4,809 research outputs found

    You've got some GALL: Google-Assisted Language Learning

    Get PDF

    Precarity and Pedagogical Responsibility

    Get PDF
    Despite good intentions, No Child Left Behind (2002) and other initiatives aimed at leveling the playing field in American society have arguably had more harmful than positive effects on children’s learning in schools. According to some critics (e.g., Au, 2004; Glass, 2007; Orfield & Kornhaber, 2001; Wotherspoon & Schissel, 2001), if we scratch beneath the surface of these initiatives, we often find discourses that pathologize certain children or groups of children, and a reluctance to look critically at the social, political, and economic conditions (such as hunger, homelessness, and lack of adequate health care) under which some children struggle to succeed in school while others flourish. But as Ron Glass (2007) argues, instead of blaming children for the detrimental effects of circumstances and experiences beyond their control, we need to start holding to account the adults who could in fact make a difference in those children’s lives. I share Glass’s view, and in what follows, I want to move away from the prevailing discourses of cultural deprivation and deficit, turning instead to the recent scholarship on vulnerability and precarity in order to reframe our conception of pedagogical responsibility in today’s increasingly diverse classrooms

    Time to publication for NIHR HTA programme-funded research: a cohort study

    Get PDF
    ObjectiveTo assess the time to publication of primary research and evidence syntheses funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment (HTA) Programme published as a monograph in Health Technology Assessment and as a journal article in the wider biomedical literature.Study designRetrospective cohort study.SettingPrimary research and evidence synthesis projects funded by the HTA Programme were included in the cohort if they were registered in the NIHR research programmes database and was planned to submit the draft final report for publication in Health Technology Assessment on or before 9 December 2011.Main outcome measuresThe median time to publication and publication at 30?months in Health Technology Assessment and in an external journal were determined by searching the NIHR research programmes database and HTA Programme website.ResultsOf 458 included projects, 184 (40.2%) were primary research projects and 274 (59.8%) were evidence syntheses. A total of 155 primary research projects had a completion date; the median time to publication was 23?months (26.5 and 35.5?months to publish a monograph and to publish in an external journal, respectively) and 69% were published within 30?months. The median time to publication of HTA-funded trials (n=126) was 24?months and 67.5% were published within 30?months. Among the evidence syntheses with a protocol online date (n=223), the median time to publication was 25.5?months (28?months to publication as a monograph), but only 44.4% of evidence synthesis projects were published in an external journal. 65% of evidence synthesis studies had been published within 30.0?months.ConclusionsResearch funded by the HTA Programme publishes promptly. The importance of Health Technology Assessment was highlighted as the median time to publication was 9?months shorter for a monograph than an external journal article

    Fear, trauma and found footage : how found footage horror can help us feel better

    Get PDF
    Why would people experiencing a global pandemic seek out a pandemic disaster movie? Why would horror films help people feel better about an unrelated real world source of health anxiety? Why do people enjoy horror cinema at all? This project seeks to understand the mechanism by which horror scares and how this can be a therapeutic or preventative process, and then understand the found footage subgenre of horror by the function of this mechanical framework. This entails outlining a phenomenologically biocultural approach to horror, as informed by the work of scholars and researchers like Mathias Clasen et al, Coltan Scrivener, Julian Hanich and Adam Daniel as well as radical embodied cognition and affect theory. This approach argues that the effects of horror are fundamentally biological and cultural at the same time, and that horror provides an opportunity to vicariously experience and as such survive danger. I argue that found footage horror should defined not by the visual or formal traits the presentation seeks to emulate, but rather its relationship to the viewer; found footage horror will always feature a camera-using person or group who seeks to record. The distinction between found footage and mockumentary is in the embodiment or foregrounding of the people behind the camera, though these lines can often become blurred. This grounding of the camera-user furthers the impact of horror elements both specific to found footage and shared with more traditionally presented cinema. Finally, I will use the established methodology and the prior definitions of found footage and its thematic movements to break down Host (Savage, 2020) in order to understand both how it scares and how it can be seen as potentially therapeutic during a time of global pandemic
    • 

    corecore