Assume the position: reconfiguring the spatial in the pre-service education classroom

Current understandings of the practice of education locate pedagogy in the public domain through the articulation of the personal domain (Pinar, 2004). Critical literacy has provided teachers and teacher educators with a means of transforming subjectivity and relocating the personal through writing (Kamler, 2001). The emphasis in a critical literacy approach on the spoken and written word sits comfortably in the academic discourse of tertiary education, although it\u27s engagement with the personal meets with some resistance. However, to engage the personal through arts based approaches meets far greater resistance. When used as the medium for core educational studies it provokes passionate responses of both dissent and accord. The authors argue the possibilities for an arts based pedagogy in pre-service education which provides a space for learning outside the accepted academic discourse and which supports the possibilities of imaging and knowing the positioned teacher. This research (dis)locates (Laclau, 1990; Edwards and Usher, 1997) the spatial configuration of the tertiary education classroom: reconfiguring the physical, positional, and epistemological.<br /

1982 Ruby Yearbook

A digitized copy of the 1982 Ruby, the Ursinus College yearbook.https://digitalcommons.ursinus.edu/ruby/1085/thumbnail.jp

1966 Ruby Yearbook

A digitized copy of the 1966 Ruby, the Ursinus College yearbook.https://digitalcommons.ursinus.edu/ruby/1069/thumbnail.jp

1969 Ruby Yearbook

A digitized copy of the 1969 Ruby, the Ursinus College yearbook.https://digitalcommons.ursinus.edu/ruby/1072/thumbnail.jp

1944 Ruby Yearbook

A digitized copy of the 1944 Ruby, the Ursinus College yearbook.https://digitalcommons.ursinus.edu/ruby/1046/thumbnail.jp

Improving mood with psychoanalytic and cognitive therapies (IMPACT): a pragmatic effectiveness superiority trial to investigate whether specialised psychological treatment reduces the risk for relapse in adolescents with moderate to severe unipolar depression: study protocol for a randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Up to 70% of adolescents with moderate to severe unipolar major depression respond to psychological treatment plus Fluoxetine (20-50 mg) with symptom reduction and improved social function reported by 24 weeks after beginning treatment. Around 20% of non responders appear treatment resistant and 30% of responders relapse within 2 years. The specific efficacy of different psychological therapies and the moderators and mediators that influence risk for relapse are unclear. The cost-effectiveness and safety of psychological treatments remain poorly evaluated. METHODS/DESIGN: Improving Mood with Psychoanalytic and Cognitive Therapies, the IMPACT Study, will determine whether Cognitive Behavioural Therapy or Short Term Psychoanalytic Therapy is superior in reducing relapse compared with Specialist Clinical Care. The study is a multicentre pragmatic effectiveness superiority randomised clinical trial: Cognitive Behavioural Therapy consists of 20 sessions over 30 weeks, Short Term Psychoanalytic Psychotherapy 30 sessions over 30 weeks and Specialist Clinical Care 12 sessions over 20 weeks. We will recruit 540 patients with 180 randomised to each arm. Patients will be reassessed at 6, 12, 36, 52 and 86 weeks. Methodological aspects of the study are systematic recruitment, explicit inclusion criteria, reliability checks of assessments with control for rater shift, research assessors independent of treatment team and blind to randomization, analysis by intention to treat, data management using remote data entry, measures of quality assurance, advanced statistical analysis, manualised treatment protocols, checks of adherence and competence of therapists and assessment of cost-effectiveness. We will also determine whether time to recovery and/or relapse are moderated by variations in brain structure and function and selected genetic and hormone biomarkers taken at entry. DISCUSSION: The objective of this clinical trial is to determine whether there are specific effects of specialist psychotherapy that reduce relapse in unipolar major depression in adolescents and thereby costs of treatment to society. We also anticipate being able to utilise psychotherapy experience, neuroimaging, genetic and hormone measures to reveal what techniques and their protocols may work best for which patients. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN83033550.RIGHTS : This article is licensed under the BioMed Central licence at http://www.biomedcentral.com/about/license which is similar to the 'Creative Commons Attribution Licence'. In brief you may : copy, distribute, and display the work; make derivative works; or make commercial use of the work - under the following conditions: the original author must be given credit; for any reuse or distribution, it must be made clear to others what the license terms of this work are

Cognitive behavioural therapy and short-term psychoanalytical psychotherapy versus a brief psychosocial intervention in adolescents with unipolar major depressive disorder (IMPACT): a multicentre, pragmatic, observer-blind, randomised controlled superiority trial.

$\textbf{BACKGROUND}$: Psychological treatments for adolescents with unipolar major depressive disorder are associated with diagnostic remission within 28 weeks in 65-70% of patients. We aimed to assess the medium-term effects and costs of psychological therapies on maintenance of reduced depression symptoms 12 months after treatment. $\textbf{METHODS}$: We did this multicentre, pragmatic, observer-blind, randomised controlled superiority trial (IMPACT) at 15 National Health Service child and adolescent mental health service (CAMHS) clinics in three regions in England. Adolescent patients (aged 11-17 years) with a diagnosis of DSM IV major depressive disorder were randomly assigned (1:1:1), via a web-based randomisation service, to receive cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) or short-term psychoanalytical therapy versus a reference brief psychological intervention. Randomisation was stochastically minimised by age, sex, self-reported depression sum score, and region. Patients and clinicians were aware of group allocation, but allocation was concealed from outcome assessors. Patients were followed up and reassessed at weeks 6, 12, 36, 52, and 86 post-randomisation. The primary outcome was self-reported depression symptoms at weeks 36, 52, and 86, as measured with the self-reported Mood and Feelings Questionnaire (MFQ). Because our aim was to compare the two psychological therapies with the brief psychosocial intervention, we first established whether CBT was inferior to short-term psychoanalytical psychotherapy for the same outcome. Primary analysis was by intention to treat. This trial is registered with Current Controlled Trials, number ISRCTN83033550. $\textbf{FINDINGS}$: Between June 29, 2010, and Jan 17, 2013, we randomly assigned 470 patients to receive the brief psychosocial intervention (n=158), CBT (n=155), or short-term psychoanalytical therapy (n=157); 465 patients comprised the intention-to-treat population. 392 (84%) patients had available data for primary analysis by the end of follow-up. Treatment fidelity and differentiation were established between the three interventions. The median number of treatment sessions differed significantly between patients in the brief psychosocial intervention group (n=6 [IQR 4-11]), CBT group (n=9 [5-14]), and short-term psychoanalytical therapy group (n=11 [5-23]; p<0·0001), but there was no difference between groups in the average duration of treatment (27·5 [SD 21·5], 24·9 [17·7], 27·9 [16·8] weeks, respectively; Kruskal-Wallis p=0·238). Self-reported depression symptoms did not differ significantly between patients given CBT and those given short-term psychoanalytical therapy at weeks 36 (treatment effect 0·179, 95% CI -3·731 to 4·088; p=0·929), 52 (0·307, -3·161 to 3·774; p=0·862), or 86 (0·578, -2·948 to 4·104; p=0·748). These two psychological treatments had no superiority effect compared with brief psychosocial intervention at weeks 36 (treatment effect -3·234, 95% CI -6·611 to 0·143; p=0·061), 52 (-2·806, -5·790 to 0·177; p=0·065), or 86 (-1·898, -4·922 to 1·126; p=0·219). Physical adverse events (self-reported breathing problems, sleep disturbances, drowsiness or tiredness, nausea, sweating, and being restless or overactive) did not differ between the groups. Total costs of the trial interventions did not differ significantly between treatment groups. $\textbf{INTERPRETATION}$: We found no evidence for the superiority of CBT or short-term psychoanalytical therapy compared with a brief psychosocial intervention in maintenance of reduced depression symptoms 12 months after treatment. Short-term psychoanalytical therapy was as effective as CBT and, together with brief psychosocial intervention, offers additional patient choice for psychological therapy, alongside CBT, for adolescents with moderate to severe depression who are attending routine specialist CAMHS clinics.National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment (HTA) programme, and the Department of Health