Search results

The purpose of this paper was to explore the well-being and experiences of working from home (WFH) for psychology staff across a range of specialties working within one health board in Scotland during the COVID-19 pandemic.

In total, 161 clinical psychology professionals took part in an online survey that explored experiences of WFH during the COVID-19 pandemic and assessed well-being during this period.

A number of challenges with WFH were identified, including challenges with carrying out clinical work (e.g. communication difficulties, risk assessment) and fewer opportunities for collaborative working and technical/equipment issues. During the WFH period, 46% experienced fatigue, 45% felt stressed and anxious and 30% felt lonely and isolated, compared to normal. Physical health complaints were also common with 37% experiencing aches/pains in back compared to normal and 40% experiencing headaches or migraines.

Remote therapy should be directed to those with less complex needs or who require straightforward assessments. There should be increased access to occupational health assessments and provision of ergonomic furniture when WFH, and all staff should be supported to access well-being resources available within the health board. Further evaluation should be carried out to support evidence-based practice of remote clinical work.

Few studies have explored the experiences of WFH and/or remotely from the perspectives of clinical psychologists in a Scottish health board. It is expected that this way of working will continue, albeit to a smaller extent; therefore, WFH policy will be informed by the findings.

The Food and Drugs Bill introduced by the Government affords an excellent illustration of the fact that repressive legislative enactments in regard to adulteration must always be of such a nature that, while they give a certain degree and a certain kind of protection to the public, they can never be expected to supply a sufficiently real and effective insurance against adulteration and against the palming off of inferior goods, nor an adequate and satisfactory protection to the producer and vendor of superior articles. In this country, at any rate, legislation on the adulteration question has always been, and probably will always be of a somewhat weak and patchy character, with the defects inevitably resulting from more or less futile attempts to conciliate a variety of conflicting interests. The Bill as it stands, for instance, fails to deal in any way satisfactorily with the subject of preservatives, and, if passed in its present form, will give the force of law to the standards of Somerset House—standards which must of necessity be low and the general acceptance of which must tend to reduce the quality of foods and drugs to the same dead‐level of extreme inferiority. The ludicrous laissez faire report of the Beer Materials Committee—whose authors see no reason to interfere with the unrestricted sale of the products of the “ free mash tun,” or, more properly speaking, of the free adulteration tun—affords a further instance of what is to be expected at present and for many years to come as the result of governmental travail and official meditations. Public feeling is developing in reference to these matters. There is a growing demand for some system of effective insurance, official or non‐official, based on common‐sense and common honesty ; and it is on account of the plain necessity that the quibbles and futilities attaching to repressive legislation shall by some means be brushed aside that we have come to believe in the power and the value of the system of Control, and that we advocate its general acceptance. The attitude and the policy of the INTERNATIONAL COMMISSION ON ADULTERATION, of the BRITISH FOOD JOURNAL, and of the BRITISH ANALYTICAL CONTROL, are in all respects identical with regard to adulteration questions; and in answer to the observations and suggestions which have been put forward since the introduction of the Control System in England, it may be well once more to state that nothing will meet with the approbation or support of the Control which is not pure, genuine, and good in the strictest sense of these terms. Those applicants and critics whom it may concern may with advantage take notice of the fact that under no circumstances will approval be given to such articles as substitute beers, separated milks, coppered vegetables, dyed sugars, foods treated with chemical preservatives, or, in fact, to any food or drug which cannot be regarded as in every respect free from any adulterant, and free from any suspicion of sophistication or inferiority. The supply of such articles as those referred to, which is left more or less unfettered by the cumbrous machinery of the law, as well as the sale of those adulterated goods with which the law can more easily deal, can only be adequately held in check by the application of a strong system of Control to justify approbation, providing, as this does, the only effective form of insurance which up to the present has been devised.

The purpose of this paper is to investigate the relationship between work placements and employability, through an analysis of the impact of a work placement on students’ self-efficacy.

The basis of this paper is a large-scale work-based learning module at the University of Birmingham, the “Professional Development Module”. Students completed questionnaires both before and after they undertaken their placements and the results from the questionnaires were compared. These results were then combined with the results of semi-structured interviews undertaken with students.

The paper's findings support the view that a work placement has a positive impact on students’ self-efficacy, especially in relation to their confidence in making applications and/or attending interviews, and in articulating their skills and strengths.

While the relatively small sample size means that the paper's conclusions must remain provisional, it highlights the need for careers practitioners to encourage students to engage in critical self-reflection. The paper suggests that it is important for careers practitioners and researchers to engage in more collaborative projects in order for a fully rounded picture of the relationship between placements and employability to emerge. The paper shows that more research is needed into the relative impact of short- and long-term placements.

The paper demonstrates the value of assessing students’ views both before and after their work placements so that these views can be compared directly.