Multisensorial dynamics : encountering and capturing the intangible heritage of the Art School in Britain

Art Schools are key sites for the formation of material culture, yet have resisted narrativisation of their own materiality. This article examines the heritage of art schools and suggests strategies for assessing the material and immaterial practices it produces. It surveys a number of counter-hegemonic practices historically within the twentieth-century art school, before considering material encounters in the art school and the spatial-temporal qualities of the art school site. The article argues for a model of temporal uncertainty and fluidity that can be experienced as Art School Time where flexible, cross-disciplinary spaces for as yet unknown material and immaterial encounters enable students to develop new tactics to address societal challenges within the multi-layered and multisensorial spaces of the art school

Dora Gordine and Barbara Hepworth : connections across time and space

The figurative bronze sculpture of Dora Gordine (1895–1991) and Barbara Hepworth’s (1903-1975) carved or cast forms are usually perceived as occupying different spaces within the rich histories of modern British sculpture. Yet, it is striking that Gordine and Hepworth were born within just eight years of each other. Their work became known at the same time in late 1920’s Britain, and they subsequently exhibited together in various pre and post-war group exhibitions. This essay critically reflects on the importance of their studio-homes to their practice, on the moments where their trajectories as sculptors intersected, and identifies the artistic and aesthetic concerns they shared as successful women artists in the highly competitive and often polarised spaces of modern sculpture in Britain from the late 1920s to the early 1950s

Making a new world : Karin Jonzen and the World Health Organisation in New Delhi and Geneva in the early 1960s

This the first art historical study to focus on Karin Jonzen (née Löwenadler, 1914-1998), the youngest sculptor to contribute to the first Battersea Park ‘Open Air Sculpture Exhibition’ in 1948 and the ‘Festival of Britain’ in 1951. Löwenadler’s pre-war art school training was at the Slade School of Fine Art (1933-1936) and the City and Guilds Art School at Kennington (1937), before winning The British School in Rome Sculpture Scholarship in 1939, thwarted by the outbreak of war. The article focuses on two previously neglected UK commissions that Jonzen completed for the United Nation’s specialist agency, the World Health Organisation (WHO) for new headquarter buildings in New Delhi and Geneva in the early 1960s. Drawing upon previously unpublished archive material in Geneva, New Delhi, and London, the article establishes the commissions as government gifts to the WHO and analyses the works in relation to their respective buildings and the WHO’s ideals of making a new world dedicated to health as ‘a state of complete physical, mental and social well-being’. The research offers new perspectives on Jonzen’s sculptural practice and the significance of the commissions in the context of post-war British sculpture and its promotion at home and abroad

Parents talking everyday science with young children

This report is the evaluation of an early years project which was developed by members of the Cass Early Childhood Studies Research Group with funding from the 2015 UEL Civic Engagement Fund. The project aimed to encourage parents‟ confidence in their own ability to support emergent scientific thinking among their young children. The project was modelled on an early years initiative undertaken a few years ago in rural Bangladesh. The original Bangladeshi project was pioneered by Dr Sue Dale Tunnicliffe, Reader in Science Education at University College London‟s Institute of Education, and chair of CASTME, the Commonwealth Association of Science, Technology and Mathematics Educator

BHPR research: qualitative1. Complex reasoning determines patients' perception of outcome following foot surgery in rheumatoid arhtritis

Background: Foot surgery is common in patients with RA but research into surgical outcomes is limited and conceptually flawed as current outcome measures lack face validity: to date no one has asked patients what is important to them. This study aimed to determine which factors are important to patients when evaluating the success of foot surgery in RA Methods: Semi structured interviews of RA patients who had undergone foot surgery were conducted and transcribed verbatim. Thematic analysis of interviews was conducted to explore issues that were important to patients. Results: 11 RA patients (9 ♂, mean age 59, dis dur = 22yrs, mean of 3 yrs post op) with mixed experiences of foot surgery were interviewed. Patients interpreted outcome in respect to a multitude of factors, frequently positive change in one aspect contrasted with negative opinions about another. Overall, four major themes emerged. Function: Functional ability & participation in valued activities were very important to patients. Walking ability was a key concern but patients interpreted levels of activity in light of other aspects of their disease, reflecting on change in functional ability more than overall level. Positive feelings of improved mobility were often moderated by negative self perception ("I mean, I still walk like a waddling duck”). Appearance: Appearance was important to almost all patients but perhaps the most complex theme of all. Physical appearance, foot shape, and footwear were closely interlinked, yet patients saw these as distinct separate concepts. Patients need to legitimize these feelings was clear and they frequently entered into a defensive repertoire ("it's not cosmetic surgery; it's something that's more important than that, you know?”). Clinician opinion: Surgeons' post operative evaluation of the procedure was very influential. The impact of this appraisal continued to affect patients' lasting impression irrespective of how the outcome compared to their initial goals ("when he'd done it ... he said that hasn't worked as good as he'd wanted to ... but the pain has gone”). Pain: Whilst pain was important to almost all patients, it appeared to be less important than the other themes. Pain was predominately raised when it influenced other themes, such as function; many still felt the need to legitimize their foot pain in order for health professionals to take it seriously ("in the end I went to my GP because it had happened a few times and I went to an orthopaedic surgeon who was quite dismissive of it, it was like what are you complaining about”). Conclusions: Patients interpret the outcome of foot surgery using a multitude of interrelated factors, particularly functional ability, appearance and surgeons' appraisal of the procedure. While pain was often noted, this appeared less important than other factors in the overall outcome of the surgery. Future research into foot surgery should incorporate the complexity of how patients determine their outcome Disclosure statement: All authors have declared no conflicts of interes

How to specify healthcare process improvements collaboratively using rapid, remote consensus-building: a framework and a case study of its application

Abstract: Background: Practical methods for facilitating process improvement are needed to support high quality, safe care. How best to specify (identify and define) process improvements – the changes that need to be made in a healthcare process – remains a key question. Methods for doing so collaboratively, rapidly and remotely offer much potential, but are under-developed. We propose an approach for engaging diverse stakeholders remotely in a consensus-building exercise to help specify improvements in a healthcare process, and we illustrate the approach in a case study. Methods: Organised in a five-step framework, our proposed approach is informed by a participatory ethos, crowdsourcing and consensus-building methods: (1) define scope and objective of the process improvement; (2) produce a draft or prototype of the proposed process improvement specification; (3) identify participant recruitment strategy; (4) design and conduct a remote consensus-building exercise; (5) produce a final specification of the process improvement in light of learning from the exercise. We tested the approach in a case study that sought to specify process improvements for the management of obstetric emergencies during the COVID-19 pandemic. We used a brief video showing a process for managing a post-partum haemorrhage in women with COVID-19 to elicit recommendations on how the process could be improved. Two Delphi rounds were then conducted to reach consensus. Results: We gathered views from 105 participants, with a background in maternity care (n = 36), infection prevention and control (n = 17), or human factors (n = 52). The participants initially generated 818 recommendations for how to improve the process illustrated in the video, which we synthesised into a set of 22 recommendations. The consensus-building exercise yielded a final set of 16 recommendations. These were used to inform the specification of process improvements for managing the obstetric emergency and develop supporting resources, including an updated video. Conclusions: The proposed methodological approach enabled the expertise and ingenuity of diverse stakeholders to be captured and mobilised to specify process improvements in an area of pressing service need. This approach has the potential to address current challenges in process improvement, but will require further evaluation