Recent Changes

Tuesday, March 22

Friday, January 14

  1. 10:41 pm

Monday, December 13

  1. page History edited ... Summary: A long-range planning committee worked on revisions to the overall plan. The revised…
    ...
    Summary:
    A long-range planning committee worked on revisions to the overall plan. The revised plan was then sent to section heads – the different sub-organizations within the AAA – as an internal document. There is ambiguity as to whether every section head received the revised plan or not. After section heads were consulted, the long-range planning committee then presented the revised document to the Executive Board during the AAAs. Accepting that the proper internal processes had been followed, the Executive Board voted to accept the plan.
    ...
    for Anthropological SciencesSciences(SAS) to its
    Dear Supporters of Anthropological Science,
    I write as President of the Society for Anthropological Sciences (SAS) to inform you of a
    ...
    you to renew your membership in the Society for Anthropological Sciences
    (http://anthrosciences.org/csac/SASci/sasci.tabs/Members).
    Following this development,Thank you,
    Peter N. Peregrine, President
    Society for Anthropological Sciences
    Following the letter from SAS,
    on November
    Consecutively, the Inside Higher Ed published an article that framed the changes in the long-range plan as reflecting a polarizing debate within the field of anthropology. Two blog posts were used to generate this perception of enormous opposition within the field.
    "Some [anthropologists] also say privately that this conflict marks the latest in a running cycle of perceived exclusions among the heterodox discipline… More fundamentally, the dispute has brought to light how little common ground is shared by anthropologists who span a wide array of sub-specialties."
    (view changes)
    8:54 pm
  2. page History edited ... (2) initial reactions on the Internet fueled a broader controversy through polarizing takes on…
    ...
    (2) initial reactions on the Internet fueled a broader controversy through polarizing takes on the meaning of that document.
    The leadership of the American Anthropological Association made the decision to update the association’s long-term plan, which was last revised in 1983. As the AAA officers wrote in the subsequentpublic release of the plan(after the controversy had erupted):
    Our"Our AAA long-range
    ...
    Executive Board acted.acted."
    Summary:
    A long-range planning committee worked on revisions to the overall plan. The revised plan was then sent to section heads – the different sub-organizations within the AAA – as an internal document. There is ambiguity as to whether every section head received the revised plan or not. After section heads were consulted, the long-range planning committee then presented the revised document to the Executive Board during the AAAs. Accepting that the proper internal processes had been followed, the Executive Board voted to accept the plan.
    ...
    largely internal. The only “news” about it was anemailOnly one email sent by
    ...
    for Anthropological SciencestoSciences to its members
    ...
    from AAA members. Themembers signified the change. This email was
    ...
    in New Orleans
    On
    Orleans,
    Dear Supporters of Anthropological Science,
    I write as President of the Society for Anthropological Sciences (SAS) to inform you of a
    troubling development that occurred at the Executive Board (EB) meeting of the American
    Anthropological Association (AAA) this past weekend. The EB adopted a new Long-Range
    Plan (LRP) that includes a significant changes to the AAA mission statement—it removes all
    mention of science. The old and new versions of the AAA mission statement are reproduced
    below. Members of SAS feel these changes undermine American anthropology, and we passed
    a resolution at our business meeting condemning them. That resolution is also reproduced
    below. If you are concerned about this, I encourage you to contact the AAA. I would also urge
    you to renew your membership in the Society for Anthropological Sciences
    (http://anthrosciences.org/csac/SASci/sasci.tabs/Members).
    Following this development, on
    November 30th,
    Consecutively, the Inside Higher Ed published an article that framed the changes in the long-range plan as reflecting a polarizing debate within the field of anthropology. Two blog posts were used to generate this perception of enormous opposition within the field.
    Some"Some [anthropologists] also
    ...
    array of sub-specialties.sub-specialties."
    The journalist Dan Berrett then used a November 25th blog post on the Psychology Today network, Alice Dreger’s “No Science, Please. We’re Anthropologists.”, to highlight the science side: her post “distinguished between ‘fluff-head cultural anthropological types who think science is just another way of knowing’ and those who pay closer attention to hard data — and follow that data wherever they lead.”
    Berrett then used Recycled Mind’s November 26th Views from the ANThill: Anthropology as Science post to emphasize the opposition that Dreger advanced. This post “argued that continuing to use the term ‘science’ in the association’s mission statement had become a concern because it maintained ‘the colonizing, privileging, superior positionality of anthropology that continues to plague the discipline’.”
    (view changes)
    8:51 pm
  3. page History edited History of the AAA Long-Range Plan This section provides historical context for the proposed ch…

    History of the AAA Long-Range Plan
    This section provides historical context for the proposed changes to the mission statement. When was the last version created? What was the context?
    The issue concerning the removal of 'science' was a two step process:
    (1) a new document created through an internal process became public
    ...
    The leadership of the American Anthropological Association made the decision to update the association’s long-term plan, which was last revised in 1983. As the AAA officers wrote in the subsequentpublic release of the plan(after the controversy had erupted):
    Our AAA long-range plan needed updating in order to address the changing composition of the profession and the needs of the AAA membership. At its November 20 meeting in New Orleans, the Executive Board specified, concretized, and enlarged its operational roadmap for investing the Association’s resources towards a sustainable future. Section leadership was consulted prior to the New Orleans Annual Meeting, and the Executive Board acted.
    Summary:
    A long-range planning committee worked on revisions to the overall plan. The revised plan was then sent to section heads – the different sub-organizations within the AAA – as an internal document. There is ambiguity as to whether every section head received the revised plan or not. After section heads were consulted, the long-range planning committee then presented the revised document to the Executive Board during the AAAs. Accepting that the proper internal processes had been followed, the Executive Board voted to accept the plan.
    The changes in the AAA long-range plan would likely have remained largely internal. The only “news” about it was anemail sent by the president of the Society for Anthropological Sciencesto its members as well as to the AAA protesting the removal of all mention of science and potential loss of support from AAA members. The email was sent on Tuesday, November 23rd, two days after the AAA meetings ended in New Orleans
    ...
    Berrett then used Recycled Mind’s November 26th Views from the ANThill: Anthropology as Science post to emphasize the opposition that Dreger advanced. This post “argued that continuing to use the term ‘science’ in the association’s mission statement had become a concern because it maintained ‘the colonizing, privileging, superior positionality of anthropology that continues to plague the discipline’.”
    Developments:
    ...
    Anthropological Association's new statement,What Is
    ...
    social and biologicalsciencesbiological sciences as well as the humanitiesandhumanities and physical sciences."
    Update: The

    The American Anthropological Association's statement,
    AAA has also releasedAAA Responds to
    Some recent media coverage, including an article in the New York Times, has portrayed anthropology as divided between those who practice it as a science and those who do not, and has given the mistaken impression that the American Anthropological Association (AAA) Executive Board believes that science no longer has a place in anthropology. On the contrary, the Executive Board recognizes and endorses the crucial place of the scientific method in much anthropological research. To clarify its position the Executive Board is publicly releasing the document “What Is Anthropology?” that was, together with the new Long-Range Plan, approved at the AAA’s annual meeting last month.
    This section provides historical context for the proposed changes to the mission statement. When was the last version created? What was the context?[[include[[include component="comments" page="History"
    (view changes)
    8:39 pm
  4. page History edited History of the AAA Long-Range Plan The issue concerning the removal of 'science' was a two step…

    History of the AAA Long-Range Plan
    The issue concerning the removal of 'science' was a two step process:
    (1) a new document created through an internal process became public
    (2) initial reactions on the Internet fueled a broader controversy through polarizing takes on the meaning of that document.
    The leadership of the American Anthropological Association made the decision to update the association’s long-term plan, which was last revised in 1983. As the AAA officers wrote in the subsequentpublic release of the plan(after the controversy had erupted):
    Our AAA long-range plan needed updating in order to address the changing composition of the profession and the needs of the AAA membership. At its November 20 meeting in New Orleans, the Executive Board specified, concretized, and enlarged its operational roadmap for investing the Association’s resources towards a sustainable future. Section leadership was consulted prior to the New Orleans Annual Meeting, and the Executive Board acted.
    Summary:
    A long-range planning committee worked on revisions to the overall plan. The revised plan was then sent to section heads – the different sub-organizations within the AAA – as an internal document. There is ambiguity as to whether every section head received the revised plan or not. After section heads were consulted, the long-range planning committee then presented the revised document to the Executive Board during the AAAs. Accepting that the proper internal processes had been followed, the Executive Board voted to accept the plan.
    The changes in the AAA long-range plan would likely have remained largely internal. The only “news” about it was anemail sent by the president of the Society for Anthropological Sciencesto its members as well as to the AAA protesting the removal of all mention of science and potential loss of support from AAA members. The email was sent on Tuesday, November 23rd, two days after the AAA meetings ended in New Orleans
    On November 30th, Inside Higher Ed published an article entitled “Anthropology without Science.” ThoughPeter Wood’s piecein The Chronicle of Higher Education came the day before, and another article onAnthropologists Debate Whether ‘Science’ Is a Part of Their Missionalso appeared in the Chronicle on the 30th, this Inside Higher Ed piece is really what kicked off the controversy in a public fashion.Barbara King tweetedabout it, and the article was then projected widely by others, and thelabel of #aaafail appeared. It was also the piece theAAA leadership reacted to, as it is the first of two pieces mentioned by the AAA officers in their public statement about the controversy.
    Consecutively, the Inside Higher Ed published an article that framed the changes in the long-range plan as reflecting a polarizing debate within the field of anthropology. Two blog posts were used to generate this perception of enormous opposition within the field.
    Some [anthropologists] also say privately that this conflict marks the latest in a running cycle of perceived exclusions among the heterodox discipline… More fundamentally, the dispute has brought to light how little common ground is shared by anthropologists who span a wide array of sub-specialties.
    The journalist Dan Berrett then used a November 25th blog post on the Psychology Today network, Alice Dreger’s “No Science, Please. We’re Anthropologists.”, to highlight the science side: her post “distinguished between ‘fluff-head cultural anthropological types who think science is just another way of knowing’ and those who pay closer attention to hard data — and follow that data wherever they lead.”
    Berrett then used Recycled Mind’s November 26th Views from the ANThill: Anthropology as Science post to emphasize the opposition that Dreger advanced. This post “argued that continuing to use the term ‘science’ in the association’s mission statement had become a concern because it maintained ‘the colonizing, privileging, superior positionality of anthropology that continues to plague the discipline’.”
    Developments:
    The American Anthropological Association's new statement,What Is Anthropology?
    "To understand the full sweep and complexity of cultures across all of human history, anthropology draws and builds upon knowledge from the social and biologicalsciences as well as the humanitiesand physical sciences."
    Update: The AAA has also releasedAAA Responds to Public Controversy Over Science in Anthropology:
    Some recent media coverage, including an article in the New York Times, has portrayed anthropology as divided between those who practice it as a science and those who do not, and has given the mistaken impression that the American Anthropological Association (AAA) Executive Board believes that science no longer has a place in anthropology. On the contrary, the Executive Board recognizes and endorses the crucial place of the scientific method in much anthropological research. To clarify its position the Executive Board is publicly releasing the document “What Is Anthropology?” that was, together with the new Long-Range Plan, approved at the AAA’s annual meeting last month.

    This section provides historical context for the proposed changes to the mission statement. When was the last version created? What was the context?[[include component="comments" page="History" limit="100" ]]
    (view changes)
    8:35 pm

Thursday, December 9

Monday, December 6

  1. page Inclusive Points for the Plan to Address edited This section is for individuals to raise major concerns, as well as hopes, for the long-range p…

    This section is for individuals to raise major concerns, as well as hopes, for the long-range plan. What should such a plan include? What are some core issues or dilemmas that need to be addressed?
    [[include component="comments" page="Inclusive Points for the Plan to Address" limit="100" ]]
    (view changes)
    11:04 am
  2. page Due Process edited How did the changes made by the Executive Board come about? [[include component="comments…

    How did the changes made by the Executive Board come about?
    [[include component="comments" page="Due Process" limit="100" ]]
    (view changes)
    11:03 am
  3. page History edited History of the AAA Long-Range Plan ... was the context? context?[[include component="co…

    History of the AAA Long-Range Plan
    ...
    was the context?context?[[include component="comments" page="History" limit="100" ]]
    (view changes)
    11:03 am

More