How Common is Common Human Reason?:The Plurality of Moral Perspectives and Kant’s Ethics

In his practical philosophy, Kant aims to systematize and ground a conception of morality that every human being already in some form is supposedly committed to in virtue of her common human reason. While Kantians especially in the last few years have explicitly acknowledged the central role of common human reason for a correct understanding of Kant’s ethics, there has been very little detailed critical discussion of the very notion of a common human reason as Kant envisages it. Sticker critically discusses in what ways Kant is committed to the notion that there are certain rational insights and rational capacities that all humans share, and thus investigates critically how Kant thinks moral normativity appears to the common human being, the rational agent who did not enjoy special education or philosophical training

Gibt es ein transnationales Selbstbestimmungsrecht? Bewegungsethische Erkundungen

Mecheril P. Gibt es ein transnationales Selbstbestimmungsrecht? Bewegungsethische Erkundungen. In: Ackeren van I, ed. Bewegungen. Beiträge zum 26. Kongress der Deutschen Gesellschaft für Erziehungswissenschaft. Opladen: Barbara Budrich; 2020: 101-118

Extrakranielle Neurinome der Kopf-Hals-Region: Eine Fall-Übersicht

Einleitung: Neurinome der Kopf-Hals-Region treten meist intrakraniell auf. Je nach klinischer Symptomatik und Größe wird oft zunächst ein kontrollierendes Vorgehen empfohlen, um das Risiko iatrogener Nervenschädigungen zu vermeiden. Bei den extrakraniellen Manifestationen fehlen bislang konsistente Therapieempfehlungen. Material und Methoden: Wir untersuchten alle Patienten mit extrakraniellen Neurinomen im Kopf/Halsbereich, die von 2007-2013 an der HNO-Uniklinik Bochum operiert wurden. Hierbei wurden klinische prä- und postoperative Manifestation, Bildgebung sowie histologische Aufarbeitung betrachtet. Ergebnisse: Bei den erfassten 6 Patienten (4w, 2m, Altersdurchschnitt 43,6 Jahre) fanden sich (jeweils n=1) Nn. VII, X, XI, XII, Plexus brachialis und cervicalis als Ursprungsnerven. Die Erstvorstellung erfolgte meist bei unklarer cervikaler Raumforderung. In 3 Fällen bestand bereits präoperativ mittels Bildgebung Neurinomverdacht. In allen Fällen erfolgte die totale Tumorentfernung, wobei postoperativ alle Patienten im Verlauf persistierende Paralysen mit entsprechender Funktionseinschränkung zeigten, nur in einem Fall bestand die Parese bereits präoperativ. Schlussfolgerungen: Extrakranielle Neurinome können diagnostische und therapeutische Herausforderungen darstellen. Als operative Therapieoptionen bestehen Enukleation und komplette Tumorresektion. In der Literatur wird die intrakapsuläre Enukleation bezüglich Funktionserhalt kontrovers diskutiert. Bei den von uns operierten Patienten traten in 5/6 Fällen Paralysen auf, die präoperativ noch nicht bestanden. Es sollte diskutiert werden, ob bei präoperativ insgesamt konsistenten Befunden ein sofortiges operatives Vorgehen zwingend notwendig oder eine engmaschige wait-and-scan Strategie optional sinnvoll ist.Der Erstautor gibt keinen Interessenkonflikt an

World-wide barriers and enablers to achieving evidence-informed practice in education: what can be learnt from Spain, England, the United States, and Germany?

A global push exists to bolster the connections between research and practice in education. However, fostering evidence-informed practice (EIP) has proven challenging. Indeed, this ‘problem’ requires simultaneously attending to multiple aspects/levels of education systems, and to the contexts within which they reside. As such, comparative analyses using systems approaches hold potential for achieving context-specific insights regarding how to foster EIP. However, such analyses have been scarce, and what research does exist has generally been limited relative to methods and theory. Given this, the present study executes and describes/reflects upon a novel approach for analysing and comparing EIP in/across systems. In this study, educators’ evidence use patterns are described and comparatively analysed, using a sample of four regions within high-income national settings: Catalonia (Spain), England (UK), Massachusetts (USA), and Rheinland-Pfalz (Germany). This study employs a dual analytical frame (a cohesion/regulation matrix and institutional theory) to supply a methodological lens through which to understand EIP within and across these four systems. Together, this approach not only provides a way of accounting for the macro-level differences between contexts, it also enables a comparison of meso-level and micro-level factors (via institutional theory) that might be common and distinct across systems. This study’s findings reveal substantial diversity in the extent and nature of evidence use between systems, which in turn patterned according to distinctive cultural, systemic, and institutional features. Considering these findings, this study’s discussion advances some provisional insights and reflections regarding actual and potential EIP in education. For example, variability relative to the types/extents of accountability pressures, and how this affected educators’ data and evidence use, enabled a discussion holding relevance for policymakers. We also share process-related insights—i.e., describing the advances and challenges we experienced while undertaking this new approach. These points hold relevance for colleagues wishing to emulate and improve upon the efforts described herein, which we argue are applicable both in and beyond the education sector. Relative to education, these approaches can be applied and improved with an eye toward developing context-specific (vs. one-size-fits-all) packages for fostering EIP and, ultimately, achieving high quality and progressively improving schools/systems