Herman Kuhlman (1808?-1876)

Herman Kuhlman born circa 1808 in either Hanover, Lower Saxony or Westenberg, Prussia. Emigrated to U.S. (year unknown). Married a German woman named Caroline (year unknown).Came to Savannah in the early 1840\u27s and worked in the grocery business. Had eight children between the years 1841-1852 (all died at early ages, except for two). Caroline died in 1852. Kuhlman remarried in 1853 to Emelie Engels, also of Germany. Had eleven children between the years 1854-1876. Gave up grocery business for farming in the early 1860\u27s. Moved to Tattnall County, Ga. between the years 1860-1870. Died in Tattnall Co. on December 12, 1876. (Burial place unknown).https://digitalcommons.georgiasouthern.edu/sav-bios-lane/1215/thumbnail.jp

Interactions between a Speech Pathologist and people with aphasia in the first 6 weeks post stroke: A qualitative study of assessment experiences

This study examines clinician and client interactions in the context of an acute care unit in a small urban Western Australian Hospital. The study involved audiovisual recordings and observations of assessment sessions, and in-depth interviews with the assessing Speech Pathologist and her clients. Analysis used Discourse Analysis of assessment sessions and Thematic Analysis of interviews. There is growing evidence as to how less formal non-traditional assessment might be more supportive of people with aphasia—for instance, by using concepts and techniques drawn from Dynamic Assessment and principles of Adult Learning. Surveys of Australian and New Zealand Speech Pathologists reflect a move away from standardised tests in acute settings, finding Speech Pathologists are more likely to use informal and/or unstandardised assessment tools. However, little research has been conducted about the assessment experiences of people with aphasia, particularly in the early stages post- stroke. The purpose of this study is to describe and analyse typical contemporary speech pathology practices in assessment of people with aphasia in the early stages post-stroke, and explore how assessment is experienced by both the assessing clinician and the person assessed

Community–University Partnerships: Using Participatory Action Learning and Action Research (PALAR)

This article positions participatory action learning and action research (PALAR) as a preferred methodology for community-university partnerships to achieve a holistic outcome that benefits the common interest. Evidence for this claim is illustrated through case studies of two community engagement programs, one in South Africa and the other in Australia. The South African study explains how relationships, reflection and recognition (the three R’s of PALAR) are important elements that promote a truly participatory approach to knowledge creation and practical improvement in social circumstances. The Australian study then highlights what can be achieved. It does this by showing the potential for PALAR participants to learn how to design and implement a community engagement program, and how to cascade their own learning into their community to improve educational opportunities. Both studies demonstrate PALAR’s potential to disrupt traditional understandings of the research process, particularly in terms of researcher–participant relationships. At the same time, both studies identify the challenges arising from the theoretical and practical implications of PALAR as an approach to community development. This article is therefore significant for universities and funding organisations engaging in community-based research and development through partnerships, specifically in contexts of disadvantage. Keywords: Participatory action learning and action research, PALAR, community development, community engagement, community partnerships, disadvantaged communities, higher education

Judicial Termination of Treaty Water Rights: The Snake River Case

This article criticized the Idaho district court\u27s resolution of the Nez Perce Tribe\u27s water rights in the Snake River Basin Adjudication (SRBA). The scope of the tribe\u27s claims were considerable, since they included the right to maintain their fishing practices at the time of their 1855 treaty, The article examined the SRBA decision, the purposes of the 1855 treaty, the nature of the tribe\u27s off-reservation water rights, and the unprincipled termination of those rights by the 1999 SRBA court\u27s decision. The article\u27s call for a correction by the Idaho Supreme Court, which the epilogue to the article noted included a conflict-of-interest on the part of the SRBA court, was later obviated by a settlement between the tribe and the state