraduate and graduate transcripts, sample of scholarly writing, evidence of teaching success, and at least 3 letters of reference to: Application Information Joe Wert, Dean School of Social Sciences Indiana University Southeast 4201 Grant Line Road New Albany, IN 47150 Assistant Professor, Legal Studies - Sociology, Social Work & Criminal Justice Assistant Professor, Legal Studies - Sociology, Social Work & Criminal Justice; Full-time; Tenure-track. How to Apply: Refer to the HR Website at: https://jobs.lamar.edu, click on Search Postings. Read and follow all instructions on how to apply. Application materials must be submitted online unless otherwise noted. Application Information Postal Address: Human Resources Lamar University P. O. Box 11127 Beaumont, TX 77710 Phone: (409) 880-8375 Fax: (409) 880-8464 Online App. Form: https://jobs.lamar.edu