Who is the Practitioner in Faculty-Staff Sexual Misconduct Work?: Views from the UK and US

This article maps and compares four universities’ policies and procedures for addressing faculty and staff sexual misconduct in higher education in the UK and US. While universities have engaged in significant work to grapple with student-student sexual misconduct, attention to misconduct perpetrated, and experienced, by higher education employees is relatively nascent. In this paper, we explore the maze of institutional processes and actors that victim-survivors of FASSM might encounter. We describe what is known about prevalence of FASSM in the US and UK and offer an overview of the policy landscape in both settings. Inspired by Patricia Yancey Martin, we analyze publicly available policy documents on FASSM from two US and two UK universities and map out visually the range of investigative, reporting, and sanctioning processes. We introduce an analytic distinction between an actor and a practitioner within the FASSM context, whereby actors are those tasked with administrative duties in handling sexual misconduct reports, while practitioners are those with specialized knowledge and training that enables them to prioritize victim-survivor needs. These illustrative diagrams suggest that while university employees are tasked to act on reports and disclosures of sexual misconduct, it is difficult to identify specialist practitioners with expertise to support victim-survivors of FASSM. Ultimately, this work provides a deeper understanding of what practice looks like in relation to higher education FASSM, and we outline implications for future research directions

Tertiary remagnetization of Paleozoic rocks from the Eastern Cordillera and sub-Andean Belt of Bolivia

Paleomagnetic samples were collected from 98 sedimentary horizons in eight different Devonian to Permian sedimentary units at eight localities in the Eastern Cordillera and the sub-Andean Belt of Bolivia. For 77 sites, thermal demagnetization allowed determination of a characteristic magnetization (ChRM) with site-mean 95% confidence limit, α95, ≤15°. The ChRM is carried predominantly or entirely by hematite. Fold and reversal tests from two of the sampled localities indicate that the characteristic magnetization is synfolding, likely acquired during the earliest stages of deformation. Additionally, a modified conglomerate test at one locality and the nearly uniform direction of ChRM across the Devonian to Permian age units clearly reveals the secondary nature of the characteristic magnetization. Finally, the ChRM directions are discordant from any expected Paleozoic directions. Paleomagnetic poles calculated from the ChRM directions fall near the Cenozoic portion of the apparent polar wander path for South America. We interpret these observations to indicate widespread chemical remagnetization of these Paleozoic strata during, but prior to completion of, Cenozoic Andean folding

Research on Cognitive Domain in Geoscience Learning: Temporal and Spatial Reasoning

The geosciences are characterized by their particular application of and reliance on temporal and spatial reasoning. Geoscientists must be able to apply their knowledge across a variety of scales. The ability to engage with this kind of task represents a great shift in thinking from where most students begin their studies, be that in K-12 or college. In order to understand how people\u27s ability to spatial and temporal reasoning changes over time requires identification of what skills are essential, assessment of those skills, and then exploration of the impacts of different targeted interventions in geoscience contexts. While more is known about how people reason spatially as compared with temporally, there are still significant gaps in our understanding of spatial reasoning in the geosciences. There are opportunities to build on lessons learned from previous investigations of spatial thinking (e.g. the Spatial Intelligence and Learning Center), including how a community can investigate a specific line of reasoning. There is also a need to build on established research from other domains, from anthropology to cognitive science to physics. In this chapter the authors identified and describe three grand challenges to better understand the need for and growth of spatial and temporal reasoning in geoscience education. These include identifying what reasonings or skills are essential to the geosciences (both broadly and within subdisciplines), and the intertwined challenge of how to assess those reasonings and use those results to improve on what students are learning from their geoscience experiences

Facilitating Learning in Large Lecture Classes: Testing the “Teaching Team” Approach to Peer Learning

We tested the effect of voluntary peer-facilitated study groups on student learning in large introductory biology lecture classes. The peer facilitators (preceptors) were trained as part of a Teaching Team (faculty, graduate assistants, and preceptors) by faculty and Learning Center staff. Each preceptor offered one weekly study group to all students in the class. All individual study groups were similar in that they applied active-learning strategies to the class material, but they differed in the actual topics or questions discussed, which were chosen by the individual study groups. Study group participation was correlated with reduced failing grades and course dropout rates in both semesters, and participants scored better on the final exam and earned higher course grades than nonparticipants. In the spring semester the higher scores were clearly due to a significant study group effect beyond ability (grade point average). In contrast, the fall study groups had a small but nonsignificant effect after accounting for student ability. We discuss the differences between the two semesters and offer suggestions on how to implement teaching teams to optimize learning outcomes, including student feedback on study groups

Who is the Practitioner in Faculty-Staff Sexual Misconduct Work? : Views from the UK and US

This article maps and compares four universities’ policies and procedures for addressing faculty and staff sexual misconduct in higher education (FASSM) in the UK and US. While universities have engaged in significant work to grapple with student-student sexual misconduct, attention to misconduct perpetrated, and experienced, by higher education employees is relatively nascent. In this paper, we explore the maze of institutional processes and actors that victim-survivors of FASSM might encounter. We describe what is known about prevalence of FASSM in the US and UK and offer an overview of the policy landscape in both settings. Inspired by Patricia Yancey Martin (2005), we analyze publicly available policy documents on FASSM from two US and two UK universities and map out visually the range of investigative, reporting, and sanctioning processes. We introduce an analytic distinction between an actor and a practitioner within the FASSM context, whereby actors are those tasked with administrative duties in handling sexual misconduct reports, while practitioners are those with specialized knowledge and training that enables them to prioritize victim-survivor needs. These illustrative diagrams suggest that while university employees are tasked to act on reports and disclosures of sexual misconduct, it is difficult to identify specialist practitioners with expertise to support victim-survivors of FASSM. Ultimately, this work provides a deeper understanding of what practice looks like in relation to higher education FASSM, and we outline implications for future research directions