Podcasts about professor lee

Professor Gary Lee established the first dedicated pleural service in the southern hemisphere in 2009, at the Sir Charles Gairdner Hospital in Perth. He says that pleural disease has finally come to be regarded as an area of subspeciality interest in its own right, not just a complication of other comorbidities. In this podcast he presents a potted history of key developments in the management of pleural effusion in particular. This is diagnosed in about 60,000 people every year in Australia, mainly as a result of infection or malignancy. With mentors in the UK, Professor Lee conducted some of the earliest trials on fibrinolytics and DNAses to break down purulent effusions. They also put to the test protocols for pleurodesis via talcum insufflation that date back to the 1930s. Professor Lee's more recent clinical research has focused on the use of indwelling pleural catheters that a patient can use to drain pleural effusate when feeling breathless. He has also a made an important contribution to conservative management guidelines for primary spontaneous pneumothorax. This story is great example of how clinical practice emerges imperfectly from a soup of evidence, accidents, human biases and system. Guest Prof Gary Lee PhD FRACP FRCP FCCP (Pleural Service, Sir Charles Gairdner Hospital in Perth; University of Western Australia).Co-hostDr Marion Leighton FRACP (Wellington Hospital).ProductionProduced by Mic Cavazzini DPhil. Music licenced from Epidemic Sound includes ‘Reconstruct' by Amaranth Cove, ‘Nagba Algooah' by Ebo Krdum. ‘Vittoro' by Borrtex provided courtesy of FreeMusicArchive. Image by ilbusca licenced through Getty Images.   Editorial feedback kindly provided by RACP physicians Aidan Tan, Maansi Arora, Simeon Wong, Hugh Murray and Vanessa Wong.Please visit the Pomegranate Health web page for a transcript and supporting references.Login to MyCPD to record listening and reading as a prefilled learning activity. Subscribe to new episode email alerts or search for ‘Pomegranate Health' in Apple Podcasts, Spotify,Castbox or any podcasting app.

We're finishing up the first season of XO, Kitty this week on Teen Girl Talk and things are getting complicated.  Professor Lee remains a jerk.  Also on this episode Suesie defends Bella Swan.  Frank subtweets Bella Swan.  Intro and outro is Rebel Girl by Bikini Kill.  Please rate, review and subscribe to the show on iTunesE-mail: realteengirltalk@gmail.comTeen Girl Talk's Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/realteengirltalk/ Frank's writing website: franklincota.com Suesie's Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/susieboboozy/Frank's Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/siriwouldchallenge/Frank's YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCJcUttxP0ujvc6HXBz-4kIw  

Happy New Years!  To start off the year right, I wanted to go back to basics: faith through lawyering. My guest is Randy Lee, a veteran in the field, writing on the topic of the Christian lawyer for over three decades. His insights can be found within a body of work (see links here), but the paper we mostly focused on (here) was a book review he did on Joseph G. Allegretti's The Lawyer's Calling: Christian Faith and Legal Practice. Randy teaches constitutional law, professional responsibility, torts and various writing and advocacy courses. Professor Lee has taught previously at the Villanova and University of Pittsburgh Law Schools and in the Harvard University Summer Program.  NOTE: This episode pairs well with the one featuring Jeff Ventrella on his experiences as a man of faith in big law (here). Cross & Gavel is a production of CHRISTIAN LEGAL SOCIETY. The episode was produced by Josh Deng, with music from Vexento.

In this episode of Beyond the Code, Yitzy sits down with Professor Edward Lee, a leading expert in intellectual property, copyright law, and emerging technologies. Professor Lee, author of Creators Take Control, dives into the fascinating world of NFTs, AI, and their legal and cultural implications. Together, they explore: The resurgence of NFTs and their role in redefining digital art and IP ownership; The challenges posed by AI to copyright law, including questions of authorship and creativity; The impact of regulation (or lack thereof) on innovation in Web3 and AI spaces; The evolving debate over NFTs as securities and the role of the SEC in shaping the market. Professor Lee shares insights from his book, recent Harvard and Yale publications, and his work tracking AI controversies through ChatGPTIsEatingTheWorld.com.  Tune in to learn how law is adapting—or failing to adapt—to innovations that are reshaping our world. Guest Links: Book: Creators Take Control Website: ChatGPTIsEatingTheWorld.com AI and the Sound of Music (Yale) Prompting Progress: Authorship in the Age of AI (Florida Law Review) Why is the SEC wrong about NFTs (Coindesk) The Original Public Meaning of ‘Investment Contract' (Harvard) Follow Prof. Lee:  X: https://x.com/edleeprof Bluesky: https://bsky.app/profile/edleeprof.bsky.social LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/edward-lee-18084652

Lessons From The Bible's Lesser Unkmown's Guest Law Professor Lee A. Coppock s9e16

In this episode of PRCA Fuse, Farzana speaks with Professor Lee Edwards, a leading academic in strategic communications and public engagement at the London School of Economics (LSE). With a unique background that bridges both academia and the PR industry, Lee brings a rich perspective on the socio-cultural dynamics of public relations, power, and diversity. Professor Edwards, who spent six years in the PR industry working with major clients such as Microsoft, now focuses her research on how power operates in and through public relations, as well as how public engagement can enhance citizen participation. In this episode, she shares insights on the evolving role of PR in media policy, the rise of AI, and the importance of addressing diversity and inclusion in the communications field. In This Episode, We Explore: Lee's journey from technology PR to becoming a professor of strategic communications at LSE How her industry experience informs her academic research and teaching The socio-cultural perspective on PR and its impact on power dynamics The role of public relations in media policy and enhancing public engagement How AI is reshaping the PR industry and the ethical considerations surrounding it Key insights from her book Power, Diversity, and Public Relations and the future of DEI in communications Connect with Professor Lee Edwards: LinkedIn: Lee Edwards Follow Farzana on Social Media: Twitter & Instagram: @FarzanaBaduel Executive Producer: David Olajide - david@curzonpr.com Podcast Manager and Editor: Ikechukwu Mgbenwelu - ike.mgbenwelu@prca.org.uk Disclaimer: Views expressed by the guest are their own and not necessarily endorsed by the Fuse podcast.

Today's guests bring a unique blend of expertise and personal connection to the show. Lee Ann Butler and Alex Butler are not only esteemed faculty at Rice Business, but also a married couple! Lee Ann Butler, a senior lecturer in management, has been teaching business law and related courses since 2001, joining Rice in 2010. She also served as the former academic director for the Online MBA program, MBA@Rice. Alex Butler, the Jesse H. Jones Professor of Finance, specializes in empirical corporate finance, financial institutions and markets. His research dives deep into how firms, governments and individuals navigate external financing, with recent work examining racial disparities in the auto loan market. He was instrumental in launching Rice Business's undergraduate business major and previously served as the director of undergraduate programs. Together, with host Maya Pomroy '22, the Butlers share insights from their nearly three-decades-long academic journeys and personal lives. Lee Ann reflects on her passion for business law and the ethical challenges facing today's business leaders, while Alex highlights his findings in consumer finance. They also discuss the undergraduate business major at Rice, offer perspectives on teaching during uncertain times and explore how their partnership shapes their professional lives.Episode Guide:00:57 How The Butler's Met: A Love Story in a Bar01:38 Lee Ann's Journey from Litigator to Lecturer04:19 Alex's Path to Finance and Academia09:13 Launching the Undergraduate Business Program at Rice12:36 Teaching Experiences and Student Interactions15:20 Working Together as a Married Couple18:56 Alex's Research on Racial Disparities in Auto Loans23:32 Higher Interest Rates for Minorities26:20 Impact of Anti-Discrimination Policies28:39 Legal and Ethical Challenges in Business33:22 Teaching in Uncertain Times36:19 Future of Rice's Undergraduate Business Major & Rice Business42:46 Reflections and Words of WisdomOwl Have You Know is a production of Rice Business and is produced by University FM.Episode Quotes:On the ethical challenges that business leaders face today30:30: [Maya Pomroy]: What are some of the most critical legal or ethical challenges that business leaders face today? Because that's something that you're preparing this generation of leaders to tackle. 30:41: [Lee Ann Butler]: Well, I think the ethical challenges come every day, and probably the most difficult bit is when we just don't realize it's an ethical dilemma that's in front of us, right? And we tend to think of ourselves—everyone thinks of themselves as an ethical person: I don't need to worry about this because I'm a good person, and I will do the right thing. But when we take the time to actually systematically go through it in a logical way, I think not only what does my ethical framework tell me is right and wrong in the situation, but how might others view it? 'Cause not everyone—not everyone has the same framework as me or anyone else.Surprising lessons learned from being educators at Rice13:38 [Alex Butler] Several years ago, we ran an experimental course where faculty from four different functional areas got together, all of whom were going to teach their discipline, but along the theme of decision-making. And so we had someone from one group who's going to think about decision-making in teams, one-person decision-making, as students as far as how personal-psychological biases affect your decisions. One person doing game theory and I doing decision-making with data, so I learned a few things in that, one of which was. What a great place to work where someone can have this bonkers idea of let's come at decision-making from four different ways, all of us with our own strange perspectives, and deliver that as a course to the students and have the administration be like, yeah, man, let's do that. That sounds awesome.What makes Rice special from an educator's perspective08:35: It comes down to A: the students, right? That is my interaction. Most of the time, they are phenomenal. They are here to learn, and they have that kind of hunger that's amazing. I really enjoy teaching in the MBA program because they come with so much work experience, and I learn something every single class that I teach. Hopefully, they learn a lot from me, but I am absolutely learning a lot from them each time, too. But we also have wonderful support and administration here, which is not always the case at every school. But we have the whole package, which is just a joy to work here.Show Links: TranscriptGuest Profiles:Lee Ann E. Butler | Rice Business Alexander Butler | Rice Business Racial Disparities in the Auto Loan Market | The Review of Financial Studies | Oxford Academic  Check out this episode featuring Professor Anastasia Zavyalova here: https://business.rice.edu/owlhaveyouknow/season-3-episode-10

In Episode 80 of the Stronger Bones Lifestyle Podcast, host Debi Robinson talks with the Professor Paul Lee, an expert in regenerative medicine, combining expertise in sports medicine, orthopedics, and medical engineering for over 30 years. Professor Paul shares his comprehensive approach to bone health, integrating the principles of physics, chemistry, biology, and time.** For FULL show notes, please visit: https://debirobinson.com/episode80/ Professor Paul offers practical tips, like checking out how our shoes wear down to spot alignment issues and making simple posture adjustments to fend off musculoskeletal problems. He and Debi also chat about yoga and how everyday awareness can make a huge difference.They discuss Wolff's Law, explaining that bones need to be loaded with the right amount of force to build density, but we need to do it safely and with proper guidance as well as how gut health, managing stress and lifestyle are critical in maintaining or even reversing bone health.The episode also touches on new tech in bone health diagnosis, highlighting the REM scanner over the traditional DEXA scan and ends with a conversation about how lifestyle changes and understanding our genetic and physiological makeup can positively impact our bone health.Key  Takeaways:[2:54] Who is Professor Lee[4:35] His life and education as an orthopedic surgeon[5:28] Breaking down bone health[6:23] Physics and muscular skeletal movement[10:56] Chemistry and diet[12:37] Drugs and changing your chemistry[16:11] Biology and how you feel in terms of stress, sleep and environment plus what's in your DNA[17:43] Epigenetics[21:22] DEXA and REMS Scans[27:56] Time and timing[31:45] Is bone loss reversible[32:07] Age – physical vs chronological[34:50] Bisphosphonate[35:49] Loading bones[43:12] His book Regeneration by Design Where to Find Guest:WebsiteLinkedInHis book, Regeneration by Design** For FULL show notes, please visit: https://debirobinson.com/episode80/ Memorable Quotes:"Science is what we need to bring into the medical space." [5:08] - Professor Paul"Just being so aware of how are you standing walking moving sitting." [9:45] - Debi"We don't just think about regeneration.  Its regeneration and degeneration. Its what we call an equilibrium." [10:27] - Professor Paul"It doesn't really matter how old you are, you can still start." [33:09] - Professor Paul"You will only perform well if you're in the right environment." [33:59] - Professor Paul         "It's cheaper to get a new pair of shoes than to get a hip replacement. And its quicker too." [38:49] - Professor PaulTo learn more about me and to stay connected, click on the links below:Instagram: @debirobinsonwellnessWebsite: DebiRobinson.comHealthy Gut Healthy Bones Program

There is no way to truly prepare a client for life following a criminal conviction, and the aftermath of a defendant's guilty verdict can be incredibly complex. Rocky Dhir welcomes Professor Lee Kovarsky to learn from his wealth of expertise on post-conviction law, mitigation investigations, capital defense teams, and more. They discuss nuances in this area of the law to help attorneys understand processes and needs for clients navigating this segment of our justice system. Lee Kovarsky is the Bryant Smith Chair in Law and the Co-Director of the Capital Punishment Center at the University of Texas School of Law.

There is no way to truly prepare a client for life following a criminal conviction, and the aftermath of a defendant's guilty verdict can be incredibly complex. Rocky Dhir welcomes Professor Lee Kovarsky to learn from his wealth of expertise on post-conviction law, mitigation investigations, capital defense teams, and more. They discuss nuances in this area of the law to help attorneys understand processes and needs for clients navigating this segment of our justice system. Lee Kovarsky is the Bryant Smith Chair in Law and the Co-Director of the Capital Punishment Center at the University of Texas School of Law.

Watch the episode HERE. It's high time we took a second stab at what many consider the best Wolverine film, and one of the greatest comic book movies ever made. Take a trip with Old Man Foltz and Professor Lee as they journey through themes of dehumanization, nature versus nurture, and promised lands. Sink your claws into this classic episode! For more "legacy" episodes like this one, check our archives on your audio podcast app or www.popcorntheology.com! This episode is brought to you by Reel Leadership, the new book that helps you understand how your favorite films can make you a better leader. To learn more, visit www.jmlalonde.com/popcorn, and use the coupon code PODCAST to a $5 discount!  — We've got new merchandise! Check it out at the merch store. Help us recruit more film lovers and theology nerds by sharing this episode with your friends. Rate and review the podcast wherever you listen to help attract more listeners. Follow and connect with us on social media. Support us on Patreon. Chapters: Introduction - 00:00 Content: Claws and F-Bombs - 4:00 X-Films and Logan's Legacy - 9:30 ADS - 20:24 SPOILERS: Parenting and Child Violence - 23:22 Dehumanization: People as Tools - 28:16 Nature, Nurture and Sin Nature - 31:53 Logan meets Johnny Cash - 41:23 Danger of Isolation - 47:16 Promised Land: Fiction or Reality? 58:05 Logan and Shane - 1:07:25 Wrap-up - 1:13:22 #Logan #Wolverine #Xmen #deadpoolandwolverine #hughjackman #Marvel #MCU #ChristianPodcasts #MoviePodcasts #YouAreNotAMindlessConsumer #MovieDiscussion #FilmCriticism #MovieReview #FilmReview #FilmDiscussion #MovieExplanation #FilmAnalysis #CharacterAnalysis #MovieExplanation #MovieAnalysis #MovieReaction #reformedtheology #PopcornTheology Music by Ross Bugden: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bln0BEv5AJ0&t=0s

Learn how physics, chemistry, biology, and time intersect to empower health and longevity by reading Professor Paul Lee's Regeneration by Design. Learn more about Professor Lee's comprehensive regenerative services, and order your copy of his global best-seller at https://www.amazon.com/Regeneration-Design-science-superhuman-ageing/dp/1781338574/ref=tmm_pap_swatch_0?_encoding=UTF8&qid=&sr= Regeneration Man City: Grantham Address: 41 Sandon Road Website: https://regenman.com/ Phone: +44 330 001 0048 Email: support@regenman.com

76% of the UK's Prime Ministers in the last 80 years graduated from Oxford. There is no comparable University concentration among American Presidents. Does British policy creation suffer as a result of such a narrow leadership pool ? --- Send in a voice message: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/james-herlihy/message

Ever wondered about the mysteries of memory, cognition, and the early signs of dementia? In this episode of Bouncing Back: The Personal Resilience Science Insights Podcast, we're delving deep into this fascinating realm with our esteemed guest, Professor Lee-Fay Low. Get ready for a mind-expanding journey into understanding forgetfulness, mild cognitive impairment (MCI), and the crucial nuances of dementia. Hosted by Joahanna Wickramaratne, this episode promises insights that will challenge your perceptions and enlighten your understanding of the human mind. Professor Lee-Fay Low is a beacon in the field of Ageing and Health at the University of Sydney. With a wealth of knowledge and experience, Professor Low is a registered psychologist with a PhD in psychiatric epidemiology. Her extensive research, comprising over 150 peer-reviewed articles and three books on dementia, reflects her dedication to making a tangible difference in our world. Prepare to be captivated by her expertise as we navigate through the complexities of cognitive health and resilience. In this compelling episode, Professor Low sheds light on the intricacies of forgetfulness and the continuum of Neurocognitive Disorders. Through her expert lens, we unravel the distinctions between mild cognitive impairment (MCI) and the early indicators of dementia, establishing a crucial foundation for understanding and intervention. Moreover, Professor Low elucidates strategies for holistic care that prioritize not only cognitive function but also the emotional well-being of individuals facing these challenges.  Join us as we explore how society can better equip itself to support and accommodate those navigating the terrain of cognitive decline. Get ready to expand your perspective and foster resilience in the face of cognitive complexities! Follow Lee-Fay's work at https://www.sydney.edu.au/medicine-health/about/our-people/academic-staff/lee-fay-low.html or connect with her on social media via Twitter https://www.twitter.com/leefay_low/  Produced by the Personal Resilience Science Labs, a division of LMSL, the Life Management Science Labs. Explore LMSL at https://lifemanagementsciencelabs.com/ and visit http://pr.lmsl.net/ for additional information about Personal Resilience Science Labs. Follow us on Social Media to stay updated:  YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCv1pZy9W9aew6CUK12OeSSQ      Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/personal.resilience.science.labs      Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/resilience.science.labs/   LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/showcase/personal-resilience-science-labs/   Twitter: https://twitter.com/PRScienceLabs   TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@resilience.science.labs   Pinterest: https://www.pinterest.com/resiliencesciencelabs/      You can also subscribe and listen to the show on your preferred podcasting platforms: Apple Podcasts: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/bouncing-back-the-personal-resilience-science/id1649518468    Spotify: https://open.spotify.com/show/48GknFUDXjMsdisT6nRDh2   Amazon: https://music.amazon.com/podcasts/9d79c724-902a-4777-ab4a-b31968806798/bouncing-back-the-personal-resilience-science-insights-podcast   iHeart Radio: https://www.iheart.com/podcast/338-bouncing-back-the-personal-102890036/   Podbean: https://thepersonalresilienceinsights.podbean.com/   PlayerFM: https://player.fm/series/3402362   Podchaser: https://www.podchaser.com/podcasts/bouncing-back-the-personal-res-4930612   Google: https://podcasts.google.com/feed/aHR0cHM6Ly9mZWVkLnBvZGJlYW4uY29tL3RoZXBlcnNvbmFscmVzaWxpZW5jZWluc2lnaHRzL2ZlZWQueG1s  

In this episode, Professor Tiffany Lee is interviewed about service dogs and disability rights and accommodations. They discuss the Americans with Disabilities Act, the definition of disability, and disability benefits. They also explore reasonable accommodations in the workplace and education settings, as well as the challenges and advocacy involved. The conversation covers topics such as disclosing disabilities to employers and universities, getting a service dog, dealing with unresponsive disability lawyers, appealing denied disability benefits, and correcting inaccuracies in medical records. The episode provides valuable insights and guidance for individuals with disabilities navigating legal and practical aspects of their rights and accommodations. Professor Lee wanted to clarify the following points from the discussion of Social Security disability. SSI places limits on assets ($2000 for an individual) and income. SSDI does not have an asset limit but requires the recipient not be able to engage in “substantial gainful activity,” which generally acts as an income limit. There is a “Ticket to Work” program called “Choose Work” available that provides some options similar to those in the earlier “Ticket to Work” program mentioned in this episode.YOUR host, as always, is Dr. Linda Bluestein, the Hypermobility MD.Key points discussed: **Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA):** The conversation explores the ADA, a crucial piece of legislation that prohibits discrimination against individuals with disabilities and mandates reasonable accommodations.**Disability Benefits:** The episode delves into disability benefits, including the process of applying, appealing denied benefits, and addressing inaccuracies in medical records.**Workplace and Education Accommodations:** Reasonable accommodations in both workplace and education settings are explored, shedding light on the challenges and advocacy involved.**Disclosure to Employers and Universities:** Professor Tiffany Lee provides insights into the considerations and potential challenges of disclosing disabilities to employers and universities.**Service Dogs:** The episode discusses obtaining a service dog and the associated considerations.**Dealing with Disability Lawyers:** Challenges related to unresponsive disability lawyers are addressed, offering guidance on how to navigate such situations.**Financial Impact of Disability:** The limitations and financial impact of applying for disability, including asset limits and restrictions on work and income, are discussed.**Flaws in the Disability System:** Issues within the disability system, such as the poverty threshold and its impact on marriage, are highlighted.**Emergency Response Accessibility:** Making disaster and emergency response accessible to people with disabilities is discussed.Overall, the episode provides an exploration of the legal, practical, and personal aspects of disability rights and accommodations, offering valuable insights and guidance for individuals with disabilities.Chapters00:00 Introduction and Overview01:14 Americans with Disabilities Act03:28 Reasonable Accommodations in the Workplace04:38 Determining Reasonable Accommodations09:07 Accommodations in High School and College11:22 Challenges with Disability Services in Education13:59 Advocating for Accommodations in Education16:36 Disclosing Disabilities to Employers and Universities19:03 Determining Job Compatibility with Accommodations21:03 Getting a Service Dog23:37 Regulations and Considerations for Service Dog Training36:33 Dealing with Unresponsive Disability Lawyers38:07 Appealing Denied Disability Benefits40:03 Legal Recourse for Undertreatment of Pain43:07 Accommodations for Productivity Standards43:45 Correcting Inaccuracies in Medical Records47:46 Knowing When to Get an Accommodation or Apply for Disability48:36 Considerations for Applying for Disability50:23 Assets and Poverty Threshold for Disability58:58 Making Disaster and Emergency Response Accessible01:02:44 Hypermobility Hack: Walking DeskConnect with YOUR Bendy Specialist, Dr. Linda Bluestein, MD at https://www.hypermobilitymd.com/.   Thank YOU so much for tuning in. We hope you found this episode informative, inspiring, useful, validating, and enjoyable. Join us on the next episode for YOUR time to level up your knowledge about hypermobility disorders and the people who have them.Join YOUR Bendy Bodies community at https://www.bendybodiespodcast.com/.      YOUR bendy body is our highest priority!

In this episode, Professor Tiffany Lee is interviewed about service dogs and disability rights and accommodations. They discuss the Americans with Disabilities Act, the definition of disability, and disability benefits. They also explore reasonable accommodations in the workplace and education settings, as well as the challenges and advocacy involved. The conversation covers topics such as disclosing disabilities to employers and universities, getting a service dog, dealing with unresponsive disability lawyers, appealing denied disability benefits, and correcting inaccuracies in medical records. The episode provides valuable insights and guidance for individuals with disabilities navigating legal and practical aspects of their rights and accommodations. Professor Lee wanted to clarify the following points from the discussion of Social Security disability. SSI places limits on assets ($2000 for an individual) and income. SSDI does not have an asset limit but requires the recipient not be able to engage in “substantial gainful activity,” which generally acts as an income limit. There is a “Ticket to Work” program called “Choose Work” available that provides some options similar to those in the earlier “Ticket to Work” program mentioned in this episode.YOUR host, as always, is Dr. Linda Bluestein, the Hypermobility MD.Key points discussed: **Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA):** The conversation explores the ADA, a crucial piece of legislation that prohibits discrimination against individuals with disabilities and mandates reasonable accommodations.**Disability Benefits:** The episode delves into disability benefits, including the process of applying, appealing denied benefits, and addressing inaccuracies in medical records.**Workplace and Education Accommodations:** Reasonable accommodations in both workplace and education settings are explored, shedding light on the challenges and advocacy involved.**Disclosure to Employers and Universities:** Professor Tiffany Lee provides insights into the considerations and potential challenges of disclosing disabilities to employers and universities.**Service Dogs:** The episode discusses obtaining a service dog and the associated considerations.**Dealing with Disability Lawyers:** Challenges related to unresponsive disability lawyers are addressed, offering guidance on how to navigate such situations.**Financial Impact of Disability:** The limitations and financial impact of applying for disability, including asset limits and restrictions on work and income, are discussed.**Flaws in the Disability System:** Issues within the disability system, such as the poverty threshold and its impact on marriage, are highlighted.**Emergency Response Accessibility:** Making disaster and emergency response accessible to people with disabilities is discussed.Overall, the episode provides an exploration of the legal, practical, and personal aspects of disability rights and accommodations, offering valuable insights and guidance for individuals with disabilities.Chapters00:00 Introduction and Overview01:14 Americans with Disabilities Act03:28 Reasonable Accommodations in the Workplace04:38 Determining Reasonable Accommodations09:07 Accommodations in High School and College11:22 Challenges with Disability Services in Education13:59 Advocating for Accommodations in Education16:36 Disclosing Disabilities to Employers and Universities19:03 Determining Job Compatibility with Accommodations21:03 Getting a Service Dog23:37 Regulations and Considerations for Service Dog Training36:33 Dealing with Unresponsive Disability Lawyers38:07 Appealing Denied Disability Benefits40:03 Legal Recourse for Undertreatment of Pain43:07 Accommodations for Productivity Standards43:45 Correcting Inaccuracies in Medical Records47:46 Knowing When to Get an Accommodation or Apply for Disability48:36 Considerations for Applying for Disability50:23 Assets and Poverty Threshold for Disability58:58 Making Disaster and Emergency Response Accessible01:02:44 Hypermobility Hack: Walking DeskConnect with YOUR Bendy Specialist, Dr. Linda Bluestein, MD at https://www.hypermobilitymd.com/.   Thank YOU so much for tuning in. We hope you found this episode informative, inspiring, useful, validating, and enjoyable. Join us on the next episode for YOUR time to level up your knowledge about hypermobility disorders and the people who have them.Join YOUR Bendy Bodies community at https://www.bendybodiespodcast.com/.      YOUR bendy body is our highest priority!

In this thought-provoking episode of "The Rational Egoist," host Michael Liebowitz engages in a compelling dialogue with Professor Kang Lee, a distinguished scholar from the Department of Applied Psychology and Human Development at the Ontario Institute for Studies in Education. Professor Lee, renowned for his extensive research in developmental psychology, delves into the intricate dynamics of parental lying and its profound implications on child development.Throughout the conversation, Michael and Professor Lee explore the complex ethical and psychological landscapes shaped by parental dishonesty. They examine how seemingly benign untruths, often perceived as protective or nurturing, can inadvertently sow seeds of distrust and shape a child's perception of honesty and morality. This episode not only sheds light on the unintended consequences of these common parental practices but also challenges listeners to reflect on the essence of truth-telling in nurturing environments. The discussion also ventures into the broader societal impacts, questioning how these early experiences with dishonesty influence a child's future interactions and moral compass. Professor Lee brings a wealth of knowledge, sharing insights from his groundbreaking research and real-life examples, making this a must-listen for parents, educators, and anyone interested in the ethical development of the younger generation. Join us on "The Rational Egoist" for an enlightening journey into the heart of one of parenting's most understated challenges. Michael Leibowitz is a renowned philosopher, political activist, and the esteemed host of the Rational Egoist podcast. Inspired by the philosophical teachings of Ayn Rand, Leibowitz passionately champions the principles of reason, rational self-interest, and individualism, seeking to empower others through his compelling work. His life's narrative exemplifies the transformative power of Ayn Rand's writings. Having faced challenging circumstances that led to a 25-year prison sentence, Leibowitz emerged from adversity by embracing the tenets of rational self-interest and moral philosophy put forth by Ayn Rand. This profound transformation propelled him to become an influential figure in the libertarian and Objectivist communities, motivating others to adopt reason, individualism, and self-interest in their own lives.Beyond his impactful podcasting endeavors, Leibowitz fearlessly engages in lively political debates, advocating for the protection of individual rights and freedoms through compelling YouTube videos and insightful interviews. His unwavering commitment to these ideals has garnered him a dedicated following of like-minded individuals.Leibowitz is a versatile author, co-authoring the thought-provoking book titled “Down the Rabbit Hole: How the Culture of Correction Encourages Crime.” This groundbreaking work delves into societal attitudes surrounding punishment and rehabilitation, shedding light on how misguided approaches have contributed to the rise of crime and recidivism. Additionally, he has authored the book “View from a Cage: From Convict to Crusader for Liberty,” offering an intimate portrayal of his personal journey while exploring the philosophies that influenced his transformation.As you embark on your intellectual journey, join Michael Leibowitz as he advocates for reason, individualism, and the pursuit of self-interest, inspiring others to embrace a philosophy that empowers and uplifts the human spirit. For a deeper exploration of his ideas and insights, don't miss the opportunity to read “Down the Rabbit Hole: How the Culture of Correction Encourages Crime,” co-authored by Michael Leibowitz. And also, delve into his book “View from a Cage: From Convict to Crusader for Liberty.” Both books are available for purchase using the following links:“Down the Rabbit Hole”: https://www.amazon.com.au/Down-Rabbit-Hole-Corrections-Encourages/dp/197448064X“View from a Cage”: https://books2read.com/u/4jN6xj

Jenny Lee, vice president for Arizona International, dean of international education, and professor of educational policy studies and practice at the University of Arizona, leads the conversation on U.S. international academic collaboration and how U.S.-China tensions are affecting higher education. FASKIANOS: Welcome to CFR's Higher Education Webinar Series. I'm Irina Faskianos, vice president of the National Program and Outreach here at CFR. Today's discussion is on the record and the video and transcript will be available on our website, CFR.org/academic. As always, CFR takes no institutional positions on matters of policy. We're delighted to have Jenny Lee with us to discuss U.S. international academic collaboration. Dr. Lee is vice president for Arizona International, dean of international education, and professor of educational policy studies and practice at the University of Arizona. She is also a fellow of the American Educational Research Association. Dr. Lee formerly served as a senior fellow of NAFSA, the Association of International Educators, as chair for the Council of International Higher Education, and as a board member for the Association for the Study of Higher Education. And she has also served as a U.S. Fulbright scholar to South Africa, as a distinguished global professor at Korea University, and as an international visiting scholar at the City University of London, the University of Pretoria, and the University of Cape Town in South Africa. So, Dr. Lee, thank you very much for being with us for today's topic. I thought you could begin by giving us an overview of current trends in U.S. international academic collaboration, especially looking at what's happening with our relations with China. LEE: Sounds great. Well, thank you for the opportunity, Irina. It's a pleasure to be here and to speak with you and all those listening right now. I'll speak for about ten or so minutes, and then open it up and engage with the audience. Hopefully, you all have some good questions that will come up during my remarks. So, clearly, we're entering a very interesting and somewhat uncertain chapter in how we understand the role of higher education globally. So I will begin with some general observation so all our viewers are on the same page. Now, first and foremost, the U.S. is mostly at the top when it comes to the higher education sector. Most of us already know that the United States houses the most highly ranked institutions. And this allows the country to be the largest host of international students and scholars from around the world. According to the latest IIE Open Doors report published a couple of weeks ago, the U.S. attracted over a million students from all over the world. And we're almost back to pre-pandemic levels. We also host over 90,000 scholars. And the primary purpose for them being here is research, for about two-thirds to 75 percent of them. These international scholars, as well as international graduate students, contribute significantly to the U.S. scientific enterprise. The U.S. is also among the leading countries in scientific output and impact, and the largest international collaborator in the world. In other words, the U.S. is highly sought because of its prestigious institutions, drawing top faculty and students from around the world. And with that comes the ability to generate cutting-edge scientific breakthroughs which further secures the U.S.' global position in academia. At the same time, of course, we've seen China's economy rise significantly as the country surpassed the United States in scientific output, and more recently in impact as measured by publication citations, and is outpacing the U.S. in the extent of R&D investment. Chinese institutions have also made noticeable jumps in various global rankings, which is a pretty big feat considering the fierce competition among the world's top universities. What we're witnessing as well are geopolitical tensions between the two countries that have impacted the higher education sector. While these two countries, the U.S. and China, are the biggest global collaborators—and they collaborate more with each other than any other country—they're also rival superpowers. As global adversaries, what we are witnessing as well is increased security concerns regarding intellectual theft and espionage. I'm going to spend some time summarizing my work for those who are not familiar to provide some further context. I and my colleagues, John Haupt and Xiaojie Li, also at the University of Arizona, have conducted numerous studies about U.S.-China scientific collaboration. And what we're observing across these studies is how the scientific pursuit of knowledge, which is fundamentally borderless, is becoming bordered in the current geopolitical environment. International collaboration, long valued as positive-sum, is being treated as zero-sum. Besides the rise of China and the accompanying political rhetoric that posed China as a so-called threat, tensions also grew among accusations, as you may recall, about the origins of SARS-CoV-2 and a corresponding sharp increase in anti-Asian hate crimes in the United States. Public opinions about China were not favorable, and thus there was not a whole lot of public resistance when the FBI's China Initiative was launched in 2018. This initiative basically signaled that anyone of Chinese descent was a potential enemy of the state, including possible Chinese Communist Party spies in our own universities, even though there was no pervasive empirical or later judicial cases that proved such a damaging assumption. Nevertheless, world-renowned Chinese scientists were falsely accused of academic espionage and their careers and personal finances ruined. In my research that followed with Xiaojie Li, with support from the Committee of 100, we surveyed about 2,000 scientists in the U.S.' top research universities during the China Initiative. And we found that one in two Chinese scientists were afraid that they were being racially profiled by the FBI. We also observed that consequently scientists, especially those with Chinese descent, were less inclined to collaborate with China, less inclined to pursue federal grants, less inclined to even stay in the United States but rather to take their expertise to another country where they felt safer to pursue their research, including in China. In sum, the federal government's attempts to weed out possible Chinese spies was highly criticized as a damaging form of racial profiling affecting even U.S. citizens and, in the end, undermined the U.S.' ability to compete with China. Especially now, as we continue to observe Chinese scientists leaving the U.S. and taking their skills and talents elsewhere. With John Haupt and two academics at Tsinghua University in China, Doctors Wen Wen and Die Hu, we asked about two hundred co-collaborators in China and in the United States how were they able to overcome such geopolitical tensions and the challenges associated with COVID-19 during the pandemic? And we did learn something somewhat unexpected, and I hope valuable. Basically, we found that mutual trust between international collaborators helped overcome such perceived hurdles, including risks of being unfairly targeted. What this tells us is that a chilling effect is certainly real and remains possible, but in the end scientists have tremendous agency on what they study, where they study, and whether or not they seek funds, or where they seek funds. Regardless of the host or home country, international collaboration is important to all countries' scientific enterprise. Coauthors from different countries improve the knowledge being produced, its applicability, enlarges global audiences, and thereby increases the impact of the work. So considering the value, yet risks, where do we begin? Firstly, federal and institutional policies, of course, matter, for better or for worse. But policies do not manufacture trust. The formation of an academic tie does not suddenly occur over a cold call in the middle of a global meltdown, as often portrayed in Hollywood. Rather, this is a gradual process. And the longevity of the relationship helps strengthen that trust over time. According to our research, these collaborative relationships begin as graduate students, postdocs, visiting researchers. They occur at academic conferences and other in-person opportunities. Cutting short-term fellowships, for example, will impact the potential of a future scientific relationship, but its effects may not be felt for years. Same with denied visas and opportunities for travel. Fewer graduate students from particular countries or fields also means a different shape when it comes to global science. U.S. for instance, was not too long ago Russia's biggest foreign scientific collaborator, with the war in Ukraine, those research relationships, as well as much—with much of the Western world, have ceased. All of this, and my related empirical research, was conducted when I was a professor at my home institution. And since July, I've been serving, as Irina mentioned, as the dean and vice president of international affairs at my own institution. And I've been thinking a lot of, what does this mean for institutional practice? For those in university leadership positions, as mine, you know this is a tough challenge. Especially as domestic demand and state funding for higher education is generally declining. And at the same time, internationalization is increasingly central to senior leadership strategies. Universities are continuing vying to attract the world's students, even despite a decline of interest from China. And at the same time, research universities in particular are quite dependent on federal grants. We have our own research security offices that need to ensure our universities have good reputations and relations with our large federal funding agencies and taking every precaution to not be seen as a vulnerable site of intellectual theft. These units tend not to operate within international affairs. And I'm very well aware that in my role of trying to attract as many students from China and develop international partnerships, all of them can be suddenly erased if a Chinese University partner does not pass visual compliance or there is a sudden presidential executive order, as we experienced under the Trump administration. I'm also very well aware that of senior leaders have to choose between my educational offerings and partnerships in China versus risking a major grant from a federal agency, I will lose. We witnessed that with the shutting down of over 100 Confucius Institutes in the U.S., despite a lack of evidence of systematic espionage occurring through these centers. Public perceptions, informed or not, strongly affect the nature of our international work, as in the case of Florida. Such negative perceptions are not one country-sided, of course. A key concern for Chinese and other international students and their parents relate to safety. Gun violence, including on our own college campuses, anti-Asian hate crimes in surrounding neighborhoods, and unfavorable political environment in which studies might be interrupted as in the case of Proclamation 10043, or visa non-renewals are all contributing factors for the decline of interest from China, and uncertain future student exchange as well. In closing, when it comes to China these days no practices are guaranteed. However, I can recommend some while also keeping in mind geopolitical conditions can suddenly change for worse, or perhaps better. I mentioned earlier the value of mutual trust. At my university, we have long-standing relationships with university leaders at Chinese institutions. We've set up dual degree programs in China. Actually, about 40 percent of our international student enrollment are through such partner relationships throughout the world, in which we go to where they are. Hiring staff who speak the language and know the culture are also essential. And, like any relationship, these arrangements have developed over time. They are not built overnight. It takes intention. It takes effort. But in my experience, as trust is established the numbers have grown, and the positive impact is still being felt. Thank you. FASKIANOS: Thank you very much for that. That was terrific. Let's go now to all of you for your questions, comments. You can use this to share best practices and what you're doing to your universities or institutions. Please click the raise hand icon on your screen to ask a question. On your iPad or tablet, you can click the “more” button to access the raise hand feature. And when you're called upon, please accept the unmute prompts, state your name and affiliation, followed by your question. You can also submit a written question, they've already started coming in, by the Q&A icon. And if you can also include your affiliation there, I would appreciate it, although we will try to make sure we identify you correctly. So let's see. I'm looking for—no raised hands yet, but we do have questions written. So first question from Denis Simon, who's a professor at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill: Many U.S. universities have curtailed their exchanges and cooperation with China. You referenced that. Officials at these universities are worried that if they appear too friendly toward China they will lose all sorts of federal funding. Are these concerns justified? Are there any regulations or legislation that actually says federal funding can be removed assuming these universities are in compliance with the export controls, et cetera? LEE: All right. Well, thanks, Denis, for your question. I know there—when I saw the list of those who signed up, I know there are many here who can speak to this directly. So I encourage those to also raise their hands and provide input in the Q&A, maybe in the form of an A instead of a Q. But in any case, going to that question, you know, it's a tough environment. And so much in my role, but what I even experienced in my research, is about that perception, that overinterpretation. So maybe signaling that we have this exchange program might draw attention in ways that might lead to suspicions that, oh, well is this, you know, somehow creating an opportunity for us to disclose military secrets? I mean, that's where we take it. A friendly exchange or visit is oftentimes now having to be scrutinized and ensuring that there is no remote violation of export controls, even in educational delivery in a non-STEM field. And what we're seeing is that this—we have our highly sensitive fields, but that kind of scrutiny we're also seeing applied to the institution more broadly. So these seemingly benign programs about language or culture, about fields that are enhanced or help promote so-called American values, are also being watched. So I believe as an institutional leader, again, as I mentioned earlier, having to deal with the possibility of unwanted or unwarranted attention versus not having that program, I think some, as Denis has pointed out, are leaning towards being more cautious. Unfortunately, China—any work with China is considered a risk, even if there is no reason for risk, as we've witnessed under—or, observed under the China Initiative. I don't know if I've fully answered that question, but please follow up if I haven't. And I know others can probably say more to that issue. FASKIANOS: Great. I'll take the next question from Peter—I don't know how to pronounce— LEE: Peter Becskehazy. Hi, Peter. (Laughs.) FASKIANOS: There you go. Thank you very much. LEE: I know Peter. FASKIANOS: All right. Good. Well, I'd love if Peter asked his question directly, if he can. Oh, good. From Pima Community College. Go ahead, Peter. Q: Hello, Jenny. Nice to see you. LEE: Hi, Peter. Q: Now my question is, the University of Arizona and other universities have had an inflow of dozens of countries, adding up to the million that you mentioned. Are other countries trying to fill in slots left vacant by Chinese students and scholars? LEE: Yeah. Great question, Peter. And I think you can also share what you've observed at Pima in terms of the patterns you've witnessed. But for us, and as we are seeing nationally, we're seeing India rise. Not at the—not at higher numbers in many institutions, compared to China, but the rate is rising. It's not so simple, though, because we also have relations in India, and trying to set up agreements, and bring students. The competition in India is intense. So even though there's a relatively so-called large market, and the U.S. has been quite successful in attracting Indian students, that is perhaps where the attention is as a more, I would say—I hate to use the word “market,”—but a stable student market. There's a lot more interest in graduate-level education globally, as we've observed. These countries that formerly didn't have capacity now do have capacity. They have online offerings. They have branch campuses, dual degrees, lots of other options. And so the niche for the U.S., whereas before we didn't really have to think about a niche, is really in graduate education. Now, of course, that's not good news for Pima, that's thinking about a community college and other kinds of educational offerings. But for us, we're thinking about India a lot. Southeast Asia, of course, has always been an important partner to us. Africa continues to be a challenge. We know that when we think about population growth, Africa is the future. There's still challenges and trying to identify places where there is capacity. But also the affordability of a U.S. education is a huge challenge. So it's a great question. And, again, I'm curious to know other places in the world people recommend. Of course, Latin America, given our location, is a key strategic partner. But again, affordability becomes an issue. And again, I'm just talking about the traditional international student who would choose to come to Arizona. Not talking about research collaboration, which is less bound by affordability issues. Irina, you're muted. FASKIANOS: How long have I been doing this? OK. (Laughs.) I'm going to take the next written question from Allison Davis-White Eyes, who is vice president for diversity, equity, and inclusion at Fielding Graduate University: We have tried to work on collaborations with European universities and African universities, and met with much difficulty. What trends are you seeing in these regions? And what are emerging global markets beyond China? LEE: Great question, Allison. I mean, if you could leave the question in the future, so because I am visually looking at the question at the same time. FASKIANOS: Oh, great. Sorry. LEE: So, Allison, I'm not sure if you're referring to academic or research. Of course, within Europe, where the government does highly subsidized tuition, it's just becomes financially a bad deal, I suppose—(laughs)—for a student in the world who would normally get a free or highly reduced tuition to pay full price at our institution. So that kind of exchange of partnership, especially when it's about—when it's financially based, becomes almost impossible from my experience. But thinking about research collaboration, it depends on the level. So if it's an institutional agreement, you know, it's—often, these MOUs tend to just be on paper. It takes quite a bit of—it's very ceremonial. You need to get legal involved. It's a whole process to get an MOU. We really don't need these non-binding MOUs for research agreements. Some countries like it, just to display that they have an MOU with a U.S. institution. But essentially, it doesn't stop me as a professor to reach out to another professor at the University of Oslo, and say, hey, let's do a study. Which we actually are doing. So, yeah, feel free to be more specific, or if you want to raise your hand or speak on—and elaborate on that question. So, again, for educational exchange, it is difficult because we are—there's already a process within the EU that makes it very affordable and highly supported within the EU, or if you're part of that bigger program. Africa, again, my challenge from my role as an institutional leader is identifying places where there is already enough mass education up through high school where one would be able to consider, first of all, being admitted to a U.S. institution, but secondly, to be able to pay the cost. FASKIANOS: Allison, do you want to expand a little bit? Q: Oh, sorry. (Laughs.) FASKIANOS: There you go. There you go. Q: Right. Dr. Lee, thank you for your response. I think it was helpful, especially regarding the subsidizing of education in Europe. We've been working on some research partnerships. And we have just—you know, really, it has just been extremely difficult with European universities. And I do think part of it has to do with the way things are subsidized in Europe. I was just wondering if there were new and different ways to do it. I do appreciate your comment about the MOUs being largely ceremonial. I agree. And would like to see something with a little more substance. And that will take some creativity and a lot of partnership and work. As for Africa, we have tried to create partnerships with South Africa. I think there's some potential there. Certainly, some excitement. We've had a few students from Nigeria, extremely bright and motivated. I just would—you know, would like to hear, maybe from some other colleagues as well on the call, if there are creative ways in working with these students as well. So, thank you. LEE: Yeah, no. And just to follow up quickly, and, again, opportunities for others to share, academic collaboration, as I mentioned during my remarks, is largely built upon mutual trust. And not to say it can't happen from top down, but really does—is most successful from bottom up. And I don't mean to refer to professors at the bottom, but meaning those that are actually engaged with that work. And so just some considerations is rather than a top-down initiative or strategy, is to identify those that are visiting scholars, already from that country, have networks within that country. What's interesting, as I learned in my current role, is how little my predecessors worked with professors in these area's studies programs, because they're oftentimes treated as a separate or having different interests in mind when actually there is a lot of overlap to identify those that are actually there. Allison, by the way, I lived in South Africa for eight years. And I know it actually takes a long time. My Fulbright started off as a one year, and I had to extend it because even getting the data while I was on the ground takes time. And I'll be honest, I think part of it was taking some time just to build trust the intentions of my work, what was I going to do with that data, how is that going to be used? Was it actually going to be ways to empower them? You know, for those who study international collaboration, know this north and south divide, and I think there are places in the world that are—maybe have some guardrails up from those—not saying this is what's happening in your institution—but someone that they don't know coming from the Global North to study someone else in the Global South. And so how do we create or initiate a collaboration that is clearly, expressly mutual at the onset? And, again, this is where trust can be operationalized lots of different ways, but that even begins with that initial message. I mean, I remember when I started my work, nobody responded to me. They're like, who are you? And I don't care who you are or what your CV says. And it takes time. You know, building that relationship, and that person introducing me to that other person. Like, you know, this is how scientific networks form. And I think, to some extent, this is also how institutional collaborative relationships also form. FASKIANOS: Thank you. I'm going to go next to David Moore, who has a raised hand. Q: OK, thank you. I just got unmuted. FASKIANOS: Great. Q: Lee, I appreciate your comments. And I heard your reference to Florida earlier. I don't know if we have colleagues on this call from Florida, but I think they'll know what I'm about to say. I'm the dean of international education at Broward College in Fort Lauderdale. And as of tomorrow, December 1, Florida has to—all institutions in Florida, public institutions, colleges and universities, must be completely devoid of any partnerships in China. And not just China. There are seven countries of concern. And you probably can cite them, most of you would know the other six. But of the seven countries, Broward had four partnerships in China alone, none in the other countries that were active. And so we are now officially done, have to be. And I've had to notify the partners as well as our accrediting body, because these were international centers of Broward where they literally offer—we offered associate degrees, two-year degrees. And students could then transfer to an institution in the United States. Now, this didn't catch us too much by surprise because two and a half years ago our Florida legislature started in on this, really probably before that, where they isolated universities in Florida and said: You cannot do research—sensitive research, whatever, you know, engineering, computer science, et cetera—any research without notifying the state. And there's an elaborate process that had to be—you know, they had to go through to do this. But now it's not just research institutions. Now it's not just those kinds of collaborations. It is, in fact, all partnerships of any kind. We had to end our agent agreements where we were recruiting students from China that were—where the companies were based in China. And in course our programs were not research. They're just general education, two-year associate's degree, maybe some business. But we've been informed now it's completely done. And so I'm actually looking for institutions outside of Florida who might be willing to take over the role that we've had in transcripting students who later want to come to the United States. At least for the first two years in China, and then transferring to the upper division to the U.S. So I'm not sure. You're probably quite familiar with this. I don't know if you know the details of how it was worked out in practice. We were the only community college in the state that had any partnerships. So we were the ones that had to desist. So I want to—there are probably people on the call that are familiar with this, but there might be many others. And I just wanted to say that I'm looking to, you know, open that door to other institutions outside of Florida that might be willing in, yes, take a risk to go into China, but to—I've always felt that these kinds of programs were very good to build relationships, partnerships, communication. Ambassadors really. Where we feel like we were representing American education, whatever, you know, we call American values, democracy, you know, community. We thought we were doing good. But we found out we were—we were not. We were—we were doing something that went opposed to the prevailing political climate, at least in Florida. So that's my comment. I think people should know about it. And thank you for letting me speak to it a bit. Maybe someone will speak up and say they're interested in they can get in touch with me, David Moore at Broward College, Fort Lauderdale, Florida. LEE: David, thank you for sharing what you did. This is a really important example of where other states could very well head. And what's interesting, as David noted, we're talking about a community college. When we normally think about cutting ties, it's usually around the concerns about national security. Now, how this translates to a two-year degree that is solely educational based is a pretty far stretch, and yet is being impacted quite severely. So I think we should continue to follow this example—unfortunate example. And, David, yeah, your partners have reached out to my office, and I'm sure to others. But thank you for being available. Q: You're welcome. We have partners—we are also working with your Jakarta, Indonesia center there. So we have that connection. Thank you. LEE: Mmm hmm. Thanks. FASKIANOS: And if anybody wants to share contact information in the Q&A box, you can certainly do that. That would be great. There is a written question from Tutaleni Asino at Oklahoma State University: There was an article today in SEMAFOR highlighting that there are currently 350 U.S. students studying in China compared to 11,000 in 2019. Comparatively, there are 300,000 Chinese students in the United States. Is this a one-way problem, where the U.S. is not investing in international engagements as a result of being more inward looking and other countries having more options of who to collaborate with? LEE: Yeah. Tutaleni, that's—I think your question is an answer. And I think it's—I agree with your observation. So we are seeing that as there's state and public disinvestment in higher education, and including scrutiny about international higher education, we're also seeing a decline and cutting of foreign language programs in the United States. So here we are, a monolingual country whose students mostly go to Europe or other English-speaking countries to study abroad. A very limited number of international—U.S. students who pursue undergraduate degrees in a foreign country. And knowing that the future is global and international, at least in my opinion, does not set the U.S. up well to be globally competitive, even though much of its international policy is around this rhetoric of we need to compete with China. And so you raise a good point. How is this possible if U.S. citizens don't speak Chinese, or have no interest in learning about Chinese culture, or there's reduced opportunities even in our own institutions, I think is something to think about and ask more questions about. FASKIANOS: I'm going to take the next question from Zhen Zhu, chair and professor of marketing, director of faculty excellence, and director for international engagement at Suffolk University: How do you see the trend of U.S. students' interest in study abroad to China? LEE: There is actually growing interest. As many of you know, China—offering Chinese language in high schools is not as unusual as it used to be. There is growing interest as students are thinking about employability in global markets in multinational or international organizations or corporations. It would be fundamental, in fact, for someone who has any interest in international work to pick up the language if they can, and at your own institution. FASKIANOS: Great. Let's see. From—I'm going to take the next question from Jeff Riedinger: Is there a role for universities to play in knowledge diplomacy to sustain international relationships and collaborations in addressing global problems such as climate change and pandemics when national governments may be at odds with each other? LEE: Thanks, Jeff. And hi, Jeff. I'm just going to read over that question so I can kind of digest it a bit. Is there a role for institutions to play in knowledge diplomacy, such as climate change, pandemics, when national governments may be at odds with each other? Absolutely, 200 percent. It is occurring—knowledge diplomacy, science diplomacy. That one individual going on a Fulbright or coming to study here for some extended visit, having these collaborations and, ultimately, you know, science—knowledge production—I mean, there's no bounds. And when we think about the kind of research that may not occur because of these national governments are at odds when it comes to addressing climate change or other global issues, you know, the world is paying somewhat of a price when it comes to that in—when there are overarching concerns about national security. So, you know, my issue has always been with policy you overlook nuance, and with sweeping policies that overlook the disciplinary distinctions and contributions, what is lost in the pursuit of trying to stay ahead of another country in fields and areas that really have no economic or military value, right? But yet, have an important cultural value, or maybe will address something bigger, such as COVID-19. So as I mentioned, the work that I referenced earlier about U.S.-Chinese scientists coming together during COVID-19, were actually scientists who studied COVID-19 together. And again, this was not—this was fraught with risks. They were very well aware that there was a lot of scrutiny about any research about COVID-19 coming from China. There was scrutiny about, you know, where the data was held, who was analyzing it, who was funding it. And yet, these scientists took these risks in order to address how does the world deal with the pandemic. And this was based on interviews of those studies that were actually successful and published. This is where that mutual trust, as I've mentioned earlier, is so important. And without that mutual trust, these studies, I'm pretty certain, would never have been published, because it was not an easy path when it comes to that particular geopolitical climate during the pandemic. FASKIANOS: Jenny, I'm just going to ask a question. President Biden and President Xi met during APEC. Did anything come out of that meeting that could affect U.S.-China academic collaboration? LEE: Yeah. You know, this is tough. I mean, how do you analyze political statements? What do they really mean? And what is really going to change? I think what's clear is that there's an acknowledgment that we're interdependent, but we're also adversaries. Almost a love/hate codependent, in a relationship that we can't just easily separate but we do need each other. But the form that it takes, I think there's an understanding it needs to be more specific. And I don't think that has been clarified yet. I realize I missed part of Jeff's question on what can institutions do? That's such a good question. And I got more into the topic than the actual to-do. What can institutions do? Honestly—(laughs)—I'll just speak as a researcher, to back off a bit, right? To let scientists do what they want to do. Yes, we need to follow disclosures. We need to make sure there's no conflicts of interest. We need to follow all of these procedures. But what I also found during the China Initiative, there was also this chilling climate in which there's an overinterpretation that may put institutions at risk. And to my knowledge, institutions were not at risk to the extent to which their scientists, especially those of Chinese descent, felt scrutinized. FASKIANOS: Thank you. We have a raised hand from Dan Whitman. Q: OK, I think I'm unmuted. Thank you, Irina. And thanks, Professor Lee, for mentioning the Great Wall that that prevents us from dealing with even Europeans who have subsidized education or Africans who have no money. And just an anecdote, since you have welcomed anecdotes, I am an adjunct at George Washington University. But totally unrelated to that, just for free and just for fun, pro bono, nobody pays, nobody gets paid. A course that I'm giving by webinar, it's zero cost. The topic is crisis management, but it could be any topic. And in that group, which there are about eighty people who tune in twice a week, fifteen Kenyans, twenty-five Ukrainians, and forty Kazakhs. I mean, I don't know if there's ever been exchange between Kazakhstan and Kenya. Anyway, my point is things can be done. We share it for free. What motivates the students? A certificate. It's so easy to give them a certificate. And in many countries, they very highly value that, even though it's not a—there's no formality, there's no formal academic credit. But the students are very motivated. And possibly, there may be universities in the U.S. that could—that might want to give a professor a small stipendium to do an informal webinar course, which would create connections, which would be zero cost, basically, and would bridge that gap of funding that you've alluded to. Thank you. LEE: Yeah. Dan, thank you for that. And I think this leads to a kind of a spin-off comment about certificates. Absolutely. Micro-credentials or alternative forms of education, where there's maybe not a full-fledged undergraduate degree but some certificate, I think, is important niche, especially for returning adults or communities where they're not able to afford to take time off. So that flexibility, and obviously now with online education, just becomes so much more accessible and very low cost. Something else to keep in mind, though, is that, depending on the institution you're from, that will make a difference in certificates. I mean, an institution like George Washington University offering a certificate may have some symbolic or perceived value that may be higher than an institution that is lower or are not ranked at all. So this is where, unfortunately—I'm a big critic of global rankings. But unfortunately, it does play a role in how that certificate is being perceived and the attractiveness of that certificate. But absolutely, this is definitely a way to open access especially for places in the world that just cannot physically move or have the funds to support their studies. FASKIANOS: Great. There are two comments/questions in the Q&A that I wanted to give you a chance to respond to about Africa, from Tutaleni Asino and Fodei Batty. Dr. Asino talks about English is the language of instruction and governments in Africa where they're funding education to a higher degree, and thinks that there are opportunities there, but it sounds like all fifty-four countries are grouped together. And Dr. Batty talks a little bit about there are a lot of students from African countries pursuing graduate education in the United States. But South Africa is usually an exception to the higher education American norm in Africa. Most South Africans don't like to travel, especially travel to America. I thought maybe you could just clarify some—respond to those comments. LEE: Yeah. Absolutely. Thank you for sharing those comments. There's a book I edited called Intra-Africa Student Mobility. And I agree with the comments. And one of the things I didn't mention that I think is important to help us understand the broader global context is that there's actually considerable international activity within the continent. And there's actually considerable intra-Africa mobility within the continent. South Africa is the most important country player in Sub-Saharan Africa. It is globally ranked—has more globally ranked institutions than any other African country. And so South Africa then becomes an important hub. And, yes, as an English-speaking, among many other languages, country, that does attract African students to go oftentimes for a similar sense of shared culture, despite sometimes different languages and customs and backgrounds. And yet, nevertheless, South Africa is an important player within the continent. Not to say that there is no international mobility occurring, but there is increased capacity within the continent that would allow students and interested students to travel within the continent. Not the same extent, of course, as Europe. But the least we're seeing that rise over time. And so it's called Intra-Africa Student Mobility. Chika Sehoole and I coedited the book. We were able to get about eight African scholars to talk about the various reasons students would choose that particular African country, and what draw them. And what was really interesting about this phenomenon is that it goes against this prevailing notion of Africa's victim of brain drain or all going to the north. That's actually not what is happening. But that there is capacity building within the continent. So in trying to answer a different question, I skirted over a lot of the things I could go further into. But hopefully that book will shed light on what's happening within that continent, at least from the perspective of eight different countries. FASKIANOS: Fantastic. Thank you for that. I'm going to go next to Jonathan Scriven at Washington Adventist University in Maryland: What are some of the strategies universities are using to make education more affordable in the United States? If that is a challenge, are schools investing more or less in setting up campuses in foreign countries as a way to reach foreign students? LEE: I'm just going to read over that question. OK, yeah. Great question, Jonathan. So what's happening in my institution and many others is a way to attract students is we're providing considerable aid, merit aid, financial aid, aid even to international students. The majority may not even be paying the full sticker price. Now this, of course, will affect the revenue that would have otherwise been generated, but nevertheless is a way to deal with the fierce competition across U.S. institutions for these top students. So how to make it affordable? There's a lot of aid going around at the undergraduate, not just the graduate, levels. And so what are institutions doing? Well, for example, at the University of Arizona for our dual degrees, it's a fraction of the cost of what it would cost to be a student at our main campus. When you have a combination of hybrid or online delivery with a campus partner maybe providing most of the gen ed's and then we would teach most of the major courses as an example, that does significantly lower the cost where that student will still get a bona fide University of Arizona degree, just like they would at main campus. So these alternative forms of delivery certainly make it more affordable, especially for those that opt to stay in their home country and receive an online education, or a flipped classroom model, or a dual degree. FASKIANOS: Great. Denis Simon, if you can—why don't you ask your question? Q: Here I am. OK. Recently, on a trip to China in September, a number of faculty have told me they're no longer wanting to send their best students abroad. They want to keep them in China. And this is all part of the rise of Chinese universities, et cetera. And so it may not be simply the souring of Sino-U.S. relations that has causal effect here, but simply the fact that China now is becoming a major, you know, educational powerhouse. And that also could change the dynamics. For example, even the BRI countries could start to send their students to China instead of sending them to the United States. Do you see anything evolving like this or—and what might be the outcome? LEE: Yeah. Spot on, David. That halo effect of a U.S. degree is not the same as it was when I was a university student. Chinese students, as well as students in the world, are much more savvy. They have access to information. They have access to rankings. They know all universities are not the same. And they know that they have some institutions that are highly ranked and may offer better quality education than the U.S. So that the image of a U.S. degree, of course, is not as universally perceived as it may have been, I don't know, pre-internet, or without the—all sorts of rankings in which institutions are rated against one another. And absolutely, Chinese institutions are very difficult to get into, fiercely competitive, producing far more scientific output than some of our leading institutions. And there's another factor when it comes to Asian culture just more broadly speaking, is that social network tie. Sociologists refer to it as social capital. When a Chinese student, a Korean student, Japanese student decides to study in the United States, they may lose that social tie that may possibly put them in a disadvantage when they decide to come back and compete for a position when they may just have that U.S. credential, but may have either lessened or no longer have that relationship that may have allowed them to get a position at the university, or in a place where that alumni network would have been especially useful. So again, I don't want to generalize, you know, in any place to the world, but there is that component that I think sometimes is missed in the literature. Maintaining that social network is pretty key, especially as jobs, of course, global, you know, unemployment—places where students are competing for positions need to have every edge possible. So that also can be part of that reason they decide to stay. FASKIANOS: Great. The next question from Michael Kulma, who's at the University of Chicago. He's following on David Moore's comments about Florida: Do you know how many other states in the U.S. are enacting or are considering such policies against partnerships with China? LEE: I do not know the answer. So if anyone wants to raise their hand and share about their own state, or put it on the answer part of the question and answer. There are related concerns about DEI, diversity, equity, and inclusion. Some of that may spill over to China. Hopefully, at some point at the Council of Foreign Relations will have a discussion on Israel and Hamas conflict and how institutions are dealing with that. And so we're seeing a pretty challenging political environment that is clearly spilling over to our classrooms and to our international activities, our domestic recruitment. But I'm not answering your question, Michael. (Laughs.) I'll leave it up to someone else to answer. FASKIANOS: Great. Thank you. So we don't have very much time left. I thought maybe you could, given your research and expertise, could suggest resources—recommend resources for higher ed leaders and administrators to better understand how to promote collaboration. LEE: Sure. So promoting collaboration, it really—each person at a time. You know, again, MOUs may be signed, and maybe overarching presidents will come together and have an agreement, but there's no guarantee that will ever happen. I'd love to do a study on how many MOUs never actually materialized into real action. So where do we begin? International affairs SIOs out there, identify who are your area studies experts? Who are your visiting postdocs? Who are your Fulbright scholars from other parts of the world? They all represent their own network and are certainly are valuable resources to consider. What I've sometimes have heard even at my own institution is, you know, how do we bring these people to the table? Why are they not at the table to begin with, and then how do we bring them there? And this is a relatively low-cost way to go about this, right? Like, faculty engaged in service. What kind of opportunities can your university provide for faculty service that is aligned with their area of expertise, the areas of the world they represent, the networks they have? And many of—some of you already have experienced this directly. These partnerships often begin with our alumni, international—former international students who decide to go back home. So, again, there's just a lot of exciting opportunity. I love this field because it's never boring. There's always new ways to grow, expand new partners. But it really does begin with that essential element of trust. And that often begins with our own institutions and identifying those who've already started to build that network. FASKIANOS: Wonderful. Thank you very much. Really appreciate your being with us and for sharing your expertise and background, Dr. Lee. It's been fantastic. And to all of you, for your questions and comments, and sharing your experiences as well. You can follow Dr. Lee on X, the app formerly known as Twitter, at @JennyJ_Lee. I will send out a link to this webinar, the transcript, and the video, as well as the link to the book—your book that you mentioned, and any other resources that you want to share with the group. And I encourage you all to follow @CFR_academic on X, visit CFR.org, ForeignAffairs.com, and ThinkGlobalHealth.org for research and analysis on global issues. We also—just putting in a plug for our other series, Academic Webinar series, which is designed for students. We just sent out the winter/spring lineup and we hope that you will share that with your colleagues and your students. It is a great way for them to have access to practitioner scholars and to talk with students from around the country. So if you haven't received that lineup, you can email cfracademic@CFR.org, and we will share that with you. So, again, thank you, Jenny, for being with us, and to all of you. And wishing you safe and happy holidays. And good luck closing out this semester before we get to the holidays. (Laughs.) So thank you again. (END)

Jenny Lee, vice president for Arizona International, dean of international education, and professor of educational policy studies and practice at the University of Arizona, leads the conversation on U.S. international academic collaboration and how U.S.-China tensions are affecting higher education. FASKIANOS: Welcome to CFR's Higher Education Webinar Series. I'm Irina Faskianos, vice president of the National Program and Outreach here at CFR. Today's discussion is on the record and the video and transcript will be available on our website, CFR.org/academic. As always, CFR takes no institutional positions on matters of policy. We're delighted to have Jenny Lee with us to discuss U.S. international academic collaboration. Dr. Lee is vice president for Arizona International, dean of international education, and professor of educational policy studies and practice at the University of Arizona. She is also a fellow of the American Educational Research Association. Dr. Lee formerly served as a senior fellow of NAFSA, the Association of International Educators, as chair for the Council of International Higher Education, and as a board member for the Association for the Study of Higher Education. And she has also served as a U.S. Fulbright scholar to South Africa, as a distinguished global professor at Korea University, and as an international visiting scholar at the City University of London, the University of Pretoria, and the University of Cape Town in South Africa. So, Dr. Lee, thank you very much for being with us for today's topic. I thought you could begin by giving us an overview of current trends in U.S. international academic collaboration, especially looking at what's happening with our relations with China. LEE: Sounds great. Well, thank you for the opportunity, Irina. It's a pleasure to be here and to speak with you and all those listening right now. I'll speak for about ten or so minutes, and then open it up and engage with the audience. Hopefully, you all have some good questions that will come up during my remarks. So, clearly, we're entering a very interesting and somewhat uncertain chapter in how we understand the role of higher education globally. So I will begin with some general observation so all our viewers are on the same page. Now, first and foremost, the U.S. is mostly at the top when it comes to the higher education sector. Most of us already know that the United States houses the most highly ranked institutions. And this allows the country to be the largest host of international students and scholars from around the world. According to the latest IIE Open Doors report published a couple of weeks ago, the U.S. attracted over a million students from all over the world. And we're almost back to pre-pandemic levels. We also host over 90,000 scholars. And the primary purpose for them being here is research, for about two-thirds to 75 percent of them. These international scholars, as well as international graduate students, contribute significantly to the U.S. scientific enterprise. The U.S. is also among the leading countries in scientific output and impact, and the largest international collaborator in the world. In other words, the U.S. is highly sought because of its prestigious institutions, drawing top faculty and students from around the world. And with that comes the ability to generate cutting-edge scientific breakthroughs which further secures the U.S.' global position in academia. At the same time, of course, we've seen China's economy rise significantly as the country surpassed the United States in scientific output, and more recently in impact as measured by publication citations, and is outpacing the U.S. in the extent of R&D investment. Chinese institutions have also made noticeable jumps in various global rankings, which is a pretty big feat considering the fierce competition among the world's top universities. What we're witnessing as well are geopolitical tensions between the two countries that have impacted the higher education sector. While these two countries, the U.S. and China, are the biggest global collaborators—and they collaborate more with each other than any other country—they're also rival superpowers. As global adversaries, what we are witnessing as well is increased security concerns regarding intellectual theft and espionage. I'm going to spend some time summarizing my work for those who are not familiar to provide some further context. I and my colleagues, John Haupt and Xiaojie Li, also at the University of Arizona, have conducted numerous studies about U.S.-China scientific collaboration. And what we're observing across these studies is how the scientific pursuit of knowledge, which is fundamentally borderless, is becoming bordered in the current geopolitical environment. International collaboration, long valued as positive-sum, is being treated as zero-sum. Besides the rise of China and the accompanying political rhetoric that posed China as a so-called threat, tensions also grew among accusations, as you may recall, about the origins of SARS-CoV-2 and a corresponding sharp increase in anti-Asian hate crimes in the United States. Public opinions about China were not favorable, and thus there was not a whole lot of public resistance when the FBI's China Initiative was launched in 2018. This initiative basically signaled that anyone of Chinese descent was a potential enemy of the state, including possible Chinese Communist Party spies in our own universities, even though there was no pervasive empirical or later judicial cases that proved such a damaging assumption. Nevertheless, world-renowned Chinese scientists were falsely accused of academic espionage and their careers and personal finances ruined. In my research that followed with Xiaojie Li, with support from the Committee of 100, we surveyed about 2,000 scientists in the U.S.' top research universities during the China Initiative. And we found that one in two Chinese scientists were afraid that they were being racially profiled by the FBI. We also observed that consequently scientists, especially those with Chinese descent, were less inclined to collaborate with China, less inclined to pursue federal grants, less inclined to even stay in the United States but rather to take their expertise to another country where they felt safer to pursue their research, including in China. In sum, the federal government's attempts to weed out possible Chinese spies was highly criticized as a damaging form of racial profiling affecting even U.S. citizens and, in the end, undermined the U.S.' ability to compete with China. Especially now, as we continue to observe Chinese scientists leaving the U.S. and taking their skills and talents elsewhere. With John Haupt and two academics at Tsinghua University in China, Doctors Wen Wen and Die Hu, we asked about two hundred co-collaborators in China and in the United States how were they able to overcome such geopolitical tensions and the challenges associated with COVID-19 during the pandemic? And we did learn something somewhat unexpected, and I hope valuable. Basically, we found that mutual trust between international collaborators helped overcome such perceived hurdles, including risks of being unfairly targeted. What this tells us is that a chilling effect is certainly real and remains possible, but in the end scientists have tremendous agency on what they study, where they study, and whether or not they seek funds, or where they seek funds. Regardless of the host or home country, international collaboration is important to all countries' scientific enterprise. Coauthors from different countries improve the knowledge being produced, its applicability, enlarges global audiences, and thereby increases the impact of the work. So considering the value, yet risks, where do we begin? Firstly, federal and institutional policies, of course, matter, for better or for worse. But policies do not manufacture trust. The formation of an academic tie does not suddenly occur over a cold call in the middle of a global meltdown, as often portrayed in Hollywood. Rather, this is a gradual process. And the longevity of the relationship helps strengthen that trust over time. According to our research, these collaborative relationships begin as graduate students, postdocs, visiting researchers. They occur at academic conferences and other in-person opportunities. Cutting short-term fellowships, for example, will impact the potential of a future scientific relationship, but its effects may not be felt for years. Same with denied visas and opportunities for travel. Fewer graduate students from particular countries or fields also means a different shape when it comes to global science. U.S. for instance, was not too long ago Russia's biggest foreign scientific collaborator, with the war in Ukraine, those research relationships, as well as much—with much of the Western world, have ceased. All of this, and my related empirical research, was conducted when I was a professor at my home institution. And since July, I've been serving, as Irina mentioned, as the dean and vice president of international affairs at my own institution. And I've been thinking a lot of, what does this mean for institutional practice? For those in university leadership positions, as mine, you know this is a tough challenge. Especially as domestic demand and state funding for higher education is generally declining. And at the same time, internationalization is increasingly central to senior leadership strategies. Universities are continuing vying to attract the world's students, even despite a decline of interest from China. And at the same time, research universities in particular are quite dependent on federal grants. We have our own research security offices that need to ensure our universities have good reputations and relations with our large federal funding agencies and taking every precaution to not be seen as a vulnerable site of intellectual theft. These units tend not to operate within international affairs. And I'm very well aware that in my role of trying to attract as many students from China and develop international partnerships, all of them can be suddenly erased if a Chinese University partner does not pass visual compliance or there is a sudden presidential executive order, as we experienced under the Trump administration. I'm also very well aware that of senior leaders have to choose between my educational offerings and partnerships in China versus risking a major grant from a federal agency, I will lose. We witnessed that with the shutting down of over 100 Confucius Institutes in the U.S., despite a lack of evidence of systematic espionage occurring through these centers. Public perceptions, informed or not, strongly affect the nature of our international work, as in the case of Florida. Such negative perceptions are not one country-sided, of course. A key concern for Chinese and other international students and their parents relate to safety. Gun violence, including on our own college campuses, anti-Asian hate crimes in surrounding neighborhoods, and unfavorable political environment in which studies might be interrupted as in the case of Proclamation 10043, or visa non-renewals are all contributing factors for the decline of interest from China, and uncertain future student exchange as well. In closing, when it comes to China these days no practices are guaranteed. However, I can recommend some while also keeping in mind geopolitical conditions can suddenly change for worse, or perhaps better. I mentioned earlier the value of mutual trust. At my university, we have long-standing relationships with university leaders at Chinese institutions. We've set up dual degree programs in China. Actually, about 40 percent of our international student enrollment are through such partner relationships throughout the world, in which we go to where they are. Hiring staff who speak the language and know the culture are also essential. And, like any relationship, these arrangements have developed over time. They are not built overnight. It takes intention. It takes effort. But in my experience, as trust is established the numbers have grown, and the positive impact is still being felt. Thank you. FASKIANOS: Thank you very much for that. That was terrific. Let's go now to all of you for your questions, comments. You can use this to share best practices and what you're doing to your universities or institutions. Please click the raise hand icon on your screen to ask a question. On your iPad or tablet, you can click the “more” button to access the raise hand feature. And when you're called upon, please accept the unmute prompts, state your name and affiliation, followed by your question. You can also submit a written question, they've already started coming in, by the Q&A icon. And if you can also include your affiliation there, I would appreciate it, although we will try to make sure we identify you correctly. So let's see. I'm looking for—no raised hands yet, but we do have questions written. So first question from Denis Simon, who's a professor at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill: Many U.S. universities have curtailed their exchanges and cooperation with China. You referenced that. Officials at these universities are worried that if they appear too friendly toward China they will lose all sorts of federal funding. Are these concerns justified? Are there any regulations or legislation that actually says federal funding can be removed assuming these universities are in compliance with the export controls, et cetera? LEE: All right. Well, thanks, Denis, for your question. I know there—when I saw the list of those who signed up, I know there are many here who can speak to this directly. So I encourage those to also raise their hands and provide input in the Q&A, maybe in the form of an A instead of a Q. But in any case, going to that question, you know, it's a tough environment. And so much in my role, but what I even experienced in my research, is about that perception, that overinterpretation. So maybe signaling that we have this exchange program might draw attention in ways that might lead to suspicions that, oh, well is this, you know, somehow creating an opportunity for us to disclose military secrets? I mean, that's where we take it. A friendly exchange or visit is oftentimes now having to be scrutinized and ensuring that there is no remote violation of export controls, even in educational delivery in a non-STEM field. And what we're seeing is that this—we have our highly sensitive fields, but that kind of scrutiny we're also seeing applied to the institution more broadly. So these seemingly benign programs about language or culture, about fields that are enhanced or help promote so-called American values, are also being watched. So I believe as an institutional leader, again, as I mentioned earlier, having to deal with the possibility of unwanted or unwarranted attention versus not having that program, I think some, as Denis has pointed out, are leaning towards being more cautious. Unfortunately, China—any work with China is considered a risk, even if there is no reason for risk, as we've witnessed under—or, observed under the China Initiative. I don't know if I've fully answered that question, but please follow up if I haven't. And I know others can probably say more to that issue. FASKIANOS: Great. I'll take the next question from Peter—I don't know how to pronounce— LEE: Peter Becskehazy. Hi, Peter. (Laughs.) FASKIANOS: There you go. Thank you very much. LEE: I know Peter. FASKIANOS: All right. Good. Well, I'd love if Peter asked his question directly, if he can. Oh, good. From Pima Community College. Go ahead, Peter. Q: Hello, Jenny. Nice to see you. LEE: Hi, Peter. Q: Now my question is, the University of Arizona and other universities have had an inflow of dozens of countries, adding up to the million that you mentioned. Are other countries trying to fill in slots left vacant by Chinese students and scholars? LEE: Yeah. Great question, Peter. And I think you can also share what you've observed at Pima in terms of the patterns you've witnessed. But for us, and as we are seeing nationally, we're seeing India rise. Not at the—not at higher numbers in many institutions, compared to China, but the rate is rising. It's not so simple, though, because we also have relations in India, and trying to set up agreements, and bring students. The competition in India is intense. So even though there's a relatively so-called large market, and the U.S. has been quite successful in attracting Indian students, that is perhaps where the attention is as a more, I would say—I hate to use the word “market,”—but a stable student market. There's a lot more interest in graduate-level education globally, as we've observed. These countries that formerly didn't have capacity now do have capacity. They have online offerings. They have branch campuses, dual degrees, lots of other options. And so the niche for the U.S., whereas before we didn't really have to think about a niche, is really in graduate education. Now, of course, that's not good news for Pima, that's thinking about a community college and other kinds of educational offerings. But for us, we're thinking about India a lot. Southeast Asia, of course, has always been an important partner to us. Africa continues to be a challenge. We know that when we think about population growth, Africa is the future. There's still challenges and trying to identify places where there is capacity. But also the affordability of a U.S. education is a huge challenge. So it's a great question. And, again, I'm curious to know other places in the world people recommend. Of course, Latin America, given our location, is a key strategic partner. But again, affordability becomes an issue. And again, I'm just talking about the traditional international student who would choose to come to Arizona. Not talking about research collaboration, which is less bound by affordability issues. Irina, you're muted. FASKIANOS: How long have I been doing this? OK. (Laughs.) I'm going to take the next written question from Allison Davis-White Eyes, who is vice president for diversity, equity, and inclusion at Fielding Graduate University: We have tried to work on collaborations with European universities and African universities, and met with much difficulty. What trends are you seeing in these regions? And what are emerging global markets beyond China? LEE: Great question, Allison. I mean, if you could leave the question in the future, so because I am visually looking at the question at the same time. FASKIANOS: Oh, great. Sorry. LEE: So, Allison, I'm not sure if you're referring to academic or research. Of course, within Europe, where the government does highly subsidized tuition, it's just becomes financially a bad deal, I suppose—(laughs)—for a student in the world who would normally get a free or highly reduced tuition to pay full price at our institution. So that kind of exchange of partnership, especially when it's about—when it's financially based, becomes almost impossible from my experience. But thinking about research collaboration, it depends on the level. So if it's an institutional agreement, you know, it's—often, these MOUs tend to just be on paper. It takes quite a bit of—it's very ceremonial. You need to get legal involved. It's a whole process to get an MOU. We really don't need these non-binding MOUs for research agreements. Some countries like it, just to display that they have an MOU with a U.S. institution. But essentially, it doesn't stop me as a professor to reach out to another professor at the University of Oslo, and say, hey, let's do a study. Which we actually are doing. So, yeah, feel free to be more specific, or if you want to raise your hand or speak on—and elaborate on that question. So, again, for educational exchange, it is difficult because we are—there's already a process within the EU that makes it very affordable and highly supported within the EU, or if you're part of that bigger program. Africa, again, my challenge from my role as an institutional leader is identifying places where there is already enough mass education up through high school where one would be able to consider, first of all, being admitted to a U.S. institution, but secondly, to be able to pay the cost. FASKIANOS: Allison, do you want to expand a little bit? Q: Oh, sorry. (Laughs.) FASKIANOS: There you go. There you go. Q: Right. Dr. Lee, thank you for your response. I think it was helpful, especially regarding the subsidizing of education in Europe. We've been working on some research partnerships. And we have just—you know, really, it has just been extremely difficult with European universities. And I do think part of it has to do with the way things are subsidized in Europe. I was just wondering if there were new and different ways to do it. I do appreciate your comment about the MOUs being largely ceremonial. I agree. And would like to see something with a little more substance. And that will take some creativity and a lot of partnership and work. As for Africa, we have tried to create partnerships with South Africa. I think there's some potential there. Certainly, some excitement. We've had a few students from Nigeria, extremely bright and motivated. I just would—you know, would like to hear, maybe from some other colleagues as well on the call, if there are creative ways in working with these students as well. So, thank you. LEE: Yeah, no. And just to follow up quickly, and, again, opportunities for others to share, academic collaboration, as I mentioned during my remarks, is largely built upon mutual trust. And not to say it can't happen from top down, but really does—is most successful from bottom up. And I don't mean to refer to professors at the bottom, but meaning those that are actually engaged with that work. And so just some considerations is rather than a top-down initiative or strategy, is to identify those that are visiting scholars, already from that country, have networks within that country. What's interesting, as I learned in my current role, is how little my predecessors worked with professors in these area's studies programs, because they're oftentimes treated as a separate or having different interests in mind when actually there is a lot of overlap to identify those that are actually there. Allison, by the way, I lived in South Africa for eight years. And I know it actually takes a long time. My Fulbright started off as a one year, and I had to extend it because even getting the data while I was on the ground takes time. And I'll be honest, I think part of it was taking some time just to build trust the intentions of my work, what was I going to do with that data, how is that going to be used? Was it actually going to be ways to empower them? You know, for those who study international collaboration, know this north and south divide, and I think there are places in the world that are—maybe have some guardrails up from those—not saying this is what's happening in your institution—but someone that they don't know coming from the Global North to study someone else in the Global South. And so how do we create or initiate a collaboration that is clearly, expressly mutual at the onset? And, again, this is where trust can be operationalized lots of different ways, but that even begins with that initial message. I mean, I remember when I started my work, nobody responded to me. They're like, who are you? And I don't care who you are or what your CV says. And it takes time. You know, building that relationship, and that person introducing me to that other person. Like, you know, this is how scientific networks form. And I think, to some extent, this is also how institutional collaborative relationships also form. FASKIANOS: Thank you. I'm going to go next to David Moore, who has a raised hand. Q: OK, thank you. I just got unmuted. FASKIANOS: Great. Q: Lee, I appreciate your comments. And I heard your reference to Florida earlier. I don't know if we have colleagues on this call from Florida, but I think they'll know what I'm about to say. I'm the dean of international education at Broward College in Fort Lauderdale. And as of tomorrow, December 1, Florida has to—all institutions in Florida, public institutions, colleges and universities, must be completely devoid of any partnerships in China. And not just China. There are seven countries of concern. And you probably can cite them, most of you would know the other six. But of the seven countries, Broward had four partnerships in China alone, none in the other countries that were active. And so we are now officially done, have to be. And I've had to notify the partners as well as our accrediting body, because these were international centers of Broward where they literally offer—we offered associate degrees, two-year degrees. And students could then transfer to an institution in the United States. Now, this didn't catch us too much by surprise because two and a half years ago our Florida legislature started in on this, really probably before that, where they isolated universities in Florida and said: You cannot do research—sensitive research, whatever, you know, engineering, computer science, et cetera—any research without notifying the state. And there's an elaborate process that had to be—you know, they had to go through to do this. But now it's not just research institutions. Now it's not just those kinds of collaborations. It is, in fact, all partnerships of any kind. We had to end our agent agreements where we were recruiting students from China that were—where the companies were based in China. And in course our programs were not research. They're just general education, two-year associate's degree, maybe some business. But we've been informed now it's completely done. And so I'm actually looking for institutions outside of Florida who might be willing to take over the role that we've had in transcripting students who later want to come to the United States. At least for the first two years in China, and then transferring to the upper division to the U.S. So I'm not sure. You're probably quite familiar with this. I don't know if you know the details of how it was worked out in practice. We were the only community college in the state that had any partnerships. So we were the ones that had to desist. So I want to—there are probably people on the call that are familiar with this, but there might be many others. And I just wanted to say that I'm looking to, you know, open that door to other institutions outside of Florida that might be willing in, yes, take a risk to go into China, but to—I've always felt that these kinds of programs were very good to build relationships, partnerships, communication. Ambassadors really. Where we feel like we were representing American education, whatever, you know, we call American values, democracy, you know, community. We thought we were doing good. But we found out we were—we were not. We were—we were doing something that went opposed to the prevailing political climate, at least in Florida. So that's my comment. I think people should know about it. And thank you for letting me speak to it a bit. Maybe someone will speak up and say they're interested in they can get in touch with me, David Moore at Broward College, Fort Lauderdale, Florida. LEE: David, thank you for sharing what you did. This is a really important example of where other states could very well head. And what's interesting, as David noted, we're talking about a community college. When we normally think about cutting ties, it's usually around the concerns about national security. Now, how this translates to a two-year degree that is solely educational based is a pretty far stretch, and yet is being impacted quite severely. So I think we should continue to follow this example—unfortunate example. And, David, yeah, your partners have reached out to my office, and I'm sure to others. But thank you for being available. Q: You're welcome. We have partners—we are also working with your Jakarta, Indonesia center there. So we have that connection. Thank you. LEE: Mmm hmm. Thanks. FASKIANOS: And if anybody wants to share contact information in the Q&A box, you can certainly do that. That would be great. There is a written question from Tutaleni Asino at Oklahoma State University: There was an article today in SEMAFOR highlighting that there are currently 350 U.S. students studying in China compared to 11,000 in 2019. Comparatively, there are 300,000 Chinese students in the United States. Is this a one-way problem, where the U.S. is not investing in international engagements as a result of being more inward looking and other countries having more options of who to collaborate with? LEE: Yeah. Tutaleni, that's—I think your question is an answer. And I think it's—I agree with your observation. So we are seeing that as there's state and public disinvestment in higher education, and including scrutiny about international higher education, we're also seeing a decline and cutting of foreign language programs in the United States. So here we are, a monolingual country whose students mostly go to Europe or other English-speaking countries to study abroad. A very limited number of international—U.S. students who pursue undergraduate degrees in a foreign country. And knowing that the future is global and international, at least in my opinion, does not set the U.S. up well to be globally competitive, even though much of its international policy is around this rhetoric of we need to compete with China. And so you raise a good point. How is this possible if U.S. citizens don't speak Chinese, or have no interest in learning about Chinese culture, or there's reduced opportunities even in our own institutions, I think is something to think about and ask more questions about. FASKIANOS: I'm going to take the next question from Zhen Zhu, chair and professor of marketing, director of faculty excellence, and director for international engagement at Suffolk University: How do you see the trend of U.S. students' interest in study abroad to China? LEE: There is actually growing interest. As many of you know, China—offering Chinese language in high schools is not as unusual as it used to be. There is growing interest as students are thinking about employability in global markets in multinational or international organizations or corporations. It would be fundamental, in fact, for someone who has any interest in international work to pick up the language if they can, and at your own institution. FASKIANOS: Great. Let's see. From—I'm going to take the next question from Jeff Riedinger: Is there a role for universities to play in knowledge diplomacy to sustain international relationships and collaborations in addressing global problems such as climate change and pandemics when national governments may be at odds with each other? LEE: Thanks, Jeff. And hi, Jeff. I'm just going to read over that question so I can kind of digest it a bit. Is there a role for institutions to play in knowledge diplomacy, such as climate change, pandemics, when national governments may be at odds with each other? Absolutely, 200 percent. It is occurring—knowledge diplomacy, science diplomacy. That one individual going on a Fulbright or coming to study here for some extended visit, having these collaborations and, ultimately, you know, science—knowledge production—I mean, there's no bounds. And when we think about the kind of research that may not occur because of these national governments are at odds when it comes to addressing climate change or other global issues, you know, the world is paying somewhat of a price when it comes to that in—when there are overarching concerns about national security. So, you know, my issue has always been with policy you overlook nuance, and with sweeping policies that overlook the disciplinary distinctions and contributions, what is lost in the pursuit of trying to stay ahead of another country in fields and areas that really have no economic or military value, right? But yet, have an important cultural value, or maybe will address something bigger, such as COVID-19. So as I mentioned, the work that I referenced earlier about U.S.-Chinese scientists coming together during COVID-19, were actually scientists who studied COVID-19 together. And again, this was not—this was fraught with risks. They were very well aware that there was a lot of scrutiny about any research about COVID-19 coming from China. There was scrutiny about, you know, where the data was held, who was analyzing it, who was funding it. And yet, these scientists took these risks in order to address how does the world deal with the pandemic. And this was based on interviews of those studies that were actually successful and published. This is where that mutual trust, as I've mentioned earlier, is so important. And without that mutual trust, these studies, I'm pretty certain, would never have been published, because it was not an easy path when it comes to that particular geopolitical climate during the pandemic. FASKIANOS: Jenny, I'm just going to ask a question. President Biden and President Xi met during APEC. Did anything come out of that meeting that could affect U.S.-China academic collaboration? LEE: Yeah. You know, this is tough. I mean, how do you analyze political statements? What do they really mean? And what is really going to change? I think what's clear is that there's an acknowledgment that we're interdependent, but we're also adversaries. Almost a love/hate codependent, in a relationship that we can't just easily separate but we do need each other. But the form that it takes, I think there's an understanding it needs to be more specific. And I don't think that has been clarified yet. I realize I missed part of Jeff's question on what can institutions do? That's such a good question. And I got more into the topic than the actual to-do. What can institutions do? Honestly—(laughs)—I'll just speak as a researcher, to back off a bit, right? To let scientists do what they want to do. Yes, we need to follow disclosures. We need to make sure there's no conflicts of interest. We need to follow all of these procedures. But what I also found during the China Initiative, there was also this chilling climate in which there's an overinterpretation that may put institutions at risk. And to my knowledge, institutions were not at risk to the extent to which their scientists, especially those of Chinese descent, felt scrutinized. FASKIANOS: Thank you. We have a raised hand from Dan Whitman. Q: OK, I think I'm unmuted. Thank you, Irina. And thanks, Professor Lee, for mentioning the Great Wall that that prevents us from dealing with even Europeans who have subsidized education or Africans who have no money. And just an anecdote, since you have welcomed anecdotes, I am an adjunct at George Washington University. But totally unrelated to that, just for free and just for fun, pro bono, nobody pays, nobody gets paid. A course that I'm giving by webinar, it's zero cost. The topic is crisis management, but it could be any topic. And in that group, which there are about eighty people who tune in twice a week, fifteen Kenyans, twenty-five Ukrainians, and forty Kazakhs. I mean, I don't know if there's ever been exchange between Kazakhstan and Kenya. Anyway, my point is things can be done. We share it for free. What motivates the students? A certificate. It's so easy to give them a certificate. And in many countries, they very highly value that, even though it's not a—there's no formality, there's no formal academic credit. But the students are very motivated. And possibly, there may be universities in the U.S. that could—that might want to give a professor a small stipendium to do an informal webinar course, which would create connections, which would be zero cost, basically, and would bridge that gap of funding that you've alluded to. Thank you. LEE: Yeah. Dan, thank you for that. And I think this leads to a kind of a spin-off comment about certificates. Absolutely. Micro-credentials or alternative forms of education, where there's maybe not a full-fledged undergraduate degree but some certificate, I think, is important niche, especially for returning adults or communities where they're not able to afford to take time off. So that flexibility, and obviously now with online education, just becomes so much more accessible and very low cost. Something else to keep in mind, though, is that, depending on the institution you're from, that will make a difference in certificates. I mean, an institution like George Washington University offering a certificate may have some symbolic or perceived value that may be higher than an institution that is lower or are not ranked at all. So this is where, unfortunately—I'm a big critic of global rankings. But unfortunately, it does play a role in how that certificate is being perceived and the attractiveness of that certificate. But absolutely, this is definitely a way to open access especially for places in the world that just cannot physically move or have the funds to support their studies. FASKIANOS: Great. There are two comments/questions in the Q&A that I wanted to give you a chance to respond to about Africa, from Tutaleni Asino and Fodei Batty. Dr. Asino talks about English is the language of instruction and governments in Africa where they're funding education to a higher degree, and thinks that there are opportunities there, but it sounds like all fifty-four countries are grouped together. And Dr. Batty talks a little bit about there are a lot of students from African countries pursuing graduate education in the United States. But South Africa is usually an exception to the higher education American norm in Africa. Most South Africans don't like to travel, especially travel to America. I thought maybe you could just clarify some—respond to those comments. LEE: Yeah. Absolutely. Thank you for sharing those comments. There's a book I edited called Intra-Africa Student Mobility. And I agree with the comments. And one of the things I didn't mention that I think is important to help us understand the broader global context is that there's actually considerable international activity within the continent. And there's actually considerable intra-Africa mobility within the continent. South Africa is the most important country player in Sub-Saharan Africa. It is globally ranked—has more globally ranked institutions than any other African country. And so South Africa then becomes an important hub. And, yes, as an English-speaking, among many other languages, country, that does attract African students to go oftentimes for a similar sense of shared culture, despite sometimes different languages and customs and backgrounds. And yet, nevertheless, South Africa is an important player within the continent. Not to say that there is no international mobility occurring, but there is increased capacity within the continent that would allow students and interested students to travel within the continent. Not the same extent, of course, as Europe. But the least we're seeing that rise over time. And so it's called Intra-Africa Student Mobility. Chika Sehoole and I coedited the book. We were able to get about eight African scholars to talk about the various reasons students would choose that particular African country, and what draw them. And what was really interesting about this phenomenon is that it goes against this prevailing notion of Africa's victim of brain drain or all going to the north. That's actually not what is happening. But that there is capacity building within the continent. So in trying to answer a different question, I skirted over a lot of the things I could go further into. But hopefully that book will shed light on what's happening within that continent, at least from the perspective of eight different countries. FASKIANOS: Fantastic. Thank you for that. I'm going to go next to Jonathan Scriven at Washington Adventist University in Maryland: What are some of the strategies universities are using to make education more affordable in the United States? If that is a challenge, are schools investing more or less in setting up campuses in foreign countries as a way to reach foreign students? LEE: I'm just going to read over that question. OK, yeah. Great question, Jonathan. So what's happening in my institution and many others is a way to attract students is we're providing considerable aid, merit aid, financial aid, aid even to international students. The majority may not even be paying the full sticker price. Now this, of course, will affect the revenue that would have otherwise been generated, but nevertheless is a way to deal with the fierce competition across U.S. institutions for these top students. So how to make it affordable? There's a lot of aid going around at the undergraduate, not just the graduate, levels. And so what are institutions doing? Well, for example, at the University of Arizona for our dual degrees, it's a fraction of the cost of what it would cost to be a student at our main campus. When you have a combination of hybrid or online delivery with a campus partner maybe providing most of the gen ed's and then we would teach most of the major courses as an example, that does significantly lower the cost where that student will still get a bona fide University of Arizona degree, just like they would at main campus. So these alternative forms of delivery certainly make it more affordable, especially for those that opt to stay in their home country and receive an online education, or a flipped classroom model, or a dual degree. FASKIANOS: Great. Denis Simon, if you can—why don't you ask your question? Q: Here I am. OK. Recently, on a trip to China in September, a number of faculty have told me they're no longer wanting to send their best students abroad. They want to keep them in China. And this is all part of the rise of Chinese universities, et cetera. And so it may not be simply the souring of Sino-U.S. relations that has causal effect here, but simply the fact that China now is becoming a major, you know, educational powerhouse. And that also could change the dynamics. For example, even the BRI countries could start to send their students to China instead of sending them to the United States. Do you see anything evolving like this or—and what might be the outcome? LEE: Yeah. Spot on, David. That halo effect of a U.S. degree is not the same as it was when I was a university student. Chinese students, as well as students in the world, are much more savvy. They have access to information. They have access to rankings. They know all universities are not the same. And they know that they have some institutions that are highly ranked and may offer better quality education than the U.S. So that the image of a U.S. degree, of course, is not as universally perceived as it may have been, I don't know, pre-internet, or without the—all sorts of rankings in which institutions are rated against one another. And absolutely, Chinese institutions are very difficult to get into, fiercely competitive, producing far more scientific output than some of our leading institutions. And there's another factor when it comes to Asian culture just more broadly speaking, is that social network tie. Sociologists refer to it as social capital. When a Chinese student, a Korean student, Japanese student decides to study in the United States, they may lose that social tie that may possibly put them in a disadvantage when they decide to come back and compete for a position when they may just have that U.S. credential, but may have either lessened or no longer have that relationship that may have allowed them to get a position at the university, or in a place where that alumni network would have been especially useful. So again, I don't want to generalize, you know, in any place to the world, but there is that component that I think sometimes is missed in the literature. Maintaining that social network is pretty key, especially as jobs, of course, global, you know, unemployment—places where students are competing for positions need to have every edge possible. So that also can be part of that reason they decide to stay. FASKIANOS: Great. The next question from Michael Kulma, who's at the University of Chicago. He's following on David Moore's comments about Florida: Do you know how many other states in the U.S. are enacting or are considering such policies against partnerships with China? LEE: I do not know the answer. So if anyone wants to raise their hand and share about their own state, or put it on the answer part of the question and answer. There are related concerns about DEI, diversity, equity, and inclusion. Some of that may spill over to China. Hopefully, at some point at the Council of Foreign Relations will have a discussion on Israel and Hamas conflict and how institutions are dealing with that. And so we're seeing a pretty challenging political environment that is clearly spilling over to our classrooms and to our international activities, our domestic recruitment. But I'm not answering your question, Michael. (Laughs.) I'll leave it up to someone else to answer. FASKIANOS: Great. Thank you. So we don't have very much time left. I thought maybe you could, given your research and expertise, could suggest resources—recommend resources for higher ed leaders and administrators to better understand how to promote collaboration. LEE: Sure. So promoting collaboration, it really—each person at a time. You know, again, MOUs may be signed, and maybe overarching presidents will come together and have an agreement, but there's no guarantee that will ever happen. I'd love to do a study on how many MOUs never actually materialized into real action. So where do we begin? International affairs SIOs out there, identify who are your area studies experts? Who are your visiting postdocs? Who are your Fulbright scholars from other parts of the world? They all represent their own network and are certainly are valuable resources to consider. What I've sometimes have heard even at my own institution is, you know, how do we bring these people to the table? Why are they not at the table to begin with, and then how do we bring them there? And this is a relatively low-cost way to go about this, right? Like, faculty engaged in service. What kind of opportunities can your university provide for faculty service that is aligned with their area of expertise, the areas of the world they represent, the networks they have? And many of—some of you already have experienced this directly. These partnerships often begin with our alumni, international—former international students who decide to go back home. So, again, there's just a lot of exciting opportunity. I love this field because it's never boring. There's always new ways to grow, expand new partners. But it really does begin with that essential element of trust. And that often begins with our own institutions and identifying those who've already started to build that network. FASKIANOS: Wonderful. Thank you very much. Really appreciate your being with us and for sharing your expertise and background, Dr. Lee. It's been fantastic. And to all of you, for your questions and comments, and sharing your experiences as well. You can follow Dr. Lee on X, the app formerly known as Twitter, at @JennyJ_Lee. I will send out a link to this webinar, the transcript, and the video, as well as the link to the book—your book that you mentioned, and any other resources that you want to share with the group. And I encourage you all to follow @CFR_academic on X, visit CFR.org, ForeignAffairs.com, and ThinkGlobalHealth.org for research and analysis on global issues. We also—just putting in a plug for our other series, Academic Webinar series, which is designed for students. We just sent out the winter/spring lineup and we hope that you will share that with your colleagues and your students. It is a great way for them to have access to practitioner scholars and to talk with students from around the country. So if you haven't received that lineup, you can email cfracademic@CFR.org, and we will share that with you. So, again, thank you, Jenny, for being with us, and to all of you. And wishing you safe and happy holidays. And good luck closing out this semester before we get to the holidays. (Laughs.) So thank you again. (END)

In this episode, Matthew talks to Professor Lee Elliot Major OBE, Lee is the country's first Professor of Social Mobility. Appointed by the University of Exeter to be a global leader in the field, his work is dedicated to improving the prospects of disadvantaged young people.Lee discusses his book Equity in education: Levelling the playing field of learning as well as outlining other famous sociological studies and how they relate to his findings.You can view Lee's TED talk here - • How can we level the playing field of... Contact details - https://education.exeter.ac.uk/staff/...

In this episode of That'll Preach we take an intriguing journey into the heart of biblical scholarship to scrutinize the reliability of the Old Testament. Join us as we engage in a captivating conversation with distinguished Old Testament scholar, Professor Peter Lee, from RTS (Reformed Theological Seminary). We delve deep into the questions that have sparked both curiosity and debate for centuries: "Can We Trust the Old Testament?" Professor Lee brings his extensive expertise to the forefront, shedding light on the historical context, authorship, and the concrete reliability of the Old Testament scriptures. Discover the answers to pressing questions, including: What is the role of oral tradition in the transmission of the Old Testament? Why are the Dead Sea Scrolls so significant? How do we understand authorship in the Old Testament? How do we gain confidence in the historicity of the Old Testament? Were details embellished? Whether you're a devout believer seeking to deepen your faith or a curious skeptic eager to explore the historical credibility of these sacred writings, this episode offers a balanced and well-informed examination that underscores the unwavering reliability of the Old Testament.

Today's episode takes us to Northwest Ohio as we probe into the intriguing life and ideologies of Professor Lee Strang. Engulfed in legal and societal debates, Strang plays multiple roles - a University of Toledo Law School professor, public charter school founder, anti-abortion activist, and advocate for conservative think tanks at Ohio law schools. We navigate the highs and lows of his highly charged Christian nationalist perspective, addressing his influence on law, education, and society.We peer into Strang's interpretation of the First Amendment and discuss why atheism and secular humanism do not fit into his definition of religion. We unveil his stance on the constitutional protection of unborn fetuses and how this belief fuels his anti-abortion activism. Unmasking the educational philosophy behind the Northwest Ohio Classical Academy, Strang's brainchild, we bring to light its approach to controversial topics and commitment to a classical education curriculum that tries to hide its religious underpinnings.Finally, we bare the threads of Strang's Christian Nationalist influence and the appearance of a quid pro quo with the leaders of the Ohio Republican Party and state anti-abortion groups like the Center for Christian Virtue. We scrutinize his endeavors to pass State Issue 1 alongside State Senator and former student Rob McColley and the implications for Ohio's political landscape. Regardless of personal agreement or dissent with Strang's beliefs, his impact on Ohio and beyond is undeniable. Tune in for an exploration of modern conservatism through the lens of one influential figure.Show Notes00:45 Wanting To Hear Different Voices On The Podcast04:48 Introducing Professor Lee Strang11:01 Strang Supports Originalism17:32 Strang Claims 1St Amendment Doesn't Apply To Atheists And Secular Humanists24:50 Strang Is An Anti-Abortion Activist29:45 Strang Founds Religiously Based Charter School Disguised As A Non-Religious School43:23 Strang Gets Favorable Local Press Stories Because Of Personal ConnectionsSupport the showSubscribe to our free newsletterCheck out our MerchFind us on Twitter(for now) Find us on InstagramFind us on Counter SocialFind us on Mastadon

It's all very well demanding that everything happens NOW, but we're actually going to do - or not - about climate change is all about negotiation.  What happens inside those fusty negotiating halls?  How does one negotiate well and get what one wants, whether on climate or things more domestic? And does the climate have the time for us to negotiate our way out of a paper bag? Joining Dave this episode is Camilla Born MBE. Camilla's been at more top tables than you've had hot dinners, and has been there for the crunchy bits of some of the planet's most important negotiations - not least when advising COP26 President Alok Sharma.  Find out how Camilla gets her way, and what she thinks about protestors demanding the seemingly impossible. Follow Camilla on Twitter @camillaborn. We don't talk about it in the episode but Camilla and I recommend this moving piece by Pete Betts, a legendary negotiator, reflecting on everything he's learned. Owl noises: -- 08:08: Anchoring bias explained over at the Decision Lab. -- 10:16: I should probably give due kudos to the thing that I read, which is these top 10 negotiating tips by the Harvard Law School's negotiation programme. -- 16:56: it really does matter whether we phase coal 'down' or 'out', and Carbon Brief explains why. -- 19:52: Professor Lee's thoughts on tactical empathy and much else - including more Camilla - in this Inside Science episode on negotiation. Your Brain on Climate is a podcast about human psychology vs the climate crisis: what we think, why we think it, and how it all adds up to a planet-sized emergency.  Contact the show:  @brainclimate on Twitter, or hello@yourbrainonclimate.com. Support the show on Patreon: www.patreon.com/yourbrainonclimate. The show is hosted by me, Dave Powell, who you can find @powellds on Twitter.  Original music by me, and I twiddle all the production knobs too. Show logo by Arthur Stovell at www.designbymondial.com.   

Unveiling the shocking truth about social mobility in the UK! In this explosive episode, we sit down with the world's first Professor for Social Mobility, Professor Lee Elliott Major OBE. With over 20 years of experience in improving the lives of disadvantaged children, Professor Elliott Major is a highly acclaimed education expert and published author of several books. As the ex-CEO of The Sutton Trust, he knows all too well the challenges that working-class kids face in the UK today. In this candid interview, Professor Elliott Major shares his own struggles with his lower socioeconomic background and sheds light on why it's harder than ever for disadvantaged young people to succeed. Don't miss this eye-opening conversation with one of the leading voices in education research and policy!

David Lee Shillinglaw Distinguished Service Professor Ka Yee C. Lee from the Department of Chemistry has multiple roles at the University of Chicago. As a provost, researcher, and mentor for her students, she constantly aims to bring a positive impact to people and things around her. In this episode, Professor Lee describes her school days as a head girl in Hong Kong, her research passion, her ultimate vision as a professor, and her role in making the University's campus in Hong Kong come to life.

In December 2022, nuclear fusion ignition occurred at the Lawrence Livermore National Lab. Physicists have pursued the technology to achieve such a break through for decades. Nuclear fusion power promises limitless, clean energy. It is the energy that fuels the sun and the stars. --- Send in a voice message: https://anchor.fm/james-herlihy/message

If you're a family law attorney, you may not realize you are applying principles of constitutional law all the time. I speak with family law attorney Elizabeth Billies and constitutional law Professor Randy Lee about just that, as they prepare for their panel at the PBA Family Law Section Meeting in Hershey over the January 13th weekend, where they will examine the recent Dobbs decision and other family law/constitutional law crossover issues. Randy Lee teaches constitutional law, professional responsibility, torts and various writing and advocacy courses. Professor Lee has taught previously at the Villanova and University of Pittsburgh Law Schools and in the Harvard University Summer Program. The moot court teams Professor Lee has co-coached with Professor Kearney have advanced to the National Appellate Advocacy Championship three times, and their 1993 team was recognized for the third best brief in the nation. Professor Lee is a frequent speaker for the Pennsylvania Bar Institute and has also done programs for the Pennsylvania Office of General Counsel, the Pennsylvania Attorney General's Office, and the Pennsylvania House of Representatives. Elizabeth Billies is a Partner at Dischell, Bartle & Dooley, PC, in Lansdale, PA, and concentrates her practice in all aspects of family law. Prior to her current position, she was law clerk for the Honorable Susan Devlin Scott of the Bucks County Court of Common Pleas, the former President Judge and Administrative Judge of Family Court. She has contributed articles to the Pennsylvania Family Lawyer and has presented on various family law topics at the Pennsylvania Bar Association, PBI as well as on family law related podcasts and webinars. You can also find her writings on her blog, The Divorce Lawyer Life. Ms. Billies received her B.A. from University of Wisconsin-Madison and her J.D. from Villanova University School of Law. *audio editing, voice over & music by Nick DeMatteo

The topic of this episode is: “Partisan polarization: Is it crippling Congress?”My guest is Frances Lee. She is a professor of politics and public affairs at Princeton University and a top scholar on Congress. She is the author and co-author of many articles and books on Congress, and has written for popular publications including the Atlantic magazine and the New York Times. Most recently she and James Curry published, The Limits of Party: Congress and Lawmaking in a Polarized Era (Chicago 2020), which analyzes and addresses the subject of this episode—polarization in our national legislature.Kevin Kosar:Welcome to Understanding Congress, a podcast about the first branch of government. Congress is a notoriously complex institution and few Americans think well of it, but Congress is essential to our republic. It's a place where our pluralistic society is supposed to work out its differences and come to agreement about what our laws should be, and that is why we are here to discuss our national legislature and to think about ways to upgrade it so it can better serve our nation. I'm your host, Kevin Kosar, and I'm a resident scholar at the American Enterprise Institute, a think tank in Washington, D.C.Professor Lee, welcome to the podcast.Frances E. Lee:Thank you, Kevin. It's great to be here.Kevin Kosar:Let's start by ensuring that we all are on the same page: you, I, and listeners alike. When we speak of Congress, what do we mean by the term partisan polarization?Frances E. Lee:Partisan polarization has multiple meanings and I think that's probably why you began with this question.A layman's or a dictionary definition of polarization means division into two sharply contrasting groups. Congress is clearly polarized in this sense. Congress sees much more partisan conflict. Conflict in Congress breaks down more reliably on partisan lines than it did throughout most of the 20th century. We routinely see votes that pit 90% or more Democrats against 90% or more Republicans, a partisan divide that's more deep and predictable than we used to see.However, by partisan polarization, political scientists often mean something more technical. In its most rigorous form, the concept of polarization is grounded in spatial theory. It rests on a theorized choice space in which policy preferences are ranged on an underlying continuum from left to right. In this sense, parties become more polarized as the preferences of members become more distinctly bimodal, and as the two parties' modes move farther apart from one another.It's far from clear that parties are polarized in this second sense. The problem is that the issues at stake in congressional politics are diverse. On some issues, the congressional parties have moved closer together and on some issues, they've moved farther apart. There's little doubt that the post-Trump parties in Congress are

Anglia Ruskin University Professor Catherine Lee (right) and Marketing Executive Hannah Hagon join Linda & Suzie this week. Professor Lee's own experiences while teaching in secondary schools during the years […]

This week on PNN, our founder Rick Spisak has another interview with Professor Wendy Lynne Lee of the Commonwealth University of Pennsylvania. Professor Lee has made a special study of the impact right-wing groups have had on politics and academia, delivered with humor and wit.  I will discuss the dishonest judicial scam aka 'originalism.' I will cite the work of noted constitutional scholar and Dean of the UCLA Law School, Erwin Chemerinski as documentation. To put it bluntly, 'originalism' is the tool of choice for conservatives determined to limit human rights to a certain subset, namely "white, Christian, straight males.' There is no other logical outcome if you follow the idea of 'originalism' to its pre-ordained conclusion. While this may sound purely academic, the ramifications of allowing this false theory to continue will result in the complete erosion of human rights for minorities.  And of course, we will have our "Jackass of the Week Award." Come join us.  Jeanine 

In this episode of See generally, University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School Professor Sophia Lee joins Kristen Marino to discuss her research in legal history, constitutional law, and administrative law. First, Professor Lee explains the relevance of legal history and her decision to become a legal historian. Then, she describes the historical influence of both court and non-court actors in shaping the meaning of the U.S. Constitution. Finally, Professor Lee discusses her forthcoming article, Racial Justice and Administrative Procedure. Her work analyzes the impact of the Administrative Procedure Act on racial justice movements from a historical perspective, describing ways in which administrative procedure both helped and hindered racial justice efforts. Interview by Kristen Marino, Media Editor, Vol. 171, University of Pennsylvania Law Review. Produced and edited by Andrew Gormley. Cover Art by Emily Horwitz, Online Executive Editor, Vol. 170, University of Pennsylvania Law Review. Transcript. Cite as: See generally, A Conversation with Professor Sophia Lee, U. Pa. L. Rev. (Nov. 8, 2022), https://anchor.fm/see-generally-podcast. © University of Pennsylvania Law Review 2022.

Professor Paul Lee's clinic utilises the most advanced equipment and techniques and works with some of the world's top musculoskeletal experts, to help patients get the best possible care, and kickstart their recovery. Visit http://professorlee.uk (http://professorlee.uk) to learn Professor Lee, and advanced ACL reconstruction techniques.

In September, I visited South Korea for the first time and I also had the opportunity to see the demilitarized zone. Just before my visit, I talked to Sung-Yoon Lee, Kim Koo-Korea Foundation Professor of Korean Studies and Assistant Professor at Tufts University. Our discussion was focused more on North Korea and the regime in Pyongyang. So what can we expect from Kim Jong-un and from his sister Kim Yo-jong? In fact, Professor Lee's new book will be exactly about this as its title is - The Sister: The extraordinary story of Kim Yo Jong, the most powerful woman in North Korea. Listen to our conversation. And if you enjoy what I do, please support me on Ko-fi! Thank you. https://ko-fi.com/amatisak --- Send in a voice message: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/andrej-matisak/message

Water utilities are tasked with providing clean, affordable water to their constituents, yet, a growing number of utilities are charging high prices for water and/or carrying out policies that decrease, rather than increase, water access. Participatory governance, which aims to enable those who are most closely affected by a problem to influence how policymakers solve that problem, may offer a path to a more just water policy. In “Turning Participation into Power: A Water Justice Case Study,” Prof. Jaime Lee of the University of Baltimore School of Law offers a revamped model of participatory governance she dubs the “Constituent Empowerment Model.” The model, which was recently implemented in Baltimore, Maryland, goes beyond traditional community involvement mechanisms and has the lofty goal of shifting power dynamics. In this episode, Linda Breggin, a Senior Attorney at ELI and Lecturer in Law at Vanderbilt Law School, speaks with Professor Lee to learn more. ★ Support this podcast ★

Hurting in your knees or hips? Professor Lee will fix you right up! Call him at 0330-001-0048 to set up an appointment for some world-class orthopedic treatment today! Find more details here https://www.professorlee.uk (https://www.professorlee.uk)

Looking for the best alternative therapy and regeneration treatments for athletic injuries and joint conditions? Professor Lee (0330-001-0048) is definitely your leading contact - he treated an entire UK premier League football team with groundbreaking results. For more details, go to https://www.professorlee.uk (https://www.professorlee.uk)

This 1999 Spike Lee film features a heatwave in New York in 1977, rolling blackouts, a deranged serial killer on the loose, disco & punk rock, orgies, infidelities, vigilantes, the Mob...and oh so much more! Did Spike Lee manage to cover all of those bases? Oh yes. Mad respect for Professor Lee. Please join us, but also please check out the film for yourself. Here is a terrific retrospective and dialogue Elvis Mitchel conducted with Spike Lee: https://youtu.be/pAkER9YPjaQ. Here's a frank episode of Charlie Rose with Mira Sorvino and John Leguizamo. They are enchantingly down to earth. https://charlierose.com/videos/9425.

The search for the origin of life is nothing new. Abiogenesis - life from non life - has fascinated and frustrated science for countless years. But what if we've been going about it the wrong way?PROFESSOR LEE CRONIN holds the Regius chair of chemistry at the University of Glasgow. His primary interests are in the creation of artificial lifeforms using inorganic chemistry.MARK from Evolution Soup talks to Lee about his 'Inorganica' experiments, the nature of living things, why inorganic 'dead stuff' matters and - most importantly - why evolution is the engine that powers it all. #evolution #abiogenesis #lifeLINKS FOR LEE CRONIN:LEE'S TWITTER: https://twitter.com/leecroninLAB SITE: http://www.croninlab.comLAB TWITTER: https://twitter.com/CroninLabUniversity of Glasgow: https://www.gla.ac.uk/University of Glasgow Drone Footage by ZICODIANOrginal video interview:  https://bit.ly/3G0vdg3'INORGANICA' (short film with Lee Cronin by Aeon) https://bit.ly/3b12zxwEVOLUTION SOUPYouTube: http://www.youtube.com/c/evolutionsoupFacebook: https://www.facebook.com/evolutionsoup/Pinterest: https://www.pinterest.co.uk/evolutionsoup/Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/evolution_soup/RSS feed: https://feeds.buzzsprout.com/354743.rss Support the show

Interested in applying for the Greensboro College Analytics Apprenticeship Program? Apply here: https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSfWOCoe7e_nSKtFi9kA7jsnMM5-fWfulQ9SgbJDUsk7zPISyQ/viewform?usp=sf_linkJoin our discord:https://discord.gg/hMueC9hmEjIn this livestream Lee Feinberg will talk about data analytics and how to craft a compelling story using data.Welcome to the How to Get an Analytics Job channel. Discover how you fit into the analytics marketplace, what skills you should build, and how to land your analytics dream job. Analytics agency owner John David Ariansen and Economics Department Chair Dr. Hall will give you tips and tricks to land your dream job and level up your analytics career.Check Out Our PlaylistsHow to Get an Analytics Job Podcast:https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLBvzkZLydYX0D28bbnfRCV6M4zMQrhXsdGreensboro College Analytics Lecture Series : https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLBvzkZLydYX2UenX5FGME-n-KDjvKmeKpLooking to land an analytics job? Sounds like you need a solid resume... Sign up for our email list to get a free analytics resume guide: https://mailchi.mp/df01df1e8856/analyticsjobFollow us on LinkedIn:John David Ariansenhttps://www.linkedin.com/in/johndavidariansen/Daniel Hallhttps://www.linkedin.com/in/daniel-hall-088b1115/Want to learn some analytics skills? Check out John David's courses below:Tableau Desktop Specialist Guidehttps://www.udemy.com/course/tableau-desktop-specialist-certification-guide/?referralCode=AC6F2FDED8C5A0040276Power BI Top Skillshttps://www.linkedin.com/learning/power-bi-top-skills/top-skills-for-power-bi

Professor Lee's weekly variety Show

In this episode I talk to a philosopher and best selling author who may be the world's expert on bridging the gap to talk to science deniers.  This is the second podcast in series on how to change minds and influence people using the Rational Art of War to spread The Rational View. Lee McIntyre is a Research Fellow at the Center for Philosophy and History of Science at Boston University. Formerly Executive Director of the Institute for Quantitative Social Science at Harvard University, McIntyre is the bestselling author of POST-TRUTH (MIT Press, 2018)  -- along with thirteen other works of fiction and nonfiction, including DARK AGES (2006), and THE SCIENTIFIC ATTITUDE (2019). McIntyre has made appearances on CNN, PBS, NPR and the BBC -- and has spoken at the United Nations, the Aspen Institute, and the Vatican. He starred in the docu-series INFODEMIC: Global Conversations on Science and Misinformation. In November, 2018, McIntyre went undercover at the Flat Earth International Conference in Denver, Colorado, as research for his newest book, HOW TO TALK TO A SCIENCE DENIER (2021), which resulted in over a hundred media appearances including this one. Register for my newsletter at www.therationalview.ca Join the Facebook conversation @TheRationalView Twitter @AlScottRational Instagram @The_Rational_View #therationalview #podcast #communicating #sciencedenial #flatearth #evidencebased #tribalism #fakenews

How can you help your children do well at school and beyond? Hear the top tips – and the evidence for them – in this special live event with Lee Elliot Major, the first professor of Social Mobility. He reveals what really matters in education, debunking myths and misconceptions that can harm children's learning. Professor Eliot Major's work helps parents to focus on the effective use of their time, which leads to better outcomes for children, but also a more balanced life. Based on the findings of thousands of studies alongside many personal parenting stories, we'll examine how to empower children so they become independent thinkers ready to prosper in the world.

Dean Michael Horswell engages In Conversation with Lee Soroko, Assistant Professor of Movement at FAU's Theater and Dance Department. He is a fight director and instructor who insures the safety of actors during fight scenes on stage. In 2022, Professor Soroko will be choreographing the violence scenes for "Carmen" at the Palm Beach Opera. 

Stand Up is a daily podcast. I book,host,edit, post and promote new episodes with brilliant guests every day. Please subscribe now for as little as 5$ and gain access to a community of over 800 awesome, curious, kind, funny, brilliant, generous souls Check out StandUpwithPete.com to learn more also please donate to GiveWell.org/StandUp and start a store or shop at Shopify.com/Standup Today's show opens with an almost 45 minute new recap then we get to my conversation with Christine Romans  who is CNN's Chief Business Correspondent and anchor of Early Start with Laura Jarrett weekdays from 4 am to 6 am ET. She won an Emmy award for her work on the series "Exporting America" about globalization and outsourcing American jobs overseas, and is author of three books: Smart is the New Rich: If You Can't Afford it—Put it Down (Wiley 2010) How to Speak Money (Wiley 2012) and Smart is the New Rich Money Guide for Millennials (Wiley March 2015). Romans is known as CNN's explainer-in-chief of all things money. She covers business and finance from the perspective of American workers and small business owners, translating what budgets and bailouts and economic data mean for families. Romans brings an award-winning career in business reporting. In 2014, she crossed the country reporting for her series, "Is College Worth it." In 2010, Romans co-hosted "Madoff: Secrets of a Scandal," a special hour-long investigative report examining disgraced financier Bernard Madoff and how he perpetrated one of the largest investor frauds ever committed by an individual. In 2009, her special "In God We Trust: Faith & Money in America" explored the intersection of how our religious values govern the way we think about and spend our money. Her series of reports "Living Dangerously" illustrated the risks and precautions for the nearly 30 percent of America's population living in the path of an Atlantic-coast hurricane. In "Deadly Hospitals," she examined how hospitals spread dangerous infections and what patients can do to protect themselves. Romans joined CNN Business News in 1999, spending several years reporting from the floor of the New York Stock Exchange. Romans was the anchor of CNNfn's Street Sweep tracking the market's boom through the late 1990s to tragedy of Sept. 11 attacks. She anchored the first democratic elections in Iraq's history from CNN Center in Atlanta. She has covered four hurricanes and four presidential elections, and was part of the coverage teams that earned CNN a George Foster Peabody award for its Hurricane Katrina coverage and an Alfred I. duPont Award for its coverage of the tsunami disaster in Southeast Asia. The National Foundation for Women Legislators has honored her with its media excellence award for business reporting and the Greenlee School of Journalism named her the 2009 James W. Schwartz award recipient. ------------------------- My second guest today starts at 1:02 Lee McIntyre is a Research Fellow at the Center for Philosophy and History of Science at Boston University and an Instructor in Ethics at Harvard Extension School. He holds a B.A. from Wesleyan University and a Ph.D. in Philosophy from the University of Michigan (Ann Arbor). He has taught philosophy at Colgate University (where he won the Fraternity and Sorority Faculty Award for Excellence in Teaching Philosophy), Boston University, Tufts Experimental College, Simmons College, and Harvard Extension School (where he received the Dean's Letter of Commendation for Distinguished Teaching). Formerly Executive Director of the Institute for Quantitative Social Science at Harvard University, he has also served as a policy advisor to the Executive Dean of the Faculty of Arts and Sciences at Harvard and as Associate Editor in the Research Department of the Federal Reserve Bank of Boston.McIntyre is the author of How to Talk to a Science Denier (MIT Press, 2021), Philosophy of Science (Routledge, 2019), The Sin Eater (Braveship, 2019), The Scientific Attitude (MIT Press, 2019), Post-Truth (MIT Press, 2018), Respecting Truth (Routledge, 2015), Dark Ages (MIT Press, 2006), and Laws and Explanation in the Social Sciences (Westview Press, 1996). He is the co-editor of four anthologies: Readings in the Philosophy of Social Science (MIT Press, 1994), two volumes in the Boston Studies in the Philosophy and History of Science series: Philosophy of Chemistry: Synthesis of a New Discipline (Springer, 2006) and Philosophy of Chemistry: Growth of a New Discipline (Springer 2014), and The Routledge Companion to Philosophy of Social Science (Routledge, 2017). McIntyre is also the author of Explaining Explanation: Essays in the Philosophy of the Special Sciences (Rowman and Littlefield/UPA, 2012), which is a collection of twenty years' worth of his philosophical essays that have appeared in Synthese, Philosophy of the Social Sciences, Teaching Philosophy, Perspectives on Science, Biology and Philosophy, Critica, Theory and Decision, and elsewhere. Other work has appeared in such popular venues as the New York Times, Newsweek, Scientific American, the Boston Globe, the Chronicle of Higher Education, the New Statesman, the Times Higher Education Supplement, and the Humanist. Check out all things Jon Carroll Follow and Support Pete Coe Pete on YouTube Pete on Twitter Pete On Instagram Pete Personal FB page Stand Up with Pete FB page  

Follow Lee! Twitter: https://twitter.com/leeigel

Marketing is such a big term and large industry.  In order to understand how to be a good marketer, once must understand cultures and trends.  Having traveled to more than 20 countries to research and understand international business markets and globalization, Professor Lee has a good understanding of what it takes.  Listen to how he got into marketing and his take on what it means to be a Global Marketer.#CoverageGenius #GeniusNation #AsianSuccess #learn

Welcome to another prehistory guys interview, introducing you to archaeologists and historians, all too often hidden behind the scenes, finding out what they're up to while the world isn't watching. This time we're talking with Dr Lee Bray, lead archaeologist for the Dartmoor National Park in Devon, south west England. Lee started out in geology before making the move into archaeology, and to Exeter University where he gained his doctorate in Romano British Iron production on Exmoor. Dartmoor is a special place for us, so we were very much looking forward to this conversation with Dr Bray, who has possibly the best job archaeology can provide. He didn't disappoint. Like what we're doing? There are 2 ways to support our work:

“Have you gotten your 10,000 steps in today?” The phrase 10,000 steps is something we see regularly in media, ad campaigns for FitBit, Apple Watch, fitness apps, as well as in workplace conversations. A health and wellness expert whose work I regularly follow shares on an almost daily basis how she's getting in those 10,000 steps by the end of the day. Now I consider myself active since I do at least two to three weight training sessions a week, and some form of cardiovascular activity on the other days. But the truth is, I do work at a computer for both my profession and my business. So I dusted off my Fitbit thinking, “How many steps can I get in?” And total transparency: I haven't used my FitBit since January 2020. I found that on most days, I was only getting close to 5000 steps. So that led me to want to find the answers. What is the science behind the number? I found an article from 2019 in the Atlantic titled, “What 10,000 steps will really get you.” In this article, Harvard epidemiology professor I-Min Lee states the following: “It turns out the original basis for the 10,000 step guideline was really a marketing strategy.” She goes on to explain that In 1965, a Japanese company was selling pedometers, and they gave it a name that in Japanese means the 10,000 step meter. Based on conversations she's had with Japanese researchers, Lee believes that the name for the product was chosen with intention because the character for 10,000 looks kind of like a man walking. So this concept of 10,000 steps a day as well as the phrase isn't something brand new. This marketing campaign for the pedometer was conducted shortly before the start of the 1964 Tokyo Olympic Games. Now as far as Professor Lee knows, the actual health merits of that number had never been validated by research. She also published a study in JAMA, which is short for Journal of the American American Medical Association in 2019, titled “Association of Step Volume, and Intensity with all cause Mortality in Older Women.” The basic finding was that at 4400 steps per day, these women had significantly lower mortality rates compared to the least active women. Lee explains in the article that if they did more, their mortality rates continued to drop until they reached a level of 7500 steps per day, at which point the mortality rates leveled out, ultimately increasing daily activity by at least 10,000 steps a day, less than a mile of walking was associated with positive health outcomes for the elderly women. Just as with any lifestyle modification, changes can and should vary with each person's needs, which makes the 10,000 steps for some people an unrealistic goal. Not to mention, it's discouraging when you don't hit that benchmark. A study published in the American Journal of health education in 2017 titled, “The Motivational Impact of Wearable Healthy Lifestyle Technologies: A self-determination perspective on Fitbit with adolescence” found that while at first 13- to 14-year-olds enjoyed being challenged to reach this goal. When they realized how difficult it was to maintain this goal, they complained that it was unfair. So you can only imagine as adults, how we feel when we don't reach this elusive goal that isn't actually rooted in science but on a marketing campaign. Now, the good news is some form of body movement does your body good, the key is slowly shifting from being sedentary to more active. So the bottom line is if you are getting or exceeding 10,000 steps per day, that is awesome. If not, an increase of even as little as 2000 steps per day is going to be very beneficial for your health. Do you use a fitness tracker to monitor your steps or for your workouts? What changes will you make to your daily activity after listening to this episode? I'd love to hear from you! Screenshot + share this episode online and tag me @_healthhasnofinishline --- Send in a voice message: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/healthhasnofinishline/message

Core Insights host Trevor Barnes talks to Nick Lee, Professor of Marketing, whose research using neuroscience and chaos theory has found a way of predicting our decisions before we have even made them. Professor Lee reveals how brain scans can determine the state of our mind and so work out what we will decide. He reveals the implications and future possibilities in the field of neuroscience.

In this episode I interview App Development Expert, Author & Teacher : Professor Lee Barney of Brigham Young University in Idaho. Professor Barney shares his journey of writing about iPhone app development and being the first wave of developers when the iPhone SDK was first launched.