Inclusive Scholarship: Developing Black Studies - Ford Foundation

Index
Note: Page references in italics refer to illustrations.
acculturation, 96–97
Adams, Anne, 173
Adams, Russell L., xx
Adell, Sandra, 152–53
administrators, university, 99, 102–5, 113–14
admissions quotas, 161
affirmative action, 67–68, 73
bans in California/Texas, xvii, 161, 191,
203, 228n.28
Pinderhughes, Yarborough Report on,
161, 169, 191, 203, 219–20, 228n.28
African American art Web site, 214
African American Studies
and African American faculty, 169–71
(see also Black scholars)
and the American experience, vii–viii
and Black communities, 234
and building a professional network, 237
and collaborations/partnerships, 236
continuing challenges for, 231–38
criticism of foundations’ role in developing,
x, xxii–xxiii n.3
and Ethnic Studies, 120–21, 129–30,
139–40
field vs. discipline, xxii n.2
Ford Foundation grantmaking in,
xviii–xix, xxiv n.17 (see also O’Meally,
Smith Report)
and gender, 234
general assessments (O’Meally, Smith
Report), 127–41
and globalization, 235
and identity, 233–34
importance/influence, ix–x
institutionalization/legitimization,
6–7, 129
and leadership succession, 236
meeting of program/department directors,
163–64
Ph.D.s in, xix, xxiv n.18, 162, 233 (see
also specific universities)
and the pipeline (See pipeline problem/projects)
public scrutiny of, 167
reports on (see Harris, Hine, McKay
Report; Huggins Report; O’Meally,
Smith Report; Pinderhughes, Yarborough
Report)
research tools, 131–32
research/writing quality, 157
scholarship vs. canon, 9n.4
and sexuality, 234
stages of development, 82–83, 91–98,
102, 128–29, 168
star system’s effects, 83–84, 115
success of, 156–57
and technology, 235
use of term, xvi, xxiii n.1, 101, 169–70
249