A comparison of the length and width of static inked two-dimensional bare footprints found on a hard compared to a soft surface.

In forensic intelligence-gathering it would be useful to evaluate if there are differences between static inked bare footprints captured on hard surfaces compared to soft surfaces. This was undertaken using samples from 30 undergraduate students. Initially a static footprint was taken for each participant on a hard surface and this was followed by a static footprint on a soft surface. On both occasions, the participants stood on an inkless mat and then on reactive paper, creating a two-dimensional print. The Reel method was used to analyse each footprint and the print was measured to see whether a difference existed between length and width (forefoot and rearfoot width) on a hard surface compared to a soft surface. The conclusion from this study was there is a statistically significant increase in length and width of a static bare footprint on a soft surface as opposed to a hard surface. If a forensic footprint examiner compares static bare footprints found on a soft surface and compares them to a static bare footprint of the same foot taken later, then the increase in both length and width of the footprints on a soft surface should be considered in the evaluation

Top accolade for Rhodes scientist

A RHODES University research professor who is championing ground-breaking research into a new cancer diagnosIs and treatment methodology has received a prestigious award after being nominated one of 10 Women of Excellence in South Africa

Prospectus, October 23, 2002

https://spark.parkland.edu/prospectus_2002/1027/thumbnail.jp

ETHICS in AIED: Who Cares? An EC-TEL workshop

The 2018 and 2019 AIED conferences workshop ETHICS in AIED: Who Cares? Was an important but only a first step towards addressing the far-reaching ethical questions raised by the field of AIED. The reality is that, although there are encouraging signs, most AIED research, development and deployment continues to take place in what is essentially a moral vacuum. In short, still today, little research has been undertaken, no guidelines have been provided, no policies have been developed, and no regulations have been enacted to address the specific ethical issues raised by the application of AI in educational contexts. For these reasons, for the EC-TEL 2019 conference, we proposed a third ETHICS in AIED: Who Cares? Workshop. This built on the outcomes of the previous workshops (which includes a journal paper and commissioned book). It was an opportunity for researchers who are exploring AIED ethical issues to share their insights, to identify key ethical issues, to map out how to address the multiple challenges, and to inform best practice. The overarching aim was to help establish a basis for meaningful ethical reflection necessary for innovation in AIED. The workshop began with “ETHICS in AIED: What’s the problem?”. Then was followed by “Addressing the Challenges”, round-table small-group discussions, each triggered by an ethics vignette or a provocative statement; and then “Mapping the Landscape”, in which two EC-TEL conference participants gave a fifteen-minute presentation on an ethics in AIED research issue with which they have been engaging. The workshop concluded with a whole-workshop discussion considering what Ethics in AIED 2025 will look like. A core outcome for this workshop was to identify and propose Ethics in AIED policy for the International AIED Society and future EC-TEL conferences to address

Academic information on Twitter: A user survey

Although counts of tweets citing academic papers are used as an informal indicator of interest, little is known about who tweets academic papers and who uses Twitter to find scholarly information. Without knowing this, it is difficult to draw useful conclusions from a publication being frequently tweeted. This study surveyed 1,912 users that have tweeted journal articles to ask about their scholarly-related Twitter uses. Almost half of the respondents (45%) did not work in academia, despite the sample probably being biased towards academics. Twitter was used most by people with a social science or humanities background. People tend to leverage social ties on Twitter to find information rather than searching for relevant tweets. Twitter is used in academia to acquire and share real-time information and to develop connections with others. Motivations for using Twitter vary by discipline, occupation, and employment sector, but not much by gender. These factors also influence the sharing of different types of academic information. This study provides evidence that Twitter plays a significant role in the discovery of scholarly information and cross-disciplinary knowledge spreading. Most importantly, the large numbers of non-academic users support the claims of those using tweet counts as evidence for the non-academic impacts of scholarly researc

High School Media Too: A School Day in the Lives of Fifteen Teenagers

An observational study of media consumption and exposure throughout the school day of fifteen middle- and high-school students. The study measures exposure in ten second increments in all locations from home and car through school and others and details incidence and duration os media use. Results also details incidence of Concurrent Media Exposure (multi-tasking)

Prospectus, January 29, 2003

https://spark.parkland.edu/prospectus_2003/1001/thumbnail.jp