Reliable data transfer via frequency transmission

Reliable single directional frequency data transfer is a method of electronic communication that is a potential alternative to a bi-directional or wired method. It is intended to determine whether or not single directional data transfer can be designed to perform at the same reliability level as other methods of data transmission. The reason for researching this is to see whether, two-way communication is necessary. Upon finding results to this question it will be determined if single directional frequency data transfer can be as power efficient as bi directional data transfer. It will also look into the overall performance of the method and how it can deal with inhibiting factors that will be introduced to simulate real world external variations in the signal. How reliable single directional frequency transfer is, will be determined through experiments that are tasked at finding the maximum transmission rate of the devices made and the distance that data transmission can be conducted over. The investigation will require the design of an experimental apparatus that will allow results to be found in the maximum possible transmission rate and distance transmission can cover. The experimental apparatus will consist of two possessors, one for encoding a message, the other for decoding a message. The apparatus will also require an integrated radio frequency transmitter circuit as well as a receiver radio frequency integrated circuit. The processors will need to be coded with a new protocol that will allow the incorporation of three forward error correction techniques. This is so that a basic, intermediate and advanced method of forward error correction can be compared when gathering results. Throughout this research consideration into all aspects that can possibly improve the energy efficiency of the electrical apparatus will be addressed an implemented. By creating an experimental apparatus that is competitive against other data transmission methods in terms of energy efficiency. With an energy efficient experimental apparatus, then results found could be a close representation of the likely outcomes if single directional data transmission was to be implemented on a larger scale

Navigating the Pre-Tenure Review Process: Experiences of a Self-Study Researcher

Four years after the first Castle Conference, Cole and Knowles (1998) wrote of teacher educator concerns in conducting self-study research: Concerns about institutional responses to self-study mainly are rooted in issues associated with tenure and promotion ... (p. 225). The publication of Studying Teacher Education and increased acceptance of self-study research in teacher education journals provide an avenue for self-study researchers to publish in respected, refereed journals. Questions of self-study\u27s validity, rigor, and trustworthiness have a long history (e.g., Bullough & Pinnegar, 2001). However, questions remain around the acceptance of self-study research among tenure and promotion committees. Institutional context certainly plays a significant factor in whether or not self-study research is an accepted form of qualitative research. Conversations with fellow S-STEP members point to a wide range of support for self-study work. However, at my institution, self-study research has not fit within the norm of what is considered mainstream research. Historically, quantitative research has dominated the college of education. Qualitative research has only recently appeared in a significant manner, mostly conducted by junior faculty. This reality complicates the promotion and tenure process, as many of those faculty working toward tenure use what might be deemed as emerging methods while evaluated by senior faculty who predominately conduct quantitative research and whose epistemological stances are echoed in statements to doctoral students (through dissertation work) and junior faculty (through evaluations) as to what is valued as scholarship. It is within that context this chapter takes place. As a faculty member who went through pre-tenure review in 2013-2014, I sought to answer the following question: What are the experiences of a self-study researcher in the third-year, pre-tenure review process

Fair Use Challenges in Academic and Research Libraries

Summarizes findings from a survey of librarians on the application of fair use in copyright practice to fulfill libraries' missions of teaching and learning support, scholarship support preservation, exhibition, and public outreach

Fair Use Without Fear in the Academy

Provides information on the legal side of fair use. Includes information on the purpose of copyright, best practice codes, court cases, etc

Some Cautionary Tales about Collective Licensing

Article published in the Michigan State International Law Review

The Joker Controversy: An Origin Story

The Joker has been in the Batman comics for over 80 years and appeared on small and large screen as Batman’s violent arch-nemesis. In the month prior to its theatrical release, commentary about the 2019 film Joker spurred a viral media reaction with concerns about the film inciting violence. To understand this phenomenon, we used Google Trends to trace a timeline of online media reactions mapped to events. Then, we analyzed over 200 news stories, commentary articles, and film reviews for explanatory narratives. We noted four key moments: the Venice Film Festival; an open letter by family members of victims of the 2012 mass shooting at an Aurora, Colorado theater playing The Dark Knight Rises; the reaction of the film’s star to questions about inspiring violence; and military warnings about possible violence at theaters. We also discovered that a handful of influential movie reviews facilitated the framing of the wider media narrative around socio-political hot topics, particularly mass shootings and “incels.” The individual events, wedged into this narrative, gave the story legs. This fueled a short-burst media frenzy about the so-called controversy surrounding the film, which abated shortly after the film’s release. We argue that pop cultural beliefs about the Joker character, media environments, social context, and the parceling of sensational storylines contributed to the viral reaction

The Law and Accessible Texts: Reconciling Civil Rights and Copyrights

Executive Summary Institutions of higher education (IHEs—colleges, community colleges, and universities) have a mission to provide all students, including those with disabilities (a physical or mental impairment that substantially limits one or more major life activities), with opportunities for a rich, deep, and equitable learning experience, and to provide all researchers with access to a comprehensive and varied collection of information resources to support their work. Several disability rights laws create obligations for IHEs to ensure that students and researchers with disabilities have access to resources, including texts, at a level that is as close as reasonably possible to the level of access provided to those without disabilities. Enforcement actions can be brought by federal government agencies (the civil rights division of the Department of Education, for example) or by private citizens, and the result of these actions has typically been that IHEs are compelled to improve levels of access, including by incorporating new technology, creating new staff positions, and implementing new policies. For years, disability services offices (DSOs—the office or department at an IHE tasked with supporting the needs of users with disabilities) and others involved in fulfilling the requirements of disability rights laws have viewed copyright (the body of law that governs copying, adaptation, distribution, and certain other uses of works of creative expression) as an impediment to their work. They have been uncertain about what is permitted, and have constrained their activities in support of civil rights out of fear of violating copyrights. The tension has dramatically curtailed their efficiency. This fear is due primarily to a misunderstanding of voluntary arrangements DSOs have with some of the biggest publishers. These arrangements place strict constraints on DSOs’ use and reuse of accessible texts, based on the publishers’ view of their commercial interests, not on the law. Some publishers have also included misleading warnings on accessible texts they provide to DSOs. The Law and Accessible Texts: Reconciling Civil Rights and Copyrights 7 In reality, even in the absence of such voluntary arrangements, copyright law provides IHEs with broad, clear authority to create accessible copies of in-copyright works (i.e., to “remediate” them by converting them into a format that makes it possible for users with disabilities to acquire the same information, have the same interactions, and otherwise derive the same benefits as other users), to distribute accessible texts to qualified users, and to retain and share remediated texts in secure repositories for use in serving future qualifying requests. The key provisions in U.S. copyright law that make this possible are Section 121, also known as the Chafee Amendment, and Section 107, the fair use doctrine. Section 121 is a specific but broad exception permitting authorized entities to make copyrighted works available to the print-disabled in accessible formats without permission from the copyright holder. Section 107 is the general right to use copyrighted works without permission when a set of flexible, equitable factors weigh in favor of the use. A landmark case, Authors Guild v. HathiTrust, has established that fair use authorizes IHEs to create and manage repositories of digital texts in support of accessibility, among other legitimate uses. Together, these two rights enacted by Congress permit each step in a workflow that starts with a request from a student or researcher with a disability, involves remediation and delivery of an accessible version to the requestor, and culminates with deposit of the remediated version in a secure repository for appropriate future use (including future remediation) in the service of other requestors. Along the way, copyright law provides some guidance as to how exactly each step might be conducted, but leaves IHEs with discretion to design their systems in consideration of values and priorities both intrinsic and extrinsic to copyright. In addition to copyright, IHEs working together to provide accessible texts to qualified users should consider a range of values and priorities as they decide whether and how to take advantage of their rights. These include their own missions, the privacy and autonomy of those they serve, and the plausible risks (if any) associated with increasing access to information Conclusion In 2016, Stevie Wonder addressed the United Nations, urging member states to ratify the Marrakesh Treaty. He told the assembly, “This is a truly life changing opportunity. It opens the door to the world’s knowledge to the visually impaired people.”89 Indeed, the U.S. ratification of the Marrakesh Treaty is the culmination of a series of developments in U.S. law favoring access to knowledge regardless of ability, from the Rehabilitation Act to the codification of the fair use doctrine in the 1976 Copyright Act, to the passage of the Chafee Amendment and the courts’ decisions in the HathiTrust case. Collectively, these measures create a framework that IHEs and their allies and affiliated entities can leverage to increase access and vastly improve education and research for all. They ensure that institutions with an obligation and a mission to pursue justice also have the right to do so. Perhaps the most striking takeaway from this survey has been the extent to which copyright defers to accessibility, not the other way around. What has emerged is a hierarchy of legal interests, arrayed under the general heading of the First Amendment and its protection for expression and access to information. Contrary to what some have assumed in the past, the first priority under that heading is accessibility, which consistently trumps the exclusive rights granted by copyright when the two come into conflict. This priority is built into the copyright law itself, through both its general fair use right and its specific provisions favoring accessibility. The effort involved in ending the book famine for thousands of students and researchers will be substantial, and there will surely be challenges along the way, but copyright law should not be one of them