Bonnie D. Oglensky (alum) published Ambivalence in Mentorship: An Exploration of Emotional Complexities (Routledge, 2018)
Ambivalence in Mentorship is based on research of scores of mentors and protégés in longstanding relationships representing a range of career fields. Using vivid case narratives, the book takes a nuanced look at the emotional complexities of their mentorships—the intense passions and hopes that get stirred up in these professional, yet intimate connections as well as the turmoil created by disappointment, betrayal, competition, and the mere readiness to move on and separate from these relationships.
Framing the psychodynamics of mentorship dialectically, the book unpacks the relational struggles in mentorship to trace how these emerge from strong emotional bonds. This is accomplished by delineating and illustrating three modes of the ambivalent attachment between mentor and protégé: idealization, loyalty, and generativity. Pushing at the boundaries of research on the topic, Ambivalence in Mentorship locates this relationship at the crosshairs of authority and love—highlighting the interplay of intrapsychic, interpersonal, cultural, and historical forces that drive this relationship to be at once vital and risky. Professionals in the social sciences, business, and management fields will find that the book offers a fresh perspective and authentic voice to the very real joys and complicated feelings that attend mentorship.
Dirk Witteveen (‘2018) and Paul Attewell (Faculty)
Co-published an article titled “The STEM grading penalty: An alternative to the “leaky pipeline” hypothesis” in Science Education (May 2020).
Click https://gc.cuny.edu/News/All-News/Detail?id=55098 to read Prof. Attewell’s interview with the GC on this project.
The low number of baccalaureates in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) is often viewed as problematic for the US’s economic competitiveness, leading scholars to search for explanations for STEM retention. Our analyses of the Beginning Postsecondary Students Longitudinal Study indicate that the notion of a so‐called “leaky STEM pipeline” out of STEM majors overstates the problem because it neglects the substantial influx into STEM from other majors throughout college. Researchers concerned with STEM retention should focus on a broader defined group of “STEM‐actives”: A combination of freshman students who declared a STEM major or who take a considerable number of STEM credits. Among these students (N = 3,020) we examine the variation in the relatively lower grades that many individuals earn in STEM courses compared to their non‐STEM courses. The size of an undergraduate’s “STEM‐grading penalty”—an individual grading disparity—in the first couple of college semesters is significantly associated with the probability of leaving STEM. The influence of this STEM‐penalty on STEM graduation chances is robust to college students’ variation in both general academic achievement and STEM‐specific preparation, thereby eliminating a large portion of the effect due to skills, performance, and selection. Our analyses expands on previous research regarding relative grading conducted within STEM‐fields.
Fang Xu (‘2016)
Published a chapter titled “Only Shanghainese Can Understand: Popularity of Vernacular Performance and Shanghainese Identity,” in Revealing/Reveiling Shanghai: Cultural Representations from the 20th and 21st Centuries. (Eds.) Lisa Bernstein and Chu-chueh Cheng. State University of New York (SUNY) Press
Fang also published an article titled “Pudong is not My Shanghai: Displacement, place-identity, and right to the city in urban China.” in City & Community (April 2020)