168,813 research outputs found

    Signs to Stop

    Get PDF
    Take this as a Sign- At night it is so much easier to believe a story. There is a forgiveness at night, an expanding of what might be possible. I first learned how to tell stories in the dark, from listening to my dad\u27s voice as I drifted off to sleep, from the whispered voices of my friends around a fire, from the car tape player on a long drive home. It is easy to imagine that something terrible stands just beyond the headlight\u27s reach, looks back at you from your dark bathroom mirror, or lurks just behind your bedroom door. Fear makes what is impossible in the day real. We inherited these stories, this fear, from generations before us. There has always been someone sitting in the dark, painting the walls with what goes bump in the night while a candle flame makes them leap and peel from the wall. Touch the wall and it will mark you, tune the radio and the station will follow you home. Do you feel it? How easy it is to believe? The signs loom large and bright from the darkness, warning you of sharp turns and sudden stops. These signs are a gift, a story for us to tell together, for you to take with you and tell again. You trust them don\u27t you? If you could, if you wanted to, would you trust me to

    The Wooster Voice (Wooster, OH), 1993-11-19

    Get PDF
    In this edition of the Voice, Thomas R. Martin, the Jeremiah O’Connor professor in Classics at the College of the Holy Cross lectures on the topics of “Slaves, Police, and Counterfeiting in Classical Athens.” In the “Speak Your Mind” section, students respond to the question “do you think drinking is a problem on this campus?” An article discusses the sex habits of Wooster students. The Flying Karamazov Brothers perform on campus. A full page advertisement for the Greenwood Trust Company encompasses page seven. Additionally, the 8-9th page has the Men’s Basketball roster from the 1993-94 academic year. Page fourteen has a full page advertisement for Kmart. Athletic updates for the past week are highlighted on pages fifteen and sixteen.https://openworks.wooster.edu/voice1991-2000/1077/thumbnail.jp

    Flamingo Vol. III N 3

    Get PDF
    Anonymous. Cover. Picture. 0. Anonymous. But We Go on Forever. Picture. 4. J.V.A. Hold the Line, Boy!. Prose. 5. Anonymous. Escape. Poem. 7. C.H.C. My Room-Mates. Poem. 7. G.W.B. LA VIE EST VAINE. Poem. 7. W.A.V. Dreams. Poem. 7. G.W.B. Impressions. Poem. 7. Anonymous. DOWNJECTED AND DECAST— I PROPOSED TO KATE LAST NIGHT BUT SHE REFUSED TO LISTEN TO ME. ROOMMATE— TUT, TUT! IT WILL TURN OUT ALL RIGHT. A WOMAN\u27S \u27NO\u27 OFTEN MEANS \u27YES\u27. D. AND D.— PERHAPS IT DOES, BUT THIS WOMAN DIDN\u27T SAY \u27NO,\u27 SHE SAID \u27RATS\u27. Picture. 8. Anonymous. How to Get A\u27s. Prose. 8. Anonymous. Untitled. Prose. 8. Anonymous. Untitled. Prose. 8. Anonymous. Untitled. Prose. 8. Anonymous. Untitled. Prose. 8. Anonymous. Things to Sob Over. Prose. 8. Anonymous. Untitled. Prose. 8. Anonymous. YOUR FACE IS LIKE A POEM. HOW THRILLING! WHAT ONE? OH, ONE OF BROWNING\u27S—THERE ARE SOME HARD LINES ABOUT IT. Picture. 8. Anonymous. Goofism. Prose. 9. Anonymous. Watch Your Step. Poem. 10. Anonymous. The Four Ages f Hair. Prose. 10. Anonymous. Untitled. Prose. 10. Anonymous. Alice— Don\u27t you think Betty made a very suitable mate? Phyllis— Yes, indeed; you know what a nervous, excitable girl she was? Well, she married a composer. Picture. 10. Anonymous. Untitled. Prose. 10. Anonymous. Untitled. Prose. 10. Anonymous. DON\u27T KEEP PESTERING ME. THEN YOU WON\u27T MARRY ME? I WOULDN\u27T EVEN BE ENGAGED TO YOU AT A SUMMER RESORT. Picture. 10. Anonymous. Untitled. Prose. 10. Anonymous. The Fall of Silas. Prose. 10. Anonymous. WHY GIRLS LEAVE HOME—AT 4:00 A. M. Picture. 11. Anonymous. Untitled. Prose. 11. Anonymous. Sparks From History. Prose. 11. Anonymous. Untitled. Prose. 11. K.K.H. Horace, Book III, Ode 9. Prose. 11. Anonymous. Untitled. Prose. 11. E.B. THE BEST OF FRIENDS MUST PART. Picture. 12. Anonymous. AESOP\u27S FABLES. Prose. 12. Anonymous. Untitled. Prose. 12. Anonymous. CRUEL— DO YOU THINK TWO CAN LIVE AS CHEAPLY AS ONE? HOPEFUL— YES, DEL, YES! I CERTAINLY DO. CRUEL— HOW SAD! AND STILL WOMEN THINK. THEY ARE MENTALLY QUALIFIED FOR THE BALLOT. Picture. 12. Anonymous. Untitled. Prose. 12. Anonymous. Untitled. Prose. 13. Anonymous. For the Cosmopolitan. Prose. 13. Anonymous. Untitled. Prose. 13. Anonymous. Untitled. Prose. 13. Mercer, Hod. A LIGHT THIRTY-SIX; SPORT MODEL \u2722. Picture. 13. W.G.M. One Precious Reputation. Prose. 15. Anonymous. Alumni, Ect. Picture. 15. Anonymous. Untitled. Prose. 15. Bridge. Denison Comics. Picture. 16. T.C.K. Untitled. Picture. 18. M. Gore. Prose. 18. Anonymous. Just Before the Battle. Prose. 18. Anonymous. Untitled. Prose. 18. Anonymous. One B. Fairfax Mislaid. Prose. 18. Anonymous. Untitled. Prose. 18. Anonymous. Untitled. Prose. 18. Anonymous. Working in Cuba-Dircections for Beginners. Prose. 19. W.A.V. ANd We Call Ourselves Modern. Prose. 19. Anonymous. Untitled. Prose. 19. Anonymous. Untitled. Prose. 19. Anonymous. Untitled. Prose. 19. Anonymous. Untitled. Prose. 19. Anonymous. Untitled. Prose. 19. Clyde. DOESN\u27T THAT GIRL OVER THERE LOOK LIKE HELEN BROWN? I WOULDN\u27T SAY HER DRESS WAS BROWN. Picture. 19. Sun Dodger. Untitled. Prose. 22. Malteaser. Untitled. prose. 22. Life. Untitled. Prose. 22. Pitt. Panther. Untitled. Prose. 22. Jester. Untitled. Prose. 22. Life. Untitled. Prose. 22. Judge, Untitled. Prose. 24. Ghost. Cutting. Prose. 24. Purple Cow. Untitled. Prose. 24. Record. Untitled. Prose. 24. Beanpot. Untitled. Prose. 24. Showme. Untitled. Prose. 24. Anonymous. We Trust Marshall Joe Will Have a Profitable Summer. Picture. 25. Youngstown Telegram. The Slamback. Prose. 25. Humbug. Untitled. Prose. 25. Scalper. Untitled. Prose. 25. Record. Untitled. Prose. 25. Gargoyle. Untitled. Prose. 26. Malteaser. Untitled. Prose. 26. Awgwan. Untitled. Prose. 26. Goblin. Untitled. Prose. 26. Sun Dial. Take Your Choice. Prose. 27. Drexerd. Untitled. Prose. 27. Frivol. Hard Times. Prose. 27. Purple Cow. Untitled. Prose. 27. Anonymous. Benny Says. Prose. 27. Anonymous. Its Annual Appearance. Prose. 28. Anonymous. Untitled. Prose. 28. Anonymous. Untitled. Prose. 28. K.K.H. TRY THIS ON YOUR PIANO- Rhapsodic Granvillianeuse. Prose. 28. The Y\u27s Guy. Untitled. Prose. 30. Lemon Punch. An African Hand. Prose. 30. Purple Cow. Untitled. Prose. 30. Lampoon. Untitled. Prose. 30. Jack-O-Lantern. Untitled. Prose. 30. American Legion Weekly. Zowie. Prose. 30. Pelican. Untitled. Prose. 31. Gargoyle. Untitled. Prose. 31. Orange Peel. Untitled. Prose. 31

    Culture and disaster risk management - citizens’ reactions and opinions during Citizen Summit in Frankfurt, Germany

    Get PDF
    The analyses and results in this document are based on the data collected during the fourth Citizen Summit held in Frankfurt/Germany on June 14th 2017. As the previous three Citizen Summits held in Romania, Malta and Italy, this Citizen Summit was designed as a one-day event combining public information with feedback gathering through different methods of data collection. In the morning session, 42 questions with pre-defined answer options were posed to the audience and collected via an audience response system. In the afternoon session, small moderated group discussions of approximately 1.5 hours duration were held, which followed a detailed set of questions and discussion guidelines, including a short association exercise. All questions and discussions aimed to explore cultural factors in citizens’ attitudes, feelings, and perceptions towards disaster risks, as well as their identification in relation to disaster preparation, response and recovery. In coordination with the Work Package 11 briefs, the definition and design of the questions was based on: 1) Results from Citizen Summits 1 and 2, complementing in particular the data related to risk perception with the aim to build up a comprehensive base for cultural comparison across all six summits; 2) Results from Stakeholder Assemblies 1 and 2, in particular regarding the identification of non-professional (“cultural”) leaders in disaster situations, motivators for improving disaster preparedness, and the role of trust/distrust; 3) Results from Work Package 3, aiming to complement and increase knowledge about citizens’ uptake of mobile phone apps and interest in usage of different features, also in contrast to social media use; 4) Results from Work Package 4, in particular regarding recent research findings in the relationships between perceived disaster preparedness and actual disaster preparedness, and in the ambivalent relationships between trust in authorities and citizens’ personal preparedness; 5) Results from Work Package 7, aiming to complement the research regarding citizen empowerment by exploring trust as a bi-directional relationship between citizens and disaster managers; and 6) Results from Work Package 8, taking into account the role of media in all phases of disaster management. For a detailed overview of all questions asked and topics discussed please see Appendix A. Overall, 105 citizens participated in this Germany event. The total sample shows a relatively even gender and age distribution, which is unsurprising given the target quotas that were requested from the recruiting local market research agency. The comparatively low number of senior citizens aged 65 and above was expected and reflects mobility issues. Participants were asked about three key aspects of experience of disasters and disaster risk perception that could potentially have an impact on how other questions were answered. Two out of three respondents indicated that they themselves, or a close friend or family member, have experienced a disaster, more than half (54%) felt that they were living in an area that is specifically prone to disasters, and 62% answered that they know other people in the area where they live who they think are particularly vulnerable or exposed to disasters. Slight gender differences (as well as age-related differences) were found to be not statistically significant (p>=.05). This report is structured in five main sections: After this introduction, the second section will provide an overview of the different methods applied. The third section, based on the quantitative data collected via the audience response system, presents the results from questions on general disaster risk perceptions, disaster preparedness, behaviours in disaster situations with a particular focus on the use of mobile phone apps and social media, and trust between citizens and different authorities including trust in different social media sources. In the fourth section, based on the qualitative data collected in the ten discussion groups, the analyses will take up the topics introduced in the previous section, focusing first on the role of citizens’ trust in different entities, in particular towards different authorities, “non-professional” leaders, and the media. Furthermore, this section will report on the participating citizens’ attitudes towards improving their disaster preparedness through different measures. In all topics, the analyses seek to identify different cultural aspects which may play a role in an improved disaster preparedness and response. The final section compares and contrasts the results from Sections 3 and 4, draws some tentative conclusions, and identifies topics and issues that should feed into the last round of events in 2018, i.e. the 3rd Stakeholder Assembly, as well as the 5th and 6th Citizen Summits.The project was co-funded by the European Commission within the Horizon2020 Programme (2014-2020).peer-reviewe

    Culture and disaster risk management - synthesis of citizens’ reactions and opinions during 6 Citizen Summits : Romania, Malta, Italy, Germany, Portugal and the Netherlands

    Get PDF
    The analyses and results in this document are based on the data collected during six Citizen Summits held in A) Romania (Bucharest) on July 9th, 2016 B) Malta on July 16th, 2016 C) Italy (Rome) on June 17th, 2017 D) Germany (Frankfurt) on June 24th, 2017 E) Portugal (Lisbon) April 14th, 2018 F) The Netherlands (Utrecht)on May 12th, 2018. All Citizen Summits were designed as one-day events combining public information with feedback gathering through different methods of data collection, as laid out in Deliverable D5.1 (Structural design & methodology for Citizen Summits). A total of 619 citizens participated in the six events. In the morning session, the Citizen Summits started with a presentation of the CARISMAND project and its main goals and concepts. Then, several sets of questions with pre-defined answer options were posed to the audience and responses collected via an audience response system. All questions in this part of the event aimed to explore citizens’ attitudes, perceptions, and intended behaviours related to disasters and disaster risks. Between these sets of questions, additional presentations were held that informed the audience about state-of-the-art disaster preparedness and response topics (e.g., large-scale disaster scenario exercises, use of social media and mobile phone apps), as well as CARISMAND research findings. Furthermore, the last round of Citizen Summits (CS5 in Lisbon and CS6 in Utrecht) were organised and designed to additionally discuss and collect feedback on recommendations for citizens, which have all been formulated on the basis of Work Packages 2-10 results and in coordination with the Work Package 11 brief. These Toolkit recommendations will form one of the core elements of the Work Package 9 CARISMAND Toolkit. In the afternoon session of each event, small moderated group discussions (with 8-12 participants each) of approximately 2 hours’ duration were held, which aimed to gather citizens’ direct feedback on the topics presented in the morning sessions, following a detailed discussion guideline. For a detailed overview of all questions asked and topics discussed, please see Appendices A-1 to A-3. The rest of this report is structured in six main sections: After the executive summary and this introduction, the third section will present an overview of the different methods applied. The fourth section will provide a synthesis of quantitative and qualitative data collected during all Citizen Summits. The fifth section will present the evaluation of CARISMAND Toolkit recommendations for citizens, followed by a final concluding chapter.The project was co-funded by the European Commission within the Horizon2020 Programme (2014-2020).peer-reviewe

    Culture and disaster risk management - synthesis of stakeholder attitudes during 3 Stakeholder Assemblies in Romania, Italy and Portugal

    Get PDF
    This report provides a synthesis of the results of three CARISMAND Stakeholder Assemblies held in A) Bucharest,Romania on April 14-15, 2016; B) Rome,Italy on February 27-28, 2017; and C) Lisbon,Portugal on February 27-28, 2018. These Stakeholder Assemblies, together with six Citizen Summits (see Deliverables D5.3 – D5.9) were part of the CARISMAND cycle of events (see Figure 1 below). This cycle of events was the key concept at the core of the CARISMAND project which aimed to ensure a comprehensive feedback loop betweendisaster practitioners and citizens. It also allowed for the progression of ideas co-created by disaster practitioners and citizens. The locations of the three Stakeholder Assemblies were chosen due to their rather different “backgrounds”. The three countries had been struck at the time of the respective event by different types of disasters. In addition, the three countries have very different “cultures”, or cultural impacts, at a societal level. Romania has a comparatively strong authoritative systems due to its political history; Italy has experienced a strong direct in-flow of migrants in the last years due to its geological location; and Portugal has long been a traditional “melting pot” where, over more than a millennium, people from different cultural backgrounds and ethnic origins (in particular North Africa, South America, and Europe) have lived together. Accordingly, these differences were expected to allow a wide range of practitioners’ attitudes and perceptions related to cultural factors in disaster management to emerge. In order to not only gather a variety of attitudes and perceptions but also promote cross-sectional knowledge transfer, the audience in all three events consisted of a wide range of practitioners who are typically involved in disaster management, e.g., civil protection agencies , the emergency services, paramedics, nurses, environmental protection agencies, the Red Cross, firefighters, the military, and the police. Further, these practitioners were from several regions in the respective country; in Portugal, the Stakeholder Assembly also included practitioners from the island of Madeira. The 40-60 participants per event were recruited via invitations sent to various organisations and institutions that play a role in disaster management, and via direct contacts of local partners in the CARISMAND consortium. Each assembly consisted of a mix of presentations and discussion groups to combine dissemination with information gathering (for detailed schedules see Appendices A1-A3). In an initial general assembly, the event started with presentations of the CARISMAND project and its main goals and concepts. Then, participants were split into small working groups in separate breakout rooms, where they discussed and provided feedback on a specific topic. After each working group session, panel discussions allowed the participants to present the results of their working group to the rest of the audience. After each panel discussion, keynote speakers gave presentations related to the topic that had been discussed during the working groups. This schedule was designed to ensure that participants are provided with detailed information about recent developments in disaster management, but without influencing the attitudes and perceptions expressed in the working groups. In the third Stakeholder Assembly, different sets of recommendations for practitioners (related to the use of cultural factors in disaster management) were presented to the general audience, followed by small discussion group sessions as described above.The project was co-funded by the European Commission within the Horizon2020 Programme (2014–2020).peer-reviewe
    • …
    corecore