Mobilizing Maryland: a look into the voting tendencies of students at the University of Maryland

Gemstone Team VOTE-CP (Voice of the Electorate - Collegiate Participation)

SOLOS DE CONCOURS FOR FLUTE AT THE PARTS CONSERVATORY: TWO DECADES-1900s AND 1940s

The topic of this dissertation is the concours pieces for flute at the Paris Conservatory covering two decades. The works are used for exit examination pieces for graduating students at the conservatory. The music is chosen by the director, the professors in the performance area, and a committee of other professors. These pieces still seem to be among the more important pieces known by flutists in the twenty-first century, and they are also frequently used as required audition pieces by conservatories, orchestras, and competitions. I have performed the works used for examination in two decades separated by almost half a century: The pieces from 1900 to 1909 and from 1940-1949, This performance dissertation contains three recital programs, and the recordings of the recitals are filed electronicaIly. I have grouped them according to contrasting styles in three recitals. Works performed are Agrestide (1942) by Eugene Bozza, Andante et Scherzo (1945) by Francois J. Brun, Preude et Scherzo (1908) by Henri Busser, Concertino (1902) by Cecile Chaminade, sixth Solo (1855) by Jules Demersseman (it was on the concours of 1896, dates which are outside the scope of this dissertation), Sonatine (1943) by Henri Dutilleux, Cantabile et Presto (1904) by Georges Enesco, Andante et Scheno (1901) by Louis Ganne, Fantaisie (1920) by Philippe Gaubert, Nocturne et Allegro Scherzando (1906) by Philippe Gaubert, Chant de Linos (1944) by Andre Jolivet, Fantasiestuck (1947) by Henri Martelli, Eglogue (1909) by Jules Mouquet, Concerto in A (1945-1949) by mile Passani, Ballade (1903) by Albert Perhilou, Sonatine (1946) by Pierre Sancan, Andante Pastorale et Scherzettim (1907) by Paul Taffanel, and Concertino in E Major (1945) by Henri Tornasi. Cantabile et Presto was required in both 1904 and 1940, and Andante et Scherzo was required in both 1901 and 1905.

The tithe: Public research university STEM faculty perspectives on sponsored research indirect costs

This study sought to understand the phenomenon of faculty involvement in indirect cost under-recovery. The focus of the study was on public research university STEM (science, technology, engineering and mathematics) faculty, and their perspectives on, and behavior towards, a higher education fiscal policy. The explanatory scheme was derived from anthropological theory, and incorporated organizational culture, faculty socialization, and political bargaining models in the conceptual framework. This study drew on two key assumptions. The first assumption was that faculty understanding of, and behavior toward, indirect cost recovery represents values, beliefs, and choices drawn from the distinct professional socialization and distinct culture of faculty. The second assumption was that when faculty and institutional administrators are in conflict over indirect cost recovery, the resultant formal administrative decision comes about through political bargaining over critical resources. The research design was a single site, qualitative case study with a focus on learning the meaning of the phenomenon as understood by the informants. In this study the informants were tenured and tenure track research university faculty in the STEM fields who were highly successful at obtaining Federal sponsored research funds, with individual sponsored research portfolios of at least one million dollars. The data consisted of 11 informant interviews, bolstered by documentary evidence. The findings indicated that faculty socialization and organizational culture were the most dominant themes, while political bargaining emerged as significantly less prominent. Public research university STEM faculty are most concerned about the survival of their research programs and the discovery facilitated by their research programs. They resort to conjecture when confronted by the issue of indirect cost recovery. The findings direct institutional administrators to consider less emphasis on compliance and hierarchy when working with expert professionals such as science faculty. Instead a more effective focus might be on communication and clarity in budget processes and organizational decision-making, and a concentration on critical administrative support that can relieve faculty administrative burdens. For higher education researchers, the findings suggest that we need to create more sophisticated models to help us understand organizations dependent on expert professionals.