Search results

The purpose of this study is to provide an empirical measure of how principals enact prescribed leadership standards into practice. The aim of the study was to ascertain how current school principals perceive the practice of a specific set of leadership standards.

A total of 61 practicing school principals in North Carolina were asked to rate (in a forced distribution) how they currently enact the North Carolina Standards for School Executives (their professional standards for certification and evaluation). Using Q‐methodology, factor analysis generated three model sorts. These factors are examined with the sorting data along with data from a post sort questionnaire.

The three factors that emerged in this study highlight that there is no one way leadership practices are lived in schools. Specifically, this study provided three distinct categories of how school principals practice leadership. The three factors that accounted for 38 percent of the variance in this study. The factors were named collaboration focus, policy focus, and vision focus. Each provides illustrative descriptions of what fosters and inhibits practices within each factor.

The findings have clear and present implications for how, why, and to what extent current school principals enact professional standards in the face of contextual factors that may complicate or even negate the efficacy of standardized practice. Such analysis holds promise that practices can be mediated in a meaningful manner.

This study adds value to the field by virtue of examining the dissonance between standards and practice. This study's methodology that seeks to operationalize subjectivity is original in the field of principal leadership.

In 1969, Warren Nutter left the University of Virginia Department of Economics to serve as the Assistant Secretary of Defense for International Security Affairs in the Nixon administration. During his time in the Defense Department, Nutter was deeply involved in laying the groundwork for a military coup against the democratically elected president of Chile, Salvador Allende. Although Nutter left the Pentagon several months before the successful 1973 coup, his role in Chile was far more direct than the better-known cases of Friedrich Hayek, Milton Friedman, James Buchanan, and Arnold Harberger. This chapter describes Nutter’s role in Chile policymaking in the Nixon administration. It shows how Nutter’s criticisms of Henry Kissinger are grounded in his economics, and compares and contrasts Nutter with other economists who have been connected to Pinochet’s dictatorship.

Popular constitutionalists seek to recover the popular sovereignty foundations of American constitutionalism, bringing the people in as active participants in the constitutional enterprise as they create and refashion the Constitution by “majoritarian and populist mechanisms” (Amar, 1995, p. 89). The result is to recover an understanding, in FDR's words, of constitution as a “layman's document, not a lawyer's contract” (Kramer, 2004, p. 207). This understanding has deep roots in American constitutionalism, tracing its lineage back to the founding and, as popular constitutionalists insist, finds powerful expression in the likes of The Federalist and Abraham Lincoln (Ackerman, 1991; Tushnet, 1998). In exercising popular sovereignty, the people founded the Constitution, but they did not simply retreat from the trajectory of constitutional development. Rather, as Bruce Ackerman argues, since the Constitution of 1787 the people have spoken in a manner that has re-founded the Constitution giving us a “multiple origins originalism” (Kersch, 2006a, p. 801; see also Amar, 1998 and 2005). In turning to founding era thought and the notion of constitutional foundations, popular constitutionalists like Ackerman and Amar make common cause with conservatives who turn to original intent, but then they seek to synthesize this understanding with democratic expressions of popular will by emphasizing both formal and informal constitutional change, giving us layered “foundings,” and a more complex version of “living constitutionalism.” Such constitutional change, however, can only legitimately come from an authentic expression of “We the People.”

This is a troubled age for democracy, but the nature of that trouble and why it is a problem for democracy is an open question, not easy to answer. Widespread wishing for responsible leaders who respect democratic norms and pursue policies to benefit people and protect the vulnerable don’t help much. The issue goes well beyond library contexts, but it is important that those in libraries think through our role in democracy as well. Micro-targeting library-centric problems won’t be effective and don’t address the key issue of this volume. The author can only address the future if we recover an understanding of the present by building up an understanding of actually-existing democracy: (1) the scope must be narrowed to accomplish the task; (2) the characteristics of the retreat from democracy should be established; (3) core working assumptions and values – what libraries are about in this context – must be established; (4) actually-existing democracy should then be characterized; (5) the role of libraries in actually-existing democracy is then explored; (6) the source and character of the threat that is driving the retreat from democracy and cutting away at the core of library assumptions and values is analyzed; (7) the chapter concludes by forming a basis of supporting libraries by unpacking their contribution to building and rebuilding democratic culture: libraries are simultaneously less and more important than is understood.

This study aims to investigate how two different types of brand-to-brand dialogues – “roasting” versus “toasting” – impact consumers’ brand perceptions, particularly perceived entertainment, and influence brand attitudes.

The research design comprises four studies. The preliminary study involves Web scraping to gauge consumer perception about the two communication approaches followed by two well-known brands. Study 1 involves an online experiment to compare these communication types within each brand tested in the pilot study and examines the mediation effect of perceived entertainment. Study 2, also an online experiment, investigates the role of message neutralization, demonstrating that “roasting” can be acceptable when the humor is neutralized. Study 3 further tests the effects of neutralized “roasting” at different levels of brand familiarity and personality.

Roasting can lead to more favorable consumer perceptions than toasting. The effect can be explained by roasting’s higher level of perceived entertainment. However, this positive outcome is contingent on the successful neutralization of the aggressive humor in the “roasting” messages. When it comes to brand familiarity and personality, familiar brands benefit more from neutralized “roasting,” whereas brand personality does not have a strong influence.

The findings suggest that “roasting” can be effective when messages are neutralized, and “toasting” works best when spontaneous and genuine. It highlights how brand familiarity and personality influence consumer reactions, thus, offering strategic insights for both established and lesser-known brands. The study also prompts further research to examine other brand traits, cultural factors and behavioral dimensions in brand-to-brand dialogue, signifying the complexity and richness of this growing research area.

This study advises lesser-known brands to adopt “toasting” strategies to build a positive image, while established brands can try “roasting,” ensuring message neutrality to avoid negativity. The research emphasizes the role of brand familiarity and personality in shaping brand dialogues. Marketers must consider these to make humor strategies effective and bolster positive brand image.

This research uniquely examines message neutralization through contextual cues as a strategy brands can use to aid their sensitive dialogues with others on social media. The findings provide new insights into how brands can use different types of messages in digital communications to attract consumers and ensure positive reception, offering valuable guidance for academics and practitioners in brand-to-brand dialogue.

Gambling is well-recognised as a significant public health threat. However, current responses to gambling still primarily focus on individualised responsible gambling paradigms, which neglects to consider the range of commercial and political determinants that contribute to gambling harm and how it might influence young people's gambling attitudes and consumption intentions. This includes the marketing tactics used by the gambling industry to normalise harmful gambling products as embedded in everyday life, including in sport. Young people have demonstrated an in-depth gambling brand awareness and can even recall specific strategies used in gambling advertising that might appeal to children. There have been continuous calls for action to protect children and young people from the commercial marketing of gambling products from a range of stakeholders, including young people and their parents. Young people and their parents are very supportive of increased regulations on gambling advertising, particularly during sport, and have called for sporting teams and codes to reject sponsorship deals with gambling companies. However, a heavy reliance on industry self-regulation has meant that governments across the world have decided that the costs associated with exposing children and young people to pervasive gambling marketing are outweighed by perceived benefits that gambling provides to businesses benefiting financially from gambling. Comprehensive curbs on marketing, as seen in tobacco, are required to significantly reduce young people's exposure to gambling advertising and ultimately prevent the next generation of harm.

This chapter focuses on ecofeminism that primarily refers to feminist theory and activism informed by ecology. Ecofeminism is concerned with real connections between humans and Nature, as also by the domination of Nature by man and, specifically, by women's subservience to men. The foundational ecofeminist assumption is that environmental issues are basically feminist issues, and vice versa. It believes that ecofeminism, best understood and operationalized, can restore Mother Nature (endangered by industrial extraction and exploitation) and reassure rights to animals (deanimalized and threatened by factory farming). Although ecofeminism is a diverse movement, ecofeminist theorists share the presupposition that social transformation is necessary for ecological survival, that intellectual transformation of dominant modes of thought must accompany social transformation, that Nature teaches and reveals nondualistic, nonhierarchical systems of relations that are models for social transformation of values, and that human and cultural diversity are values in social transformation; some of these values and movements even influenced the world via the UN. Accordingly, this chapter highlights major positive contributions of ecofeminism.

Warren Nutter and James M. Buchanan did not revise “Universal Education” to turn against providing tuition grants to segregated schools in 1965. Their revised text contains no call to expel segregation academies from the tuition grant program and does not even express disapproval of the goals or the work of segregation academies. Recent claims to that effect by Fleury (2023) and Levy and Peart (2023) cannot be sustained by either textual or contextual evidence.

Fifty years ago the political scientist Robert Dahl concluded that courts are usually in sync with “the policy views dominant among the lawmaking majorities” and thus offer little help to aggrieved minorities (Dahl, 1957, p. 285). In recent years, Dahl's classic formulation has received renewed attention. This chapter uses the example of the Rehnquist Court's First Amendment decisions to analyze “regime politics” theory. On religion cases the Rehnquist Court was generally in sync with the socially conservative strain in the Republican Party, but in other First Amendment areas the pattern is far more complex, raising questions about the relationship between conservative judges and the political movements that brought them to office.