Search results

There is considerable agreement around the foundation skills required by employers that will enable graduates to integrate and devise promising solutions for the challenges faced by knowledge and globalized societies. These are life skills (communication skills, teamwork and leadership skills, language skills in reading and writing and information literacy), transferable skills (such as problem-solving, including critical thinking, creativity and quantitative reasoning) and technology skills (search for knowledge and build upon it). Foundation skills, however, are recognized to be difficult both to teach and assess. This paper aims to describe a performance assessment method to assess and measure these skills in a uniquely concurrent way – the General Education Foundation Skills Assessment (GEFSA).

The GEFSA framework comprises a scenario/case describing an unresolved contemporary issue, which engages student groups in online discussions, and a task-specific analytic rubric to concurrently assess the extent to which students have attained the targeted foundation skills. The method was applied in three semesters – during 2016 and 2017. These students were non-native English speaking students in a General Education program at a university in the UAE.

Results obtained from the rubric for each foundation skill were analyzed and interpreted to ensure robustness of method and tool usability and reliability, provide insight into, and commentary on, the respective skill attainment levels and assist in establishing realistic target ranges for General Education student skill attainment. The results showed that the method is valid and provides valuable data for curriculum development.

This is the first method in published literature that directly assesses the foundation skills for General Education students simultaneously, thus providing educators with valuable data on the skill level of the students. Additionally, repeated use of the method is a valuable way of teaching skills.

This study aims to explore the scientific research progress in the field of “Rural Livelihood” from 1991 to 2022.

A total of 2,122 documents were extracted from the Web of Science Core Collection using the key terms “Rural Livelihood” OR “Rural Livelihoods” in the “Title-Abstract-Keyword” field. The statistical analysis was performed through VOSviewer, Bibliometrix, Biblioshiney open-source package of R language environment, and MS Office software.

The results show that the first research article related to the field of rural livelihood was published in 1991, and the rapid growth in the publications of rural livelihood was observed since 2000, with a positive annual growth rate of 14.87%. Shackleton CM (n = 30 articles) and Belcher B (n = 1235 citations) are the most productive and highly cited authors in the field of rural livelihood, respectively. World Development is the most prolific and dominant journal, followed by Sustainability and Land Use Policy. The citation analysis disclosed that “Capitals and capabilities: a framework for analysing peasant viability, rural livelihoods and poverty” is the most cited research paper published in the field of rural livelihood by Anthony Bebbington. University of Copenhagen, Wageningen University and Rhodes University emerged as the topmost organizations engaged in rural livelihood research. The USA and the UK are the most productive and cited countries in rural livelihood. The keyword analysis revealed that most of the research published in the field of rural livelihood has focussed on rural livelihoods, management, conservation, poverty, strategies, climate change, etc.; however, the least emphasis is given on the subjects like food security, income diversification, biodiversity, deforestation, soil fertility management, bio-economy and environmental intervention. The thematic evolution reflects that the field of rural livelihood has been extensively researched and has undergone many dimensions, such as agriculture, management, conservation, climate change, households, policy and biodiversity.

The study’s findings provide an insight into global research trends, latest advances, hot issues, leading topics, and the thematic evolution of rural livelihood research over the last 31 years approximately. This study is quite useful to researchers and stakeholders to obtain rigorous bibliographic knowledge on literature related to the topic and work accordingly for R&D activities.

The handling of conflicts of interest has become an increasingly important concern for modern professional advisers, in particular lawyers, accountants, brokers and financial advisors. This concern has become exacerbated because of the convergence of a number of factors, namely the bureaucratisation of many areas of professional advisory work, the emergence of megafirms and large national and multi‐national partnerships dealing with this work, coupled with a customer base dominated by large corporations and governments. Indeed, it is the demand of these customers that partly accounts for the emergence of larger advisory firms. However, the outcome of this process has inevitably created severe conflicts of interest problems for such conglomerate professional practices and large advisory firms, problems that they have attempted to contain through the use of what has become commonly known as Chinese walls.

Intergenerational confinement is an under-recognized, policy-driven issue which greatly impacts Indigenous and racialized peoples in countries with ongoing colonial legacies. Numerous policy solutions enacted over colonial history have exacerbated instead of mitigated this situation. This chapter advances an improved understanding of the impacts of carceral legacies, moving beyond the dominant focus of parental incarceration in the literature. Focusing on Indigenous peoples, multiple generations in families and communities have been subjected to changing methods of confinement and removal. Using critical policy analysis and interview research, this chapter interrogates these intergenerational impacts of carceral policy-making in Canada, Australia, and New Zealand. Drawing on qualitative interviews with 124 people in the three case countries, this chapter centers perspectives of people who have been intergenerationally confined in carceral institutions. With a goal of transformation, it then explores an alternative orientation to policy-making that seeks to acknowledge, account for, and address the harmful direct and indirect ripple-effects of carceral strategies over generations.

The purpose of this paper is to highlight the key findings, themes and concepts in coaching from the inception of the International Journal of Mentoring and Coaching in Education in early 2012 to the end of 2018. The review examines how coaching is theorized and practised in an educational context, and how coaching has evolved across educational disciplines.

The study is based on an analysis of research trends published in the International Journal of Mentoring and Coaching in Education from Volume 1 Issue 1 (2012) to Volume 7 Issue 4 (2018). The criterion according to which the articles were selected for inclusion in the literature review is whether the word “coaching” is used in the title, abstract or keywords.

Across a wide range of geographical and institutional contexts, the studies surveyed in this literature review point to the different ways in which coaching interventions support success in teaching and leadership. This review identifies three principal themes across the literature on coaching: confidence, trust and identity.

The literature review is confined to studies published in a single publication and is therefore not representative of the entire field of coaching research.

The focus of this review is coaching in education. The review comprises a survey of research concepts, innovation and creativity in the area of coaching and education. It highlights advances in the field of coaching and education and points to areas of development for future research.

By bringing together existing research in a number of areas across the field of coaching, this literature review provides a coherent overview of a rapidly evolving and diverse field.

This contribution argues that there is a fundamental problem for the multi-level governance (MLG) approach in that what the approach is trying to explain has never been fully agreed by the vast group of scholarship that references it. The chapter then examines and proposes that ideas and concepts from network governance, principal–agent (PA) and learning can provide the necessary micro foundations for the MLG approach.

The chapter examines and critiques the original MLG formulations and the later efforts at elaboration. It then reviews the literature and concepts for three public policy approaches that have been associated with European governance to see how core explanations can be elaborated upon in a multi-level context: network governance, principal–agent (PA) and learning.

This contribution suggests that co-ordination, and the resources that help maintain this co-ordination, is the key dependent variable that underpins the MLG approach. With multiple principals and multiple agents, operating at a number of levels of analysis, direct authority and control is harder to evoke. The key explanatory variable underpinning this MLG co-ordination is learning by the participants.

Researchers need to concentrate both their theoretical and empirical efforts in understanding the conditions that support multi-level governance and that sustain its effort.

The contribution outlines some of the key practical questions that policy-makers must face. Can they manage resources and induce learning from all the relevant public and private stakeholders to engage in the MLG effort?

Not only does an effective MLG process involve engaging a wide range of societal stakeholders, these stakeholders have to be persuaded to invest effort in learning about the nature of the governance system, the challenges of the policy problem and the implications of the efforts to resolve these problems.

This chapter isolates the fundamental lacuna at the heart of the MLG project and offers academics and practitioners a conceptual lens for building a clearer analytical structure for studying MLG.

In the era of financial capitalism, how to manage and hold global corporations accountable has become too multifarious a topic for a solitary focus of one theme, to sufficiently outline the whole gamut and implications of their activities. Capitalism is characterized by several well-organized antinomies and contrasts, with reflections of critical dualities that bear a resemblance to the primeval paradoxes of Hellenic philosophy. The challenge of governance of capitalism to be effectual entails breaking out of the entrenched precincts of habitual academic silos. Various standpoints while reasonably informative falls short to explain fully the complex interlinkages between the concept of global governance and the state’s capacity to put into effect its will on corporate power.

Spotlighting on assessing the praxis of political economy at global and national level and the corporate reality, this chapter aims to provide a renewed thrust for the focused recalibration of global regulatory regime. In this chapter, the inquiries take the regulation as the main explanandum for elucidation of the shifting governance framework.

This study aims to explain how socially responsible investing (SRI) has evolved in the past few decades and sheds light on its latest developments. It describes different forms of SRI in the financial markets, and deliberates on the rationale for the utilization of positive and negative screenings of listed businesses and public organizations.

A comprehensive literature review suggests that the providers of financial capital are increasingly allocating funds toward positive impact and sustainable investments. Therefore, this descriptive paper provides a factual summary of the proliferation of SRI products in financial markets. Afterwards, it presents the opportunities and challenges facing the stakeholders of SRI.

This research presents a historic overview on the growth of SRI products in the financial services industry. It clarifies that the market for responsible investing has recently led to an increase in a number of stakeholders, including contractors, non-governmental organizations and research firms who are involved in the scrutinization of the businesses’ environmental, social and governance (ESG) behaviors.

This discursive contribution raises awareness on the screenings of positive impact and sustainable investments. The researcher contends that today’s socially responsible investors are increasingly analyzing the businesses’ non-financial performance, including their ESG credentials. In conclusion, this paper puts forward future research avenues in this promising field of study.

Advances in Econometrics is a series of research volumes first published in 1982 by JAI Press. The authors present an update to the history of the Advances in Econometrics series. The initial history, published in 2012 for the 30th Anniversary Volume, describes key events in the history of the series and provides information about key authors and contributors to Advances in Econometrics. The authors update the original history and discuss significant changes that have occurred since 2012. These changes include the addition of five new Senior Co-Editors, seven new AIE Fellows, an expansion of the AIE conferences throughout the United States and abroad, and the increase in the number of citations for the series from 7,473 in 2012 to over 25,000 by 2022.