{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.019464720194647202, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0006951685783802572, 'mean_word_length': 5.771764705882353, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 1, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
On Becoming a Scholar: Socialization and Development in Doctoral Education (review)

it is not clear how traditionally irreconcilable positivist and poststructuralist views fit into a coherent framework. Siegel’s analysis illuminates the operation of two logics—market and social justice— behind the LEAD initiative. In an insightful account of the actors’ sensemaking about LEAD, the author shows how organizations’ multiple individual and collective agendas produced varying interpretations of the Program, which in turn determined how the Program was structured, implemented, and sustained. As Siegel explains, only when participating universities, businesses, and nonprofits recognized the relevance of the initiative to their own individual needs for a pipeline of minority students did the partnership begin to make practical sense and receive participants’ commitment and resources. Thus, the academic goals of the Program were supplemented with market considerations for a well-prepared and diverse applicant pool for university business programs and work force for business and industry. In final Part 3, the author revisits organization studies and social justice scholarship introduced in Part 1 in order to propose a conceptually novel approach to crosssector social partnerships as social movement organizations. Such an approach, he contends, will require a more active, dedicated, and emotionally invested civic engagement on the part of partnering organizations and will bring about faster social change. What makes organizing for social causes effective—the subject of Siegel’s concluding chapter—is both cultural and structural. Culturally, it involves surrendering organizational claims at leadership for the sake of sharing control with others and developing a collective identity for a larger cause. Structurally, it minimizes the distance between higher education and business and depends on well-developed relational capacities that make taking stake in social issues legitimate and rewarding for all university, industry, and community constituents. In addition to its multiple virtues as a methodo logically sound, theoretically wellgrounded, and meticulously researched project, Siegel’s book is simply enjoyable reading. The wealth of the observational, interview, and docu ment data gathered for this case study is an inex haustible source of stories and metaphors that enliven and elucidate the discussion. For organizational scholars, the allure of narratives lies in the promise of reaching beyond what is being told to get a glimpse at the tellers’ values, beliefs, and interpretative maps of the world that shape their thinking and decision making. Organizing for Social Partnership provides many such opportunities to look inside the living and learning organism of the LEAD initiative, and the outcome is invariably engaging and enlightening.