Determining Differences in Expert Judgment: Implications for Knowledge Acquisition and Validation*

In knowledge acquisition, it is often desirable to aggregate the judgments of multiple experts into a single system. In some cases this takes the form of averaging the judgments of those experts. In these situations it is desirable to determine if the experts have different views of the world before their individual judgments are aggregated. In validation, multiple experts often are employed to compare the performance of expert systems and other human actors. Often those judgments are then averaged to establish performance quality of the expert system. An important part of the comparison process should be determining if the experts have a similar view of the world. If the experts do not have similar views, their evaluations of performance may differ, resulting in a meaningless average performance measure. Alternatively, if all the validating experts do have similar views of the world then the validation process may result in paradigm myopia.     

Racial capitalism and STEM education in Chicago Public Schools

ABSTRACT

This article analyzes the role of STEM initiatives designed by city and corporate elites in a large urban district and outlines an alternative, grassroots vision for (STEM) education and city schools. Within a neoliberal context of gentrification, displacement, disinvestment, and privatization, STEM schools have become strategic components of Chicago’s ‘portfolio district’ that serve the interests of racial capitalism in three ways. First, STEM schools provide a claim to fairness in the midst of racist school closures. Second, STEM high schools are a corporate strategy for racially stratified labor force preparation that restricts curriculum and reifies tracking. Third, curriculum restriction prioritizes corporate interests over students’ capacity to shape their communities and the world. The authors draw on the wisdom of Chicago communities who have led resistance against corporate education reform to critique Chicago STEM policy and point to critical mathematics and science education as part of a model for sustainable community schools.     

The Evolution of Organizations: Suggestions from Complexity Theory About the Interplay Between Natural Selection and Adaptation

There has been much debate in the managementliterature between neo-Darwinists (who believe in thenatural selection of populations of organizations) andadaptationists (who contend that changes in organization structure and behavior occur in response to theenvironment). The general thesis of neo-Darwinism isthat species are blindly selected for survival by theenvironment. The latest empirical support for the dominant neo-Darwinism perspective adopted bymost biologists is based primarily on the experimentsconducted by Salvador Luria who claims to haveconclusively demonstrated that genes mutate randomly.Recently, however, biologists have re-examined Luria sresearch methods and, after replications of hisexperiments, now question some aspects of the validityof his results. Moreover, there is now new researchwhich provides support for the earlier adaptationistposition, namely, the existence of evolutionary driversand directors existing within self-organizing systems.Of particular importance to the present study is the experimental indication thatself-organizing systems play a conscious role in theirown evolution. We propose that similar mechanisms orprocesses operate in organizational adaptation, thuspointing toward a theoretical modification ofneo-Darwinism that embraces both adaptation and naturalselection in a general, unified theory.     

Reflections on facilitating a participatory community self-evaluation

This paper is a reflective essay about our experience in conducting a participatory, community self-evaluation of a neighborhood revitalization effort in Milwaukee, Wisconsin. We took a controversial approach to evaluation by focusing on learning community dialogues as a vehicle for program evaluation. As we implemented our strategy, two sets of contradictions surfaced. The first points to the fundamental differences between conventional and constructivist research paradigms. The second centers around our focus on dialogue as a strategy for evaluation. In response to these contradictions we performed three complementary roles: program evaluator, process consultant, and learning facilitator. We are not implying that we performed an outstanding job in these roles. Rather, this article is our way of taking stock of what we learned about our practice as evaluators and how we may expand our repertoire of skills in the future.     

Grass Roots Promotion of Community Health and Human Rights for People with Disabilities in Post-communist Central Europe: a profile of the Slovak Republic

Individuals living with a disability or chronic illness in post-communist Central and Eastern Europe face significant challenges to quality of life. The government-supported health care infrastructures in the post-communist countries of Central and Eastern Europe remain highly centralised and institutional, which poses particular obstacles to people with disabilities who wish to live independently in their communities. A partial solution to this difficulty has been the development of innovative grass roots organisations that provide community-based support to individuals with disabilities or chronic illness. These disability organisations provide services and advocacy that allow individuals to receive needed support outside of the biomedical institutions, facilitating independent living in the community. They do so, however, in a political and economic environment of immense change, and one with varying degrees of support for non-governmental organisa tions and a Civil Society. The following article profiles this grass roots development in one particularly interesting post-communist Central European country, the Slovak Republic.     

BOUNDARIES IN SCIENCE POLICY MAKING:

We simultaneously explore the history of European Union policy on the commercialization of recombinant bovine growth hormone and the sociology of boundary drawing. We argue that, to understand why some boundary-drawing efforts succeed and others fail, we need to be attentive to the relatively stable discursive, organizational, and institutional factors that shape boundary construction. We suggest that attention to two discourses (scientism and social welfarism), the structure of policy making in the European Union, and the institutionalization of particular discourses in World Trade Organization regulations shed light on the E.U.-rbGH case.     

Democrats and republicans in anthropology and sociology: How do they differ on public policy issues?

The American Sociologist - Within the fields of anthropology and sociology, how do Democrats and Republicans compare in their opinions on issues of economic regulation, personal choice, and the...