A Symposium

What Future Directions for Academic Exchange

Bibliographic Data

ID9747372
AuthorsPaul Seabury (corresponding author), A KENNETH PYE, Mark Blitz, James H Billington
Year1987
Volume491
Issue1
Pages154-163
Publication date1987-05-01
Peer ReviewedYes
Open AccessYes
TypeARTICLE
VenueThe Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 0002-7162 • E-ISSN: 1552-3349
PublisherSAGE Publications (PUBLISHER • US)
DOI10.1177/0002716287491001015
OpenAlexW2142429808
LanguageEN
Citations received2

Forty years leaves nothing unchanged, and certainly not the Fulbright program. How have its objectives changed, how should they change? Four informed observers and former or present participants in Fulbright and other exchange programs here present their views. Paul Seabury argues for a more sharply focused Fulbright program in an age when it is only a drop in a sea of exchanges, and urges that that focus should serve national interests. James H. Billington suggests that Fulbright or part of it be upgraded to focus on “brighter students or future leaders.” Mark Blitz points out that the strong support the program now receives from the administration and in Congress is based not so much on the desire to “enhance academic opportunities or...`mutual understanding' ” but rather on the hope of improving prospects for democratic development, a central purpose of our foreign policy. A. Kenneth Pye emphasizes the traditional objective of mutual understanding, and the importance of avoiding politicization and respecting the independent role of the binational commissions; he presents a variety of proposals for improvement in the program

Administration (probate law · Democracy · Epistemology · Focus (optics · Nothing · Political science · Politics · Public relations · Sociology · Variety (cybernetics · Computer Science · International Science and Diplomacy · Law · Philosophy · Public Administration

Tools

Open DOISci-Hub