Promoting Civic Health Through

University-Community Partnerships:
Global Contexts and Experiences 1st
ed. 2020 Edition Thomas Andrew Bryer
Visit to download the full and correct content document:
https://ebookmass.com/product/promoting-civic-health-through-university-community-
partnerships-global-contexts-and-experiences-1st-ed-2020-edition-thomas-andrew-br
yer/
More products digital (pdf, epub, mobi) instant
download maybe you interests ...

Community & Public Health Nursing: Promoting the

Public’s Health 9th Edition, (Ebook PDF)

https://ebookmass.com/product/community-public-health-nursing-
promoting-the-publics-health-9th-edition-ebook-pdf/

Community & Public Health Nursing: Promoting the

Public’s Ninth, North

https://ebookmass.com/product/community-public-health-nursing-
promoting-the-publics-ninth-north/

Community/Public Health Nursing; Promoting the Health

of Populations 7th Edition Mary A. Nies

https://ebookmass.com/product/community-public-health-nursing-
promoting-the-health-of-populations-7th-edition-mary-a-nies/

Community/Public Health Nursing E Book: Promoting the

Health of Populations 7th Edition, (Ebook PDF)

https://ebookmass.com/product/community-public-health-nursing-e-
book-promoting-the-health-of-populations-7th-edition-ebook-pdf/
Global Jihad in Muslim and non-Muslim Contexts 1st ed.
Edition Jonathan Matusitz

https://ebookmass.com/product/global-jihad-in-muslim-and-non-
muslim-contexts-1st-ed-edition-jonathan-matusitz/

Politicising Polio: Disability, Civil Society and Civic

Agency in Sierra Leone 1st ed. 2020 Edition Diana
Szántó

https://ebookmass.com/product/politicising-polio-disability-
civil-society-and-civic-agency-in-sierra-leone-1st-
ed-2020-edition-diana-szanto/

Negotiating Fatherhood: Sport and Family Practices 1st

ed. 2020 Edition Thomas Fletcher

https://ebookmass.com/product/negotiating-fatherhood-sport-and-
family-practices-1st-ed-2020-edition-thomas-fletcher/

Reframing the Civic University: An Agenda for Impact

Julian Dobson

https://ebookmass.com/product/reframing-the-civic-university-an-
agenda-for-impact-julian-dobson/

Suicide through a Peacebuilding Lens 1st ed. 2020

Edition Katerina Standish

https://ebookmass.com/product/suicide-through-a-peacebuilding-
lens-1st-ed-2020-edition-katerina-standish/
RETHINKING UNIVERSITY-COMMUNITY
POLICY CONNECTIONS

Promoting Civic Health

Through University-Community
Partnerships
Global Contexts and Experiences

Thomas Andrew Bryer · Cristian Pliscoff

Ashley Wilt Connors
Rethinking University-Community Policy
Connections

Series Editors
Thomas Andrew Bryer
University of Central Florida
Orlando, USA

John Diamond
Edge Hill University
Ormskirk, UK

Carolyn Kagan
Manchester Metropolitan University
Manchester, UK
.
Jolanta Vaičiūniene
Kaunas University of Technology
Kaunas, Lithuania
Rethinking University-Community Policy Connections will publish
works by scholars, practitioners, and ‘prac-ademics’ across a range of
countries to explore substantive policy or management issues in the bring-
ing together of higher education institutions and community-based orga-
nizations, nongovernmental organizations, governments, and businesses.
Such partnerships afford unique opportunities to transform practice,
develop innovation, incubate entrepreneurship, strengthen communities,
and transform lives. Yet such potential is often not realized due to bureau-
cratic, cultural, or legal barriers erected between higher education institu-
tions and the wider community. The global experience is common, though
the precise mechanisms that prevent university-community collaboration
or that enable successful and sustainable partnership vary within and across
countries. Books in the series will facilitate dialogue across country experi-
ences, help identify cross-cutting best practices, and to enhance the theory
of university-community relations.

More information about this series at

http://www.palgrave.com/gp/series/15628
Thomas Andrew Bryer • Cristian Pliscoff
Ashley Wilt Connors

Promoting Civic
Health Through
University-
Community
Partnerships
Global Contexts and Experiences
Thomas Andrew Bryer Cristian Pliscoff
University of Central Florida Institute of Public Affairs
Orlando, FL, USA University of Chile
Santiago, Chile
Kaunas University of Technology
Kaunas, Lithuania

Ashley Wilt Connors

University of Central Florida
Orlando, FL, USA

Rethinking University-Community Policy Connections

ISBN 978-3-030-19665-3    ISBN 978-3-030-19666-0 (eBook)
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-19666-0

© The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer
Nature Switzerland AG 2020
This work is subject to copyright. All rights are solely and exclusively licensed by the
Publisher, whether the whole or part of the material is concerned, specifically the rights of
translation, reprinting, reuse of illustrations, recitation, broadcasting, reproduction on
microfilms or in any other physical way, and transmission or information storage and retrieval,
electronic adaptation, computer software, or by similar or dissimilar methodology now
known or hereafter developed.
The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this
publication does not imply, even in the absence of a specific statement, that such names are
exempt from the relevant protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use.
The publisher, the authors and the editors are safe to assume that the advice and information
in this book are believed to be true and accurate at the date of publication. Neither the pub-
lisher nor the authors or the editors give a warranty, express or implied, with respect to the
material contained herein or for any errors or omissions that may have been made. The
publisher remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institu-
tional affiliations.

Cover illustration: lorenzo rossi / Alamy Stock Photo

This Palgrave Macmillan imprint is published by the registered company Springer Nature
Switzerland AG
The registered company address is: Gewerbestrasse 11, 6330 Cham, Switzerland
 Preface

We offer a brief note on terminology. As with any project that examines

global experiences with respect to a particular subject, how ideas and
structures are named is variable. Most prominently in this context is how
the units of a university are named. The reader will note the use of the
words “college,” “school,” “department,” “institute,” and “faculty” to
more-or-less refer to the same thing. Rather than adopt a single word to
describe all, we opted to maintain the terminology as it is used at the insti-
tution we discuss. Roughly, a “college” (popularly used in the United
States) is equivalent to a “faculty” (popular in Europe). An “institute” is
equivalent to a “school” or “department,” except in Russia, where the
institute is equivalent to the college/faculty. We try to discuss each struc-
tural element appropriately to avoid confusion, but this brief statement
should be used as a rough guide.
Though we do our best to report the activities and ideas from each case
university, it is always possible that we made some error in understanding
or interpretation. All such mistakes are ours.

Orlando, FL Thomas Andrew Bryer

Santiago, Chile  Cristian Pliscoff
Orlando, FL  Ashley Wilt Connors

v
 Acknowledgements

This project would not have been possible were it not for the willingness
of dozens of university professors, staff, students, and community partners
to sit for interviews, serve as tour guide on campuses, and organise gener-
ally very welcoming receptions as we visited each campus. We thank them,
though they are mostly unnamed in the pages of this monograph. We also
acknowledge the patience and support of Jemima Warren and Oliver
Foster at Palgrave Macmillan.

vii
 Contents

1 Introduction and Overview   1

2 Civic Mission of the University   7

3 University-Community Partnerships in the Literature  33

4 Introduction of Cases  63

5 Defining Community  83

6 Autonomy and Willingness to Take Risks 103

7 Universities as Contested Civic Spaces 121

8 Institutionalisation of and Socialisation to Community-­

Engaged Practice 143

9 Measuring Impact 157

ix
x Contents

10 Student Engagement 171

11 Conclusion: Towards the Future of University-Facilitated

Civic Health in Global Communities 179

Index183
 Abbreviations

ASU Arizona State University

BBC British Broadcasting Channel
EHU Edge Hill University
HEI Higher Education Institution
KTU Kaunas University of Technology
NDGs National Development Goals
PSGs Provincial Strategic Goals
PUC Catholic University of Chile
REF Research Excellence Framework
SDGs Sustainable Development Goals
SOTL Scholarship of Teaching and Learning
SU Stellenbosch University
TalTech Tallinn University of Technology
UB University of Baltimore
UCF University of Central Florida
UCH University of Chile
UdeC University of Concepción
UN United Nations
UT University of Tyumen

xi
 List of Figures

Fig. 4.1 Dormitory at University of Tyumen 75

Fig. 5.1 Home of the Division of Social Impact, Stellenbosch University 88
Fig. 5.2 City of Orlando Recreation Centre at the UCF Downtown
Campus89
Fig. 5.3 Front of Avianpark Resource Centre, Stellenbosch University  99
Fig. 5.4 Community Garden in Avianpark, Stellenbosch University 100
Fig. 5.5 Police Presence in Avianpark, South Africa, Stellenbosch
University101
Fig. 6.1 Park and Homeless Facility outside Arizona State University
Downtown117
Fig. 7.1 Legal Aid Clinic at Stellenbosch University 131
Fig. 7.2 L.I.F.E. Project Facility in Avianpark, South Africa 136
Fig. 7.3 Swop Shop in Avianpark, South Africa 137
Fig. 8.1 Typology of Civic Campuses 144
Fig. 8.2 The Living Well, Baltimore, Maryland 148
Fig. 8.3 New American University Sign at Arizona State University 149
Fig. 10.1 Social Impact Day at Stellenbosch University 177

xiii
 CHAPTER 1

Introduction and Overview

Early in the presidency of Barack Obama, he was criticised for his notion
that the United States was not uniquely exceptional in the world. In a
media interview, he stated: “I believe in American exceptionalism, just as
I suspect that the Brits believe in British exceptionalism and the Greeks
believe in Greek exceptionalism … Now, the fact that I am very proud of
my country and I think that we’ve got a whole lot to offer the world does
not lessen my interest in recognizing the value and wonderful qualities of
other countries, or recognizing that we’re not always going to be right”
(Farley 2015).
Though Obama continued through his presidency to extol various
characteristics of American society and the American economy, he never
veered from this underlying point. The United States is exceptional in the
things in which its people take pride, but is unexceptional in its belief of
exceptionality. With the same logic, we suggest what should be an obvious
truth: every society on earth has its own values, ideals of the good society,
and strategies through rule of law, rule of dictator, or somewhere between
to implement the good society. For any one society represented through
the nation-state to claim exceptionality is to acknowledge difference; to
judge those who are different based on one’s own set of socialised norms,
values, and practices, with the idea of not exceptionality but superiority, is
ego-centric.

© The Author(s) 2020 1

T. A. Bryer et al., Promoting Civic Health Through University-­
Community Partnerships, Rethinking University-Community Policy
Connections, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-19666-0_1
2 T. A. BRYER ET AL.

No society is perfect, meaning no society is without challenges in the

implementation of its strategies to achieve the ideal good society. Societies
that arc towards exceptionality in freedom struggle with individuals who
and groups that abuse that freedom to inflict harm on others; societies
that arc towards exceptionality through limitations on freedom struggle
with individuals who and groups that strive to break through authoritarian
restrictions on individualism. Both kinds of societies struggle with clear
definitions of human rights, and both equivocate regarding appropriate
sacrifices to ask of its people to further the ambitions of the society.
Further, both struggle with those who seek to enrich themselves through
unethical and corrupt practice. For societies across the ideological spec-
trum, “perfection” is always a distant goal that is never reached.
Universities are critical actors that help societies strive towards perfec-
tion, through teaching, research, and, the focus of this book, engagement
with various segments of the community on the local, national, regional,
and international levels. In these pages, we do not judge, rank, or rate the
universities profiled throughout, nor the societies in which they are
embedded. This is a goal of this text; it is comparative without judgement.
However, we do assess the profiled universities, but only through hon-
est reflection, given the unique experiences that define the lenses of the
authors. We do not claim to be unbiased in our vision of the “good uni-
versity,” and our unique biases may be revealed throughout the text.
When we are aware of them, we will call them out in the interest of trans-
parency. In cases where we are not aware of our biases, we ask readers to
question our words and to use them for their own critical reflections. This
is the primary goal of this text: to provoke and promote reflection, discus-
sion, and deliberation among readers and their associates, such that uni-
versities around the world, across societies and societal contexts, are
indeed doing what they can and think they should do in relationship with
community for the promotion of civic health.
In the balance of this introduction, we introduce the major themes
from the book and preview what we consider to be the biggest questions
for the global higher education community in the years ahead, as they
relate to university-community engagements and civic health.
Nine chapters follow this, plus the conclusion. Chapter 2 presents a
general discussion of how the civic mission of the university has been
advanced, theoretically and practically, in different parts of the world. This
is a discussion that comes at a time when this part of the mission is simul-
taneously promoted through outside recognition (Carnegie Foundation
 1 INTRODUCTION AND OVERVIEW 3

2015), application of innovative pedagogy (Bryer 2014; Shaffer, Longo,

Manosevitch and Thomas 2017), and held up by concerned stakeholders
as suffering (National Task Force on Civic Learning and Democratic
Engagement 2012), while also being overshadowed by mostly economic
interests that give rise to scenarios such as the shuttering of liberal arts
programmes in rural campuses (Smith 2019), concern for high costs of
higher education (The Economist 2018), and concern for political bias in
civic action (National Association of Scholars 2017).
As such, the chapter presents a civic mission at a crossroads and pres-
ents a set of typologies: civic versus un-civic university (Goddard,
Hazelkorn, Kempton and Vallance 2016); humaniversity versus impact
university (Campbell and Hwa 2015); multiversity versus transversity
(Scott and Awbrey 1993).
In Chap. 3, we offer a review of university-community partnership lit-
erature, linked mostly to the disciplines we uncovered in our case universi-
ties as, essentially, carrying the torch of such partnerships. The literature is
drawn from a review of scholarship of teaching and learning (SOTL) jour-
nals across disciplines, though limited to English-language journals.
We introduce our case universities in Chap. 4. Our cases come from
different parts of the world, though not exhaustive. We present core attri-
butes of each university, including historical development, size, pro-
grammes of study, mission, and other elements important for the
discussions that follow. The case universities are from North America
(University of Baltimore, Arizona State University, and University of
Central Florida), Europe (Edge Hill University, Kaunas University of
Technology, Tallinn University of Technology), Eurasia (University of
Tyumen), Africa (Stellenbosch University), and South America (University
of Chile, Catholic University of Chile, and University of Concepción). In
addition to these primary cases, we introduce other select examples from
other institutions throughout the text.
In Chaps. 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, and 10, we discuss the critical themes that
emerged in our interviews with professors, students, staff, and community
partners at our case universities. We examine the variations of how “com-
munity” is defined by our case universities in Chap. 5. Ultimately, we
distinguish between two kinds of universities: those we label as having a
hard integration with community, which tend towards having a clear
notion of communities being served, apart from academic communities,
and where there is some level of being embedded; and, those we label as
having a soft integration with community, which tend towards having a
4 T. A. BRYER ET AL.

more loose or variable definition of community and more ad hoc relations

with community stakeholders that are driven potentially more by the indi-
vidual interests of academic staff than by institutional directive.
Those universities with a harder integration (as they exist on a contin-
uum) include Stellenbosch University (South Africa), University of Central
Florida (United States), Arizona State University (United States), and, to
a more variable extent, the University of Baltimore (United States),
Kaunas University of Technology (Lithuania), University of Tyumen
(Russia), and University of Concepción (Chile). Universities with a softer
integration include Tallinn University of Technology (Estonia), Edge Hill
University (United Kingdom), and University of Chile (Chile).
In Chap. 5, we also consider different strategies for engaging with these
variably defined communities. Specifically, we consider engagement strate-
gies of the individual scholars working outside or within formal university
processes, teaching enrolled students and/or community members out-
side tuition-paying students, and research on versus with community
members. Reflecting upon the nature of civically or community-engaged
work of universities, we encounter a potential paradox. For instance,
within a university maintaining a harder integration with community, we
find a professor who prefers to work outside the formal channels of the
university to engage with certain stakeholders through his or her research
and teaching.
We question some factors that might contribute to a university’s and
individual’s inclination to engage with civic and community issues in
Chap. 6. Specifically, we examine the kind of autonomy an institution, and
professor within the institution, has, and the relationship to institutional
or individual willingness to take risks by engaging in certain civic, policy,
or political issues. We present a matrix (Table 6.1) of willingness to take
risk based on the level of contestation of the civic, policy, or political issue,
and the degree of autonomy held by the institution or individual. Examples
from the case universities elucidate the matrix categories.
Whereas we focus on civic risk-taking in Chap. 6, including research,
teaching, and other activities that might occur off campus or in partner-
ship with community groups, in Chap. 7, we consider civic action on the
university campus itself. Specifically, we consider the geographic space of
the university campus as a contested civic space. We examine different
ways in which individuals living or working on a university campus might
be alternatively empowered or manipulated, or some of both, depending
on the political sensitivity of an issue. We outline four strategies potentially
 1 INTRODUCTION AND OVERVIEW 5

employed by university leadership to either allow for or mitigate against

certain kinds of participation of professors, staff, and students in civic and
political activities: (1) controlled participation, (2) tokenistic participa-
tion, (3) symbolic or fake participation, and (4) authentic participation. As
with the previous chapter, we provide examples to demonstrate the appli-
cability of these categories.
In Chap. 8, we consider the formal and informal mechanisms through
which civic and community-engaged practice becomes embedded to vary-
ing degrees within the fabric of the university. We define four types of civic
campuses (Fig. 8.1) based on the level of formal institutionalisation of and
informal socialisation to the idea and practice of civic and community-­
engaged work. These four types of campuses are the grassroots civic cam-
pus (high socialisation, low institutionalisation), full integration civic
campus (high socialisation and high institutionalisation), ad hoc civic cam-
pus (low socialisation and low and institutionalisation), and the decoupled
civic campus (low socialisation and high institutionalisation). Examples
are provided, though we recognise that most campuses, including those of
our case universities, will exist not fully within one of these categories, but
will cross over, as levels of socialisation and institutionalisation are both to
be seen as existing on a continuum.
In Chap. 9, we examine how universities measure the impact of their
civic work. We present no typology of practice within the chapter, but we
do observe the variability in levels of formal measurement, and the chal-
lenges that align with potentially competing university objectives. These
challenges are particularly acute in considering the promotion and annual
evaluation of professors, given the pressure to succeed in “traditional”
metrics of academic success (e.g. peer reviewed publications, grants, et
cetera) while also affording them some opportunity and possibly incentive
to engage in “non-traditional” civic or community-engaged work.
Finally, in Chap. 10, we explore ways in which our case universities
provide space for students in particular to become active citizens through
their university experience and, potentially, take those lessons into the
future when they might be active citizens in their communities, wherever
they live. Much emphasis is placed here on the act of student as volunteer,
as several universities facilitate volunteerism and provide some institutional
framework to support volunteer initiatives.
These chapters represent not only key themes that emerged in the
course of our visits to our case university, but represent the critical con-
cerns that the higher education community around the world must
6 T. A. BRYER ET AL.

c­onsider as the expectation that a university be somehow civically and

community connected and engaged is growing in societies around the
world. We do not present here a “perfect model” of the civically and
community-­engaged university. Indeed, quite the opposite: we find health
in the variation of approaches, all set within different political, historical,
and cultural constraints. We believe that universities around the world can
learn from each other about how to be adaptive to and civically responsive
and responsible for their communities and broader society; this means
American university leaders and professors can learn from their Russian
counterparts; South African university leaders and professors can learn
from their Chilean counterparts, and so on. To establish this crosstalk is
our aim, not to judge or dismiss or criticise. We hope insights from our
exploration are valuable.

References
Bryer, T.A. 2014. “Beyond Job Creation and Service Learning: Putting the Public
Back in Public Affairs Education.” Journal of Public Affairs Education, 20
(2): 233–252.
Campbell, J. and Y.S. Hwa. 2015. “The Spirit of Community Engagement.”
International e-Journal of Community & Industry Engagement, 2 (1): 1–10.
Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching Elective Community
Engagement Classification. 2015.
Farley, R. 2015. https://www.factcheck.org/2015/02/obama-and-american-
exceptionalism/
Goddard, J., E. Hazelkorn, L. Kempton and P. Vallance. 2016. The Civic
University: The Policy and Leadership Challenges. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
National Association of Scholars. 2017. Making Citizens: How American
Universities Teach Civics. https://www.nas.org/projects/making_citizens_
report
National Task Force on Civic Learning and Democratic Engagement. 2012. A
Crucible Moment: College Learning and Democracy’s Future. Washington, DC:
Association of American Colleges and Universities.
Scott, D.K. and S.M. Awbrey. 1993. “Transforming Scholarship.” Change: The
Magazine of Higher Learning, 25 (4): 38–43.
Shaffer, T.J., N.V. Longo, I. Manosevitch and M.S. Thomas. 2017. Deliberative
Pedagogy: Teaching and Learning for Democratic Engagement. East Lansing:
Michigan State University Press.
Smith, M. 2019. “At Struggling Rural Colleges, No Future for History Degrees.”
New York Times, 13th January 2019.
The Economist. 2018. “All Must Have Degrees.” 3rd February 2018.
 CHAPTER 2

Civic Mission of the University

There is not one single “ideal” of a civic-oriented university, particularly

when looked at from a global, comparative perspective. This is so, first,
given the different perceived and actual functions of universities across
societies but also given different conceptions of what is properly “civic”
and appropriate civic action across societies. The “good citizen,” to bor-
row the book title from Russell Dalton (2016), appears differently in the
United States compared to Russia, or Chile, Lithuania, or South Africa.
The good university, as it were, is conceived differently, even if the rhetoric
is similar if not exactly the same across places. We explore this rhetoric in
later chapters.
For now, we consider from a more conceptual and theoretical plane the
idea of a civic mission of the university. As is appropriate given our focus,
to start from concept and theory as if it were divorced from practice is
injurious and can lead us down a path of questionable relevance. We thus
start from practice or practical, or instrumental, need, with vignettes from
numerous places, and then link these concerns to the more normative
descriptions of and prescriptions for higher education institutions. It is not
our aim in this chapter to espouse normative or values-based theories that
champion a particular role of the university, lest we fall into the trap identi-
fied by Bryer (2014) in which a single narrative about the role of higher
education institutions is stood on a pedestal whilst all other narratives are
cast aside as wrong-headed or heretical. Thus, by starting with practical

© The Author(s) 2020 7

T. A. Bryer et al., Promoting Civic Health Through University-­
Community Partnerships, Rethinking University-Community Policy
Connections, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-19666-0_2
8 T. A. BRYER ET AL.

concern, we strive for a balanced presentation of real situations, unfiltered

through any particular values-based lens—civic, economic, or otherwise.
Calls for pursuing a civic mission, or something like it, have over time
been instigated by some external forces or conditions. These forces might
be singular events (or a singular event as a culmination of trends), or a col-
lection of trends that are interpreted as troubling to theorists, practitioners,
and others. Benjamin Barber (1998) opened a provocative essay about the
civic mission of universities addressing such trends and leaving in the path
a scathing critique of American higher education institutions (178):

The modern American university is embroiled in controversy, fuelled by

deep uncertainty over its pedagogical purposes and its civic role in a “free”
society. At times the college establishment seems to know neither what a
free society is nor what the educational requisites of freedom might look
like. Nonetheless, both administrators and their critics have kept busy, for
like zealots (classically defined as people who redouble their efforts when
they have forgotten their aims), they have covered their confusion by embel-
lishing their hyperbole. They wring hands and rue the social crises of higher
education—apathy, cynicism, careerism, prejudice, selfishness, sexism,
opportunism, complacency, and substance abuse—but they hesitate when
faced with hard decisions, and prefer to follow rather than challenge the
national mood.

These words, written in the late 1980s, are still relevant in 2019.
Though, the idea of promoting freedom and taking stands to challenge
the national mood is one that is perhaps easier to vocalise and a bit more
complex in practice. It is also fraught with political landmines. For exam-
ple, a higher education policy proposal in the State of Florida (United
States) would mandate an annual survey of professors, administrators, and
students to assess openness to competing perspectives and truth claims.
This raises the question about what is legitimate other speech, and what
is, within the context of a liberal education, on the surface and deep within
anathema to the ideals of liberal education itself. Is a far-right, white
nationalist who preaches hate and discrimination a legitimate other voice
that should have a welcoming environment on a university campus?
Should university campus buildings be open for rent and utilisation by any
person or group in society, without explicit endorsement or support from
an organised student organisation or faculty member sponsor? In later
chapters, we will explore this issue more with regard to how universities
have managed such situations and the notion that, if students are well
 2 CIVIC MISSION OF THE UNIVERSITY 9

prepared, such hate speech would never be invited to campus as legitimate

speech. The problem comes when an invitation is made.
Ultimately, the concern is one of defining the public responsibility of
universities, consisting of highly educated scholars and philosophers, to
actively advise governments, non-profit or social purpose organisations,
businesses, and society writ-large on how to form a more perfect society.
The definition of the perfect society is variable across countries and over
time. Some governments in the world exercise more direct or indirect
control over their universities than others, which can have the effect of
freeing, muting, or censoring certain speech and activities on campus. The
myriad “types” of universities, such as public (state owned) or private (for
and not for profit), catholic or religious and secular, teaching or research
universities, among other classifications, also add an important level of
complexity to the matter. This too is an issue to which we will return.
However, within this context, we have not only the question of univer-
sity responsibility and government control but trust of the people in the
institutions, which can be very complicated. For example, are universities
considered neutral, independent institutions made up of neutral, indepen-
dent scholars and philosophers? This independence can potentially make
universities “enemies” of the state, and either friends or enemies of the
people depending on the popular perception of the state. Alternatively, are
universities considered to be extensions of the state, where professors
teach and research only what is directed by politicians and technocrats?
Or, are universities seen as a complete mystery, agendas unclear, account-
ability unclear, but big “players” in a community or region?
One example of the dilemma of public perception of universities is sug-
gested by the experience of Brexit. British voters approved a 2016 ballot
question that launched the process to begin negotiations for the removal
of the United Kingdom (UK) from the European Union. This act alone
shocked government, civic, and university leaders throughout the country
and, indeed, around the world. For universities, two questions emerged:
What will be the impact of Brexit on student enrolment as well as on
external research funding? Second, and to the point of this chapter, what
could universities have done differently to educate voters? Why were uni-
versities not trusted as they, with great consensus, advocated for the UK
to stay in the EU?
The minister of education in Wales raised the issue in these terms: “At
a UK-level, the pro-EU campaign of universities was too easily dismissed
as one of self-interest, almost exclusively focused on income. This is not to
Another random document with
no related content on Scribd:
The Project Gutenberg eBook of Names and
places in the Old and New Testament and
Apocrypha, with their modern identifications
This ebook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States
and most other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no
restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it
under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included with this
ebook or online at www.gutenberg.org. If you are not located in the
United States, you will have to check the laws of the country where
you are located before using this eBook.

Title: Names and places in the Old and New Testament and
Apocrypha, with their modern identifications

Compiler: George Armstrong

Editor: C. R. Conder
Sir Charles William Wilson

Release date: March 7, 2024 [eBook #73117]

Language: English

Original publication: London: Alexander P. Watt, 1889

Credits: Brian Coe, Neil Mercer and the Online Distributed

Proofreading Team at https://www.pgdp.net (This book was
created from images of public domain material made
available by the University of Toronto Libraries.)

*** START OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK NAMES AND

PLACES IN THE OLD AND NEW TESTAMENT AND APOCRYPHA,
WITH THEIR MODERN IDENTIFICATIONS ***
 Transcriber's Note
The Arabic letter hamza is here
represented by the character ʾ
(MODIFIER LETTER RIGHT HALF
RING).
 NAMES AND PLACES
IN THE

Old and New Testament and

Apocrypha,
WITH THEIR MODERN IDENTIFICATIONS.

COMPILED BY

GEORGE ARMSTRONG,
AND

REVISED BY

COLONEL SIR CHARLES W. WILSON,

K.C.B., K.C.M.G., F.R.S., D.C.L., R.E.,

AND

MAJOR CONDER, D.C.L., R.E.

PUBLISHED FOR THE

COMMITTEE OF THE PALESTINE EXPLORATION FUND

 BY

A L E X A N D E R P. W A T T,
2, PATERNOSTER SQUARE.
1889.
All rights reserved.]
 PREFACE.

This Index has been compiled from the Old and New
Testament and Apocrypha, the alterations in the
Revised Version being noted in their places; from the
‘Memoirs and Name Lists of the Survey of Western
Palestine;’ from that portion which is completed (as
yet unpublished) of the ‘Memoirs and Name Lists of
the Survey of Eastern Palestine;’ from Smith’s ‘Bible
Dictionary;’ from the list drawn up by Sir George
Grove for Clarke’s ‘Bible Atlas’ (S.P.C.K.); and from
Conder’s ‘Handbook to the Bible’ and ‘Primer of Bible
Geography,’ with numerous references to the
‘Quarterly Statements.’ The identifications adopted
are those that will be found on the new maps (to be
issued about the end of this year) of the Old and New
Testament, covering both sides of the Jordan, and
authorized by Colonel Sir Charles Wilson and Major
Conder, R.E.
 The Index to the Old Testament Sites includes
upwards of 1,150 names of places in the Holy Land,
Mesopotamia, Edom, the Desert of Sinai, and Egypt;
being, it is believed, all those that are mentioned in
the Old Testament and the Apocrypha.
The Index to the New Testament Sites contains
162 names, with references to Josephus (Whiston’s),
in addition to those in the New Testament. Of these
names 144 are known, 10 uncertain, and 8 not
identified.
The identifications suggested by Major Conder as
due to the Survey are marked with a star.
There are still 290 places mentioned in the Old
Testament, in the East of Jordan, the Desert and
Western Palestine, which remain to be identified.
Reference is made in every case to the number of
the sheet of the large and small maps on which the
modern name will be found. Under the heading
‘Remarks,’ etc., will be found fuller particulars of the
proposed site from the ‘Memoirs of Western
Palestine.’
G. A.
1, Adam Street,
Adelphi,
March 22nd, 1888.
 OLD TESTAMENT SITES

(Including all the Names to Sites in the Bible and

Apocrypha.)

In the column ‘Modern Identification,’ those marked with a single ? are

doubtful; those with double ?? are very doubtful; those marked with a star
are due to the Survey. Abbreviations—‘R.V.’ is Revised Version; ‘A.V.’ is
Authorized (Old) Version; ‘Mem.,’ with the letters, refers to the Memoirs of
the Survey of Western Palestine; ‘Sh.’ is Sheet or Plan of the Large Map,
with the number where the name is found; ‘B. R.,’ Robinson’s Biblical
Researches.

No.
of Remarks,
Bible and Modern Sheet References, and No.
Refer­ences.
Apocrypha Name. Identifi­cation. on ⅜- of Sheet on Large
in. Map.
Map.

ABANA, River 2 Kings v. Nahr Abanias, 3 One of the rivers

(R.V. ABANAH 12 a branch of and of Damascus.
or AMANAH) the Nahr 4 Now called the
Barada Barada, rising in
the Anti-
Lebanon, near
Zebdany, flowing
through Suk
Wady, Barada,
receiving the
waters of the
copious spring of
ʾAin Fijeh, and
 continuing its
course through
Damascus on to
the great marsh
on the plain
called Bahret el
Kibliyeh.
ABARIM, Num. xxvii. The range of 15 Mountains
Mountains of 12; xxxiii. Neba (Nebo) beyond Jordan,
47, 48; the range of
Deut. Nebo.
xxxii. 49
ABDON Josh. xxi. Kh. ʾAbdeh 6 A city of Ashar, 10
30; 1 miles north of
Chron. vi. ʾAkka. (Mem. I.
74 170; Sh. III.)
ABEL, The 1 Sam. vi. Deîr ʾAbân (?) — Signifying ‘The
Great Stone 18 near Beth- great stone of
of shemesh the meadow’
(R.V.).—M.
Clermont-
Ganneau.
ABEL BETH- 2 Sam. xx. Abl 6 Now a village, 6½
MAACHAH, 14, 15, 18; miles west of
(R.V. ABEL 1 Kings Banias, in
BETH- xv. 20; 2 Naphtali; also
MAACAH) Kings xv. called Abel-
29 maim. (Mem. I.
85 & 107; Sh. II.)
ABEL- Judg. xi. 33 Not identified — A place east of
CERAMIM, Jordan, beyond
(R.V. ABEL- ‘Aroer.’
CHERAMIM)
ABEL-MAIM 2 Chron. Abl — Apparently
xvi. 4 identical with
 Abel Beth-
maachah.
(Compare with 1
Kings xv. 20.)
ABEL- Judges vii. ʾAin Helweh* 10 Jerome places it
MEHOLAH 22; 1 10 miles south of
Sam. xviii. Scythopolis, or
19; 2 at the present
Sam. xxi. ‘ʾAin Helweh,’
8; 1 Kings 9½ miles south
iv. 12; xix. of Beth-shean.
16 (Mem. II. 231;
Sh. XII.)—
Conder.

ABEL-MIZRAIM Gen. l. 11 Not identified — The threshing-

floor of Atad.
‘Beyond Jordan.’
Placed by
Jerome at Beth
Hoglah, on the
west bank.
ABEL-SHITTIM Num. xxxiii. Kefrein, at 14 Known in the
49 northern days of
margin of Josephus as
Ghôr es Abila; 60 stadia
Seîsebân from the river.
The town and
palms have
disappeared; but
an extensive
acacia-grove
and some ruins
still remain on
the plain now
called Seîsebân.
(Conder’s Heth
 and Moab, p.
148.)
ABEZ, Josh. xix. Kh. el Beida 6 A town of
(R.V. EBEZ) 20 (?)* Issachar, named
between Kishion
and Remeth.
Possibly the ruin
el Beida =
‘white,’ at north
limit of the plain
of Esdraelon.
(Mem. I. 309;
Sh. V.)—Conder.

ABRONAH Num. xxxiii. Not identified —

(Ebronah) 34, 35
ACCAD Gen. x. 10 Nisibis (??) — One of the cities
in the land of
Shinar. Nisibis, a
city on the
Khabour river at
the north-east
part of
Mesopotamia,
and midway
between Orfa
and Nineveh, is
generally
believed to
occupy the
ancient site.

ACCARON 1 Macc. x. — See Ekron.

89
ACCHO, Judg. i. 31 ʾAkka 6 St. Jean d’Acre.
(R.V. ACCO) The Ptolemais of
the 1st Book of
Maccabees. A
 seaport town.
(Mem. I. 145,
153, 160; Sh.
III.)
ACHOR, Valley Josh. vii. Wâdy Kelt 14 Now Wâdy Kelt,
of 24, 26; xv. the deep ravine
7; Is. lxv. south of Jericho.
10; Hos. ii. (Mem. III. 167;
15 Sh. XVIII.)
ACHSHAPH Josh. xi. 1; Kefr Yasîf (?)* 6 The present
xii. 20; xix. village, ‘Kefr
25 Yasîf,’ 6 miles
north-east of
‘Accho.’—
Conder. Named
between Beten
and
Alammelech, a
city in Asher. Kh.
Iksâf (Sh. II., p.
119), and Haifa
(Sh. V.), have
also been
proposed. (Mem.
I. 169; Sh. III.)

ACHZIB (1) Josh. xv. ʾAin Kezbeh 14 A city of Judah,

44; Micah (?)* named with
i. 14 ‘Keilah’ and
‘Mareshah.’—
Conder. See
Chezib.
ACHZIB (2) Josh. xix. ez Zîb — The Ecdippa of
29; Judg. Josephus. The
i. 31; v. 17 present town,
‘Ez Zîb,’ 8½
miles north of
 ‘Akka’ in ‘Asher.’
(Mem. I. 155;
Sh. III.)
ADADAH Josh. xv. 22 ʾAdʾadah 14 One of the cities
in the south of
Judah, named
with ‘Dimonah’
and ‘Kedesh.’
Probably the
present ruin
Adâdah in the
desert east of
Beersheba.

ADAM Josh. iii. 16 ed Dâmieh (?) 10 ‘A city on the

Jordan, beside
Zarthan.’ The
name is
probably
preserved in that
of Tell Dâmieh,
near the ford of
ed Dâmieh.
(Mem. II. 387;
Sh. XV.)

ADAMAH Josh. xix. ed Dâmieh* 6 One of the fenced

36 cities of
Naphtali. Now
the ruin ‘ed
Dâmieh,’ 5 miles
west of Tiberias.
(Mem. I. 365;
Sh. VI.)

ADAMI, Josh. xix. Kh. Admah* 10 A place named as

(R.V. ADAM- 33 being on the
NEKEB) border of
Naphtali. The
 present ruin
‘Admah,’ 5 miles
south-west of
the Sea of
Galilee. (Mem.
II. 89; Sh. IX.)—
Conder.
ADAR, or Josh. xv. 3; Not identified — A place on the
HAZAR 1 Macc. south boundary
ADDAR vii. 40–45 of Palestine.
(R.V. ADDAR) ‘Jebel Maderah,’
in the desert, is
proposed for this
site. (Quarterly
Statement, p.
61, 1881.)

ADASA Kh. ʾAdaseh 14 According to

Josephus (12
Ant. x. 5; 5 Wars
xi. 5) was 30
stadia from
Beth-horon. Now
the present ruin
ʾAdaseh, 8 miles
south of Jufna.
(Mem. III. 106;
Sh. XVII.)

ADDAN, or Ezra ii. 59; Not identified — One of the places

ADDON Neh. vii. from which some
61 of the Captivity
returned to
Judea, who
could not show
their pedigree.
ADIDA 1 Macc. xii. Hadîtheh 10 A town on an
38; xiii. 13 eminence (13