The future of STEM in higher education: HEA discussion paper

The future of STEM education is a topic of national scrutiny and debate. The House of Lords Science and Technology Committee (HLSTC) recently completed an inquiry (HLSTC, 2012)1, in response to the United Kingdom’s (U.K.) government’s ‘Plan for Growth’ (2011)2 and reports from the Council for Industry and Higher Education (CIHE)3, and the Confederation of British Industry (CBI)4. The HLSTC’s synthesis of these reports and the subsequent emerging discourse highlight a number of key concerns, and pose a number of salient questions of higher education (H.E.) STEM providers, which will be considered in this discussion paper

An iterative consensus-building approach to revising a genetics/genomics competency framework for nurse education in the UK.

AIM: To report a review of a genetics education framework using a consensus approach to agree on a contemporary and comprehensive revised framework. BACKGROUND: Advances in genomic health care have been significant since the first genetics education framework for nurses was developed in 2003. These, coupled with developments in policy and international efforts to promote nursing competence in genetics, indicated that review was timely. DESIGN: A structured, iterative, primarily qualitative approach, based on a nominal group technique. METHOD: A meeting convened in 2010 involved stakeholders in UK nursing education, practice and management, including patient representatives (n = 30). A consensus approach was used to solicit participants' views on the individual/family needs identified from real-life stories of people affected by genetic conditions and the nurses' knowledge, skills and attitudes needed to meet those needs. Five groups considered the stories in iterative rounds, reviewing comments from previous groups. Omissions and deficiencies were identified by mapping resulting themes to the original framework. Anonymous voting captured views. Educators at a second meeting developed learning outcomes for the final framework. FINDINGS: Deficiencies in relation to Advocacy, Information management and Ongoing care were identified. All competencies of the original framework were revised, adding an eighth competency to make explicit the need for ongoing care of the individual/family. CONCLUSION: Modifications to the framework reflect individual/family needs and are relevant to the nursing role. The approach promoted engagement in a complex issue and provides a framework to guide nurse education in genetics/genomics; however, nursing leadership is crucial to successful implementation

Development of a Collaborative, Distance Learning Based route to BEng/MEng qualification for Engineers in Employment.

This report presents the development of an integrated programme entitled MEng Engineering that will provide an opportunity for engineers already in the workforce to engage with upskilling that can lead to their gaining professional recognition. Progression will be provided directly from level HNC/HND/FdSc qualifications for engineers already in employment to gain BEng and MEng qualifications by part time distance learning mode. The programme will be jointly delivered by BU and BPC, the award will be a BU award. The programme will be delivered in 2-6 years depending upon entry and exit points and amount of credits studied in an academic year. The programme has been developed through close discussion with various employer representatives. It is the intention that the programme will be submitted to the Institution of Engineering Designers (IED) and the Institution of Mechanical Engineers (IMechE) for Engineering Council accreditation for the academic requirements of IEng/CEng as appropriate to level

The illusions of competition in the water sector: a response to the OFWAT/Cave consultations on introducing competition in the water sector in England and Wales

The paper provides a critical review of the role of liberalisation and competition in the water sector, based on empirical evidence from the UK and internationally. The paper is submitted as evidence to the official reviews of competition in water sector in England and Wales

Governing Nanomedicine: Lessons from within, and for the EU medical technology regulatory framework.

Rapidly emerging technologies, such as nanotechnologies, are posing significant\ud challenges to regulatory governance due to the uncertainties of development\ud trajectories, product properties, and potential risk problems (Davies\ud 2009). While nanotechnology-based products and processes fall within the\ud scope of current regulatory instruments (European Commission 2008a;\ud Ludlow, Bowman, and Hodge 2007; van Calster 2006), there is increasing\ud concern that such frameworks may not be appropriate for adequately or\ud effectively regulating all dimensions of the technology (see, for example,\ud House of Lords Science and Technology Committee 2010; European Parliament\ud 2009a; Chaudhry et al. 2006; Taylor 2008, 2006; Royal Society and\ud Royal Academy of Engineering 2004). The traditional approach of evidencebased\ud regulation is not equipped to cope with myriad uncertainties surrounding\ud the development and commercialisation of nanotechnologies. This does\ud not mean that public policy can wait and see, however. Even in the case of\ud evidence deficiencies, public responsibility goes beyond a laissez-faire\ud approach to risk regulation. In the European Union and some other countries,\ud precautionary regulatory action is required when basic values like\ud human dignity, health, safety, environment, property, and privacy are at risk\ud (Fisher 2007; European Commission 2000)