MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W319910510

Dean Penelope Andrews: Advocacy, Leadership, Vision

2012· article· en· W319910510 sur OpenAlexaboutno aff
Erika Hauser, Kanika Johar

Notice bibliographique

RevueAlbany law review · 2012
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineSocial Sciences
ThématiqueLegal Education and Practice Innovations
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésLegal educationLawLegal professionPractice of lawSociologyPolitical scienceState (computer science)
DOInon disponible

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

A law school can't provide everything, but it can provide the right tools for its students. Albany Law School has the advantage of independence and flexibility. As the legal profession and legal education confront another wave of change, we can move with it.[dagger] The Albany Law Review proudly dedicates this, its Seventy-Sixth Anniversary General Issue, to Dean Penelope (Penny) Andrews, Albany Law School's 17th President and Dean as well as its first female president. There was an air of excitement amongst the student body, maybe even nervous anticipation, at the thought of new leadership on campus. Since Dean Andrews arrived, the excitement has only exponentially grown. From the very beginning of her tenure as Dean, it has become clear to the Albany Law School community that Dean Andrews has a vision to guide Albany Law through the difficult period facing law schools today, and that her goals closely align with both the student body and faculty members, as well as with those of alumni. Dean Andrews' vision for Albany Law School addresses many of the concerns law schools face nationwide: increasing costs of a legal education, the shrinking legal job market, bar passage, ABA accreditation requirements, and a decrease in the pool of law school applicants. She is well equipped to tackle the aforementioned challenges based on her extensive education, internationally recognized accomplishments, and experience in teaching and researching the law. Dean Andrews' interest in human rights began at an early age; she grew up in apartheid South Africa surrounded by extreme poverty and violence, where racism and sexism ran rampant. In South Africa she studied at Catholic school before receiving a Bachelor's Degree in Arts from the University of Natal in Durban, where she majored in Economic History and Comparative African Government and Administration. She went on to receive an LL.B from the same university only two years later. Dean Andrews continued her education in the United States, earning an LL.M from Columbia University School of Law. In the years following her education, Dean Andrews traveled around the world, teaching and researching in Australia, Canada, Holland, Germany, Scotland, and South Africa. Her specific interests included advocating for the rights of Australia's indigenous populations, people of color in South Africa, and disenfranchised women in Queens, New York. She has also consulted for the United Nations Development Fund for Women, and for the Ford Foundation in Johannesburg, where she evaluated labor law programs. In addition to teaching and writing, her accomplishments include an award distributed annually in her name--the Penelope E. Andrews Human Rights Award--given by the South African law school at the University of KwaZulu-Natal. Dean Andrews was also a finalist for a vacancy on the Constitutional Court of South Africa, the highest court in the country on constitutional matters. Dean Andrews has co-authored and co-edited several books. Before publishing her most recent book, she also served as an editor of three other books: Law and Rights: Global Perspectives on Constitutionalism and Governance; (1) The Post-Apartheid Constitutions: Perspectives on South Africa's Basic Law; (2) and Gender, Race and Comparative Advantage: A Cross-National Assessment of Programs of Compensatory Discrimination. (3) Adding to her impressive resume of various works discussing women's rights, law, and constitutions, (4) Dean Andrews' latest work--entitled From Cape Town to Kabul: Reconsidering Women's Human Rights (5)--provides original theory with a concept coined conditional interdependence which aims to help resolve gender inequalities and advance the rights of women in countries with developing democracies. (6) Andrews has described her work as a book that examines what government can do to change the lives not just of middle class women but all women, including women who identify strongly with their religious beliefs, indigenous women, and poor women. …

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,002
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesCharge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)
Catégories consensuellesCharge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Sans objet · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: aucune
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,877
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,999

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0020,001
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,001
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0010,000
Communication savante0,0000,002
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0040,002

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,170
Tête enseignante GPT0,448
Écart entre enseignants0,278 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; les deux têtes enseignantes s’accordent sur ce qui est montré ici.

Devis d'étudeSans objet
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations0
Publié2012
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueAlbany law reviewMême sujetLegal Education and Practice InnovationsTravaux en français237 207