18 research outputs found

    Systemic racism, a prime minister, and the remote Australian school system

    Get PDF
    Remote Australian schools face complex contextual issues due to systemic and enduring disadvantage. The structures and systems put in place to support and provide advantage for Indigenous Australians continually fail to meet their mark due to colonial structures, policies and inability to understand remote contextual demands. In South Australia, the context of this paper, systemic disadvantage disproportionately affects Indigenous people. This article explores the contemporary colonial landscape of a remote school context, provides background on the colonial institutions which shape the interactions and services provided to people in remote Australian areas, and provides two empirical examples of the contemporary, structural, and harmful influence of policy and political figures in a remote school. By examining the politics of being a school leader, the policy background for remote Australian schools, and the unique challenges of position both in policy and physical terms, we show how contemporary racism structures and conditions the lives of young people in remote contexts today

    Beyond ‘Aware and Paralysed’: Governance, Research and Leadership at the Nexus of Academic Development and Corporate Universities

    Get PDF
    The corporatisation of the higher education institution poses challenges for relational human-connected academic development. The academic developer is caught between corporate structures and narratives which conditions inaction and an inevitable professionalisation of their portfolio. This article argues that without supporting faculty agency the role is still not fully realised. It highlights how the corporate university conditions staff and students and reasserts student/staff partnership as a conduit to reposition the institution and its governance for democratic society. Through a novel synthesis of research literature, and theoretical positioning, new ways for academic developers to ‘see’ their work and reassert ownership and hope are suggested

    Harnessing Empty Institutional Priorities: Developing Radical Student Agency Through University Teaching and Learning for Revolutionary Transformation

    Get PDF
    In a rapidly shifting global landscape marked by catastrophic change, instability and precarity, and misguided promises from the political apparatus, we have arrived at a dire time for higher education. It is in this moment that we dwell on the possibility and opportunity for the academic worker, student and community member to unite and challenge the systems and structures which perpetuate the status quo. Drawing on Gramsci’s stratified conception of civil society and political society, we advance a praxiological activism for higher education teaching and learning that draws on elements of partnership, decolonisation and epistemological pluralism. We advance that through harnessing institutional priorities which are often proposed in the name of meeting Key Performance Indicators (KPIs), we may have the opportunity to deeply challenge and transform the status quo through higher education. Drawing on examples of Student Partnership and Student Voice, and considering justice for First Nations, decolonising efforts, LGBTQI+ rights and other structural transformations to education, we propose a way towards new radical praxis. Drawing on our lived experience, conversations with community, students and staff, and our own reflective capacity building, we argue for a new age of radical agency. We also challenge dominant narratives which divide and position students in negative relation to the higher education worker, even when these narratives are perpetuated by the institution itself, in order to create space for a unified, radical and transformative way forward in the higher education sector

    Digital Education in the College of Humanities, Arts and Social Sciences: Discipline Discussions

    Get PDF
    CC BY-NC-ND Flinders UniversityThe research reported here was undertaken by the Digital Education Working Group (DEWG) to achieve the following four objectives, in line with the CHASS Digital Education Action Plan: 1. To better understand the perspectives on, experiences with and plans for digital education across the College to inform further strategy or changes in the College’s approach to digital education. 2. To scope the professional learning and resourcing needs in a systematic and robust way to ensure adequate support is being provided. 3. To gather insights on current discipline-based models of learning and teaching to inform recommendations on the scholarship of teaching, particularly online teaching models. 4. To synthesise current good practice examples. The DEWG research team worked with eight discipline groups across CHASS in 2021: Archaeology, English, Geography, History, Indigenous Studies, Languages, Philosophy, and Screen and Media. This report serves as a high-level synthetic overview of the results of in-depth focus group interviews conducted with staff and makes recommendations about ways forward for digital education, with relevant stakeholders identified at College and University levels. Here, DEWG and the College’s executive leadership team hold responsibility for understanding, driving, improving and supporting the digital education strategies in the College. The report summarises key findings across several key areas

    Evaluating the energy performance of buildings within a value at risk framework with demonstration on UK offices

    Get PDF
    Facility quality is dependent on the performance of utility infrastructure and local weather conditions in addition to social context. Theoretically, improvements in facility quality such as energy performance should reduce marginal costs of consumption for occupiers so as to increase asset values. This research explores the relationship between expectations of building energy performance and the financial value of real estate. The United Kingdom was selected as a leading case, being a large economy that has enacted legislation committing the government to delivering ambitious emission reductions to mitigate climate change. Appropriate instruments are identified and applied to a diverse set of case study offices. A scalable method is employed for calculating value at risk from energy performance for buildings. This involves a novel approach to testing supporting system capacity through an exploratory analysis of 2050 end-states and demonstration on real world contemporary cases as a feasibility study. In doing so, the significance of systematic risks to building energy performance can be quantified. By comparing systematic excess returns for energy performance with rental value for a large sample a Capital Market Line for building energy management emerges, providing a means to shadow price the social impacts of climate change.The authors would like to thank the Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council, Modern Built Environment Knowledge Transfer Network and Grosvenor Group for funding this research.This is the published version. It is also available from Elsevier at http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0306261914007570#

    Safety, immunogenicity, and reactogenicity of BNT162b2 and mRNA-1273 COVID-19 vaccines given as fourth-dose boosters following two doses of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 or BNT162b2 and a third dose of BNT162b2 (COV-BOOST): a multicentre, blinded, phase 2, randomised trial

    Get PDF

    Safety, immunogenicity, and reactogenicity of BNT162b2 and mRNA-1273 COVID-19 vaccines given as fourth-dose boosters following two doses of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 or BNT162b2 and a third dose of BNT162b2 (COV-BOOST): a multicentre, blinded, phase 2, randomised trial

    Get PDF
    Background Some high-income countries have deployed fourth doses of COVID-19 vaccines, but the clinical need, effectiveness, timing, and dose of a fourth dose remain uncertain. We aimed to investigate the safety, reactogenicity, and immunogenicity of fourth-dose boosters against COVID-19.Methods The COV-BOOST trial is a multicentre, blinded, phase 2, randomised controlled trial of seven COVID-19 vaccines given as third-dose boosters at 18 sites in the UK. This sub-study enrolled participants who had received BNT162b2 (Pfizer-BioNTech) as their third dose in COV-BOOST and randomly assigned them (1:1) to receive a fourth dose of either BNT162b2 (30 µg in 0·30 mL; full dose) or mRNA-1273 (Moderna; 50 µg in 0·25 mL; half dose) via intramuscular injection into the upper arm. The computer-generated randomisation list was created by the study statisticians with random block sizes of two or four. Participants and all study staff not delivering the vaccines were masked to treatment allocation. The coprimary outcomes were safety and reactogenicity, and immunogenicity (antispike protein IgG titres by ELISA and cellular immune response by ELISpot). We compared immunogenicity at 28 days after the third dose versus 14 days after the fourth dose and at day 0 versus day 14 relative to the fourth dose. Safety and reactogenicity were assessed in the per-protocol population, which comprised all participants who received a fourth-dose booster regardless of their SARS-CoV-2 serostatus. Immunogenicity was primarily analysed in a modified intention-to-treat population comprising seronegative participants who had received a fourth-dose booster and had available endpoint data. This trial is registered with ISRCTN, 73765130, and is ongoing.Findings Between Jan 11 and Jan 25, 2022, 166 participants were screened, randomly assigned, and received either full-dose BNT162b2 (n=83) or half-dose mRNA-1273 (n=83) as a fourth dose. The median age of these participants was 70·1 years (IQR 51·6–77·5) and 86 (52%) of 166 participants were female and 80 (48%) were male. The median interval between the third and fourth doses was 208·5 days (IQR 203·3–214·8). Pain was the most common local solicited adverse event and fatigue was the most common systemic solicited adverse event after BNT162b2 or mRNA-1273 booster doses. None of three serious adverse events reported after a fourth dose with BNT162b2 were related to the study vaccine. In the BNT162b2 group, geometric mean anti-spike protein IgG concentration at day 28 after the third dose was 23 325 ELISA laboratory units (ELU)/mL (95% CI 20 030–27 162), which increased to 37 460 ELU/mL (31 996–43 857) at day 14 after the fourth dose, representing a significant fold change (geometric mean 1·59, 95% CI 1·41–1·78). There was a significant increase in geometric mean anti-spike protein IgG concentration from 28 days after the third dose (25 317 ELU/mL, 95% CI 20 996–30 528) to 14 days after a fourth dose of mRNA-1273 (54 936 ELU/mL, 46 826–64 452), with a geometric mean fold change of 2·19 (1·90–2·52). The fold changes in anti-spike protein IgG titres from before (day 0) to after (day 14) the fourth dose were 12·19 (95% CI 10·37–14·32) and 15·90 (12·92–19·58) in the BNT162b2 and mRNA-1273 groups, respectively. T-cell responses were also boosted after the fourth dose (eg, the fold changes for the wild-type variant from before to after the fourth dose were 7·32 [95% CI 3·24–16·54] in the BNT162b2 group and 6·22 [3·90–9·92] in the mRNA-1273 group).Interpretation Fourth-dose COVID-19 mRNA booster vaccines are well tolerated and boost cellular and humoral immunity. Peak responses after the fourth dose were similar to, and possibly better than, peak responses after the third dose

    AUA Submission Summaries

    No full text
    Summaries of public submissions to the Australian Universities Accord (2023)

    Supplemental materials for paper: The academic precariat post-COVID-19

    No full text
    corecore