Search results

Cornwall has implemented significant changes to the way that it delivers its safeguarding adults training. This paper outlines the benefits of combining safeguarding adults, the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (HM Government, 2005a) and equality and diversity training within a human rights framework. It examines the notion of learning transfer and considers how the design and delivery of training can improve the transfer of learning into practice. Finally, it highlights the importance of a receptive workplace culture to promote effective learning transfer.

The purpose of this paper is to clarify the relationship between safeguarding adults training, staff knowledge and confidence.

A total of 647 responses from a cross sectional postal sample survey of the health and social care sector in Cornwall, were analysed.

Differences in knowledge and confidence around safeguarding were observed between staff groups and agencies. Training contributed to an approximately 20 per cent increase in knowledge and a ceiling effect was noted. Confidence linked knowledge and action. More confident staff offered more sophisticated responses regarding improving safeguarding processes.

Low response rates and the specific context limit generalisability. Knowledge and confidence measures were simplistic. Further research is needed on the mechanism of action by which safeguarding adults training is effective.

Safeguarding adults training and a targeted approach to the analysis of learning needs should be debated in the context of training transfer. Training should be evaluated to ascertain its effectiveness.

This is the first major multi‐agency UK survey of its kind. Findings provide a baseline for further research.

This paper aims to address the potential of hunting humans as sport tourism activity in the twenty-second century. The paper explores past and current trends related to sport hunting, animal extinction, human violence and the normalisation of violence via fictional media. This paper paints a provocative picture of society with the aim of encouraging dialogue across the wider community regarding the challenges facing society in relation to practices related to sport hunting and tourism.

This paper takes a scenario narrative approach in presenting potential discussion on the future of sport hunting as a tourism activity. The importance of narrative writing as a method to research is its ability in telling a story to the reader. By embracing diverse philosophical methods, this research draws on past and current trends via secondary data sources to justify the future scenario narrative.

This paper presents interesting insights into the future of sport hunting and its potential relationship to tourism. However, considering the following quote, “Yet another uncertainty is that predictions themselves can alter the future – which, of course, is part of the motivation behind futurism” (Larson, 2002, p. 5), this paper concludes with a sobering message, if previous research as well as the ideas presented here are to become a future reality, one where humans hunt each other for sport, are we content to allow this to happen? Or do we want to encourage debate to ensure we create better futures?

This paper offers original and novel research within the sport-tourism literature by taking a futures perspective and applying a scenario narrative approach. The paper offers original insight into attitudes towards sport hunting and its future potential, moving away from its traditions of hunting animals to hunting humans. This paper encourages debate around a taboo-subject, by drawing on a popular past-time, sport. Death is also universal, and by aligning the topic with sport and as a hunting activity, this paper is offering original approaches to addressing difficult questions that need to be asked.

While the words diversity, disparate impact, and discrimination are commonly read and heard by working adults and professionals, they can at times be confusing and fearful to some managers. The purpose of this paper is to provide an overview of a specific aspect of US civil rights laws – the disparate impact theory. The authors provide an analysis based on the statute, case law interpreting, and applying the statute, administrative guidelines from the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, as well as legal and management commentary. The paper illustrates the requirements of a plaintiff employee’s initial case based on the disparate impact theory. The challenging causation component which requires some degree of statistical evidence is given particular attention. Limitations to the paper are stated at the beginning; and recommendations to managers are explored and provided toward the end of the paper.

It is a legal paper which covers all the laws related to discrimination based on disparate impact and disparate treatment theories. Actual court cases up until this month and Americans laws related to this concept are reviewed and critically discussed.

The salient feature of disparate impact is that this legal theory allows a plaintiff job applicant or employee to sustain a case of illegal discrimination without providing any evidence of a discriminatory motive. As opposed to the disparate treatment liability is imposed based on disproportionate adverse results and not discriminatory intent.

This paper deals with the disparate impact theory pursuant to Title VII of the Civil Rights Act. However, it must be pointed out that the disparate impact theory is also applicable to claims arising under the Americans with Disabilities Act and the Age Discrimination in Employment Act. Since the focus of this paper is Title VII federal and state constitutional issues, such as the applicability of the 14th Amendment’s Equal Protection clause that may arise in disparate impact cases involving government entities will not be addressed.

Managers and employees can protect themselves in the workplace from illegal discriminatory practices. Initially, employers and managers must be aware of the distinction between a disparate impact case and a disparate treatment case with the latter requiring evidence of intentional discrimination. Evidence, of course, can be direct or circumstantial or inferential. Whereas in a disparate impact case there is no intentional discrimination; and as such proof of discriminatory intent is not required. Rather, the employee has to present evidence that the employer’s neutral on-its-face employment policy or practice caused an adverse disproportionate impact on the employee as a member of a protected class.

Human resources professionals and managers must become educated in diversity laws in order to provide an inclusive workplace for all employees and candidates. Employers have legitimate areas of concern in hiring and promoting employees; and the courts are cognizant of employer responsibilities; and thus the employers must be able to show how specific knowledge, skills, education, training, backgrounds, as well as height, weight, strength, and dexterity are legitimate qualifications that directly relate to successful job performance.

This is an original paper by the authors.

This paper discusses how Russian and American social studies educators utilized a videoconference for engaging middle school students in the study of environmental issues. The preparation for the videoconference required Russian and American students to explore human-environmental interactions in their local areas and to evaluate the impact of these interactions on the local and global environment. Students shared findings of their exploration with their counterparts in Russia during a videoconference that culminated the project. The authors discussed the preparation, administration, and outcomes of the project and included the instructional materials. The authors believe their reflective ideas provide insights on the use of videoconferencing as a means of enhancing student learning in a social studies classroom.