Detention and Punishment in the Name of Drug Treatment

As member states of the United Nations take stock of the drug control system, a number of debates have emerged among governments about how to balance international drug laws with human rights, public health, alternatives to incarceration, and experimentation with regulation. This series intends to provide a primer on why governments must not turn a blind eye to pressing human rights and public health impacts of current drug policies.In some countries, people who use, or are alleged to use, illicit drugs may be detained involuntarily after little or no legal process, ostensibly for the purpose of receiving drug "treatment" or "rehabilitation."These detentions are variously described as compulsory treatment centers, drug rehabilitation centers, detoxification centers, or "centers for social education and labor." It is far from clear that all persons detained in this manner are drug-dependent or in need of treatment. If they are, there are international standards to guide treatment of drug-dependence, but drug detention centers often subject detainees to treatment methods that are scientifically unsound, punitive, cruel, inhuman, and degrading. In March 2012, 12 UN bodies—including the Joint United Nations Programme on HIV/AIDS (UNAIDS), WHO, the UN Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC), the International Labour Organization, and the Office of the High Commissioner of Human Rights—jointly issued a call for the closure of compulsory drug detention centers and an expansion of voluntary, scientifically and medically appropriate forms of treating drug dependence in the health system.The 2012 joint UN statement on compulsory drug rehabilitation centers was a very important step, but a declaration from UN member states condemning these institutions and calling for their closure would advance the cause of ending the abuses they represent. Detention and Punishment in the Name of Drug Treatment highlights considerations that should be brought to bear in the 2016 United Nations General Assembly Special Session (UNGASS) on the world drug problem, toward the goal of ending arbitrary detention and grave human rights abuses in the name of drug treatment.

A study of effective evaluation models and practices for technology supported physical learning spaces (JELS)

The aim of the JELS project was to identify and review the tools, methods and frameworks used to evaluate technology supported or enhanced physical learning spaces. A key objective was to develop the sector knowledgebase on innovation and emerging practice in the evaluation of learning spaces, identifying innovative methods and approaches beyond traditional post-occupancy evaluations and surveys that have dominated this area to date. The intention was that the frameworks and guidelines discovered or developed from this study could inform all stages of the process of implementing a technology supported physical learning space. The study was primarily targeted at the UK HE sector and the FE sector where appropriate, and ran from September 2008 to March 2009

A literature synthesis of personalised technology-enhanced learning: what works and why

Personalised learning, having seen both surges and declines in popularity over the past few decades, is once again enjoying a resurgence. Examples include digital resources tailored to a particular learner’s needs, or individual feedback on a student’s assessed work. In addition, personalised technology-enhanced learning (TEL) now seems to be attracting interest from philanthropists and venture capitalists indicating a new level of enthusiasm for the area and a potential growth industry. However, these industries may be driven by profit rather than pedagogy, and hence it is vital these new developments are informed by relevant, evidence-based research. For many people, personalised learning is an ambiguous and even loaded term that promises much but does not always deliver. This paper provides an in-depth and critical review and synthesis of how personalisation has been represented in the literature since 2000, with a particular focus on TEL. We examine the reasons why personalised learning can be beneficial and examine how TEL can contribute to this. We also unpack how personalisation can contribute to more effective learning. Lastly, we examine the limitations of personalised learning and discuss the potential impacts on wider stakeholders

Doing learning space evaluations

In this chapter we argue that evaluating learning spaces is a valuable activity that can generate operational insights into how physical space affects learning, and can thus feed into processes of learning space design. The broader context is a desire to improve learning by designing better spaces within post-compulsory education