Search results1 – 10 of 351
The purpose of this paper is to start exploring the possibilities for makerspaces to function as a new learning space within academic library services in higher education…
The purpose of this paper is to start exploring the possibilities for makerspaces to function as a new learning space within academic library services in higher education (HE). This original research study ask two key questions: How is learning achieved and supported in makerspaces? What can academic library services bring to the effective organisation and support of makerspaces?
An extensive literature review is followed by a template analysis (King, 2012) of data from an online forum of three professionals operating makerspaces in academic library services in the USA and a discussion incorporating relevant educational theory and philosophy.
The three overarching learning themes found were: experiential learning (Dewey, 1909; Kolb, 1984), communities of practice (Lave and Wenger, 1991) and self-efficacy through social learning (Bandura, 1997).
The one-week forum of three professional library staff provided detailed and informative data. Substantial field work with students will also be required to see how far this professional lens has provided insight into how students are learning and supported in these and other makerspaces.
The wider cultural implications are examined, including the potential social value of makerspaces as transformative creative spaces empowering communities and individuals.
This is the first study to date on the potential educational value of makerspaces within HE, and the specific support academic library services can offer if they choose to host a makerspace (including teaching information, digital and critical literacies).
Ever since Mead, sociology has maintained a deep divide between human and non human animals. In effect, Mead constructed humans as having capacities that he saw lacking in…
Ever since Mead, sociology has maintained a deep divide between human and non human animals. In effect, Mead constructed humans as having capacities that he saw lacking in animals. Recent research on animals has challenged the traditional ideas of Mead and others by providing evidence of animal intelligence, adaptability, selfawareness, emotionality, communication and culture. This paper examines the human‐animal relationship as presented in Introductory Sociology Textbooks to see if this new research on animals has allowed us to move beyond Mead. We find outdated information and confused thinking on such topics as the relationship between language and culture, the development of the self in animals, and the role of instinct, socialization and culture in animal behavior. We conclude that, with few exceptions, the main function of the treatment of animals in these texts is to affirm the hard line that sociology has always drawn between humans and other species.
Things seem to be going desperately wrong with the concept of the “brave new world” predicted by the starry‐eyed optimists after the Second World War finally came to an end. To those who listen only to what they want to hear, see everything, not as it is, but as they would like it to be, a new society could be initiated and the lusty infant would emerge as a paragon for all the world to follow. The new society in truth never really got off the ground the biggest mistake of all was to cushion millions of people against the results of their own folly; to shelter them from the blasts of the ensuing economic climate. The sheltered ones were not necessarily the ordinary mass of people; many in fact were the victims and suffered the consequences. And now that the state has reached a massive crescendo, many are suffering profoundly. The big nationalised industries and vast services, such as the national health service, education, where losses in the case of the first are met by Government millions, requests to trim the extravagant spending is akin to sacrilege in the latter, have removed such terms as thrift, careful spending, value for money from the vocabulary.
The purpose of this study is to examine the design, development and implementation of responsibility centre management at a mid-sized Canadian university, within the…
The purpose of this study is to examine the design, development and implementation of responsibility centre management at a mid-sized Canadian university, within the context of decentralized decision-making. More specifically our study focused on the design, development and implementation of a revenue and cost allocation process known as transparent activity–based budgeting system (TABBS).
The authors conducted this study using a qualitative case study methodology, rooted in grounded theory, as the primary approach to collect and analyse data, and report the findings. Primary data were collected from ten participants using semi-structured interviews.
The main takeaways from our research are that (1) such systems take time to design, develop and implement, (2) consultation, communication and information sharing and model adjustment and refinement are important enabling mechanisms, (3) internal and external events posed significant challenges, (4) although such systems are often designed keeping in mind several intended outcomes, there exists the possibility of experiencing some unintended consequences and (5) the juxtaposition of the above has the potential to negatively or positively impact organizational performance.
The research demonstrates that the design, development and implementation of a complex resource allocation model is an important element of a responsibility-centred approach to planning and decision-making. It highlights the importance and contribution of enabling mechanisms as well as the challenges that large, complex organizations may confront when introducing change.
The more recent history of the National Health Service, especially the Hospital Service, has been in the nature of a lumbering from one crisis to another. From the moment of its inception it has proved far more costly than estimated and over‐administered, but in the early years, it had great promise and was efficient at ward level, which continued until more recent times. As costs increased and administration grew and grew, much of it serving no useful purpose, there appeared to be a need for reorganisation. In 1974, a three‐tier structure was introduced by the establishment of new area health authorities, the primary object of which was to facilitate — and cheapen — decision making; to give the district bodies and personnel easier access to “management”. It coincided with reorganisation of Local Government, which included the transfer of all the personal health services and abolition of the office of medical officer of health. At the time and in looking back, there was very little need for this and reviewing the progress and advances made in local government, medical officers of health who had advocated the transfer, mainly for reasons of their own status, would have achieved this and more by remainining in the local government service; the majority of health visitors appear to have reached the same conclusion. They constitute a profession within themselves and in truth do not have all that much in common with day‐to‐day nursing. The basic training and nursing qualification is most essential, however. It has been said that a person is only as good a health visitor as she is a nurse.
The Department of Health for Scotland, in a communication relating to the report of the Sub‐Committee appointed by the Scientific Advisory Committee to investigate the use of the Freezing Point (Hortvet) Test as a means of detecting added water in milk, observes this test is capable of furnishing conclusive evidence regarding the presence or absence of added water. While the Hortvet Test is of undoubted assistance to Local Authorities when considering the institution of proceedings in a particular case, its use should also tend to protect the seller of milk in border‐line cases where the milk may be found to be deficient in non‐fatty solids but actually to contain no added water. It is pointed out in the communication that the Secretary of State is aware that certain Public Analysts are already applying the test to milk samples found to contain less than 8·5 per cent. of solids not fat, and that the results to an increasing extent are being produced in Court in the case of legal proceedings. Under Section 28 of the Food and Drugs (Adulteration) Act, 1928, the production of a certificate of a Public Analyst in the form prescribed by the Act is sufficient evidence of the facts stated therein unless it is desired by one of the parties that the Public Analyst be called as a witness. Where reliance is to be placed on the result of a Hortvet Test, however, it is desirable for the Public Analyst to give evidence in person, since the statutory certificate has no direct applicability with respect to this test. What the Public Analyst finds as the result of the test may nevertheless form part of the grounds on which he places his statutory declaration that a particular sample of milk contains added water. In such a case the ability to lead evidence to that effect may have an important bearing on the outcome of the proceedings.
The long‐awaited regulations to provide statutory compositional requirements for the ever‐increasing range of meat products have at last arrived; presented in the form of a triology—The Canned Meat Product Regulations, The Meat Pie and Sausage Roll Regulations and The Sausage and Other Meat Product Regulations—all of which apply to England and Wales only; presumably the Scottish counterparts, modified for the geographical variations in commodities, will appear in due course. The Meat Pie and Sausage Roll Regulations come into operation on May 31 1968; the other two on May 31 1969.
If it is a fraud to dye an unripe orange to make it look ripe, why should it be permissible to dye winter butter to make it look like summer butter?”, he says. Or one might add, to dye a biscuit brown to imply the presence of chocolate or to colour a cake yellow to simulate the addition of eggs? Our third heading is, What? What colouring matters should be allowed, and upon what conditions? Great Britain is the only leading country which has not a legal schedule of permitted colours. In this country any colouring agent may be added to food, except compounds of antimony, arsenic, cadmium, chromium, copper, mercury, lead and zinc. Gamboge, picric acid, victoria yellow, manchester yellow, aurantia and aurine are also prohibited. The addition, however, of any other colouring agent which is injurious to health would be an offence under the Food and Drugs Act. Other countries, including the United States of America, France, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Italy, Spain, Sweden and Denmark have drawn up lists of permissible colours. And so the question arises—is it preferable to draw up a list of permissible colours or one of prohibited colours? It is obvious that if only certain colours are prohibited the remainder may be legally employed so long as they are not injurious to health. Thus a colouring agent may be used for a considerable time before it is proved to be injurious, whereas, if only‐certain colouring agents which have been previously proved to be non‐injurious were permitted, this risk of possible danger to health would be avoided. There is no doubt that in many cases proof of injury to the health of the human being is difficult to obtain. Much of the work that has been carried out to establish whether a particular dye is harmless or not has involved the use of dogs as test subjects. This does not appear to be a very satisfactory method of testing, for obviously dogs may react very differently from human beings towards chemicals. A dog's digestive powers are stronger than those of humans. No one would think of suggesting that bones are suitable food for humans just because dogs love them! Matta found that the capacity to depress the human digestion is possessed not only by poisonous dyes but also by dyes which he had proved to be non‐poisonous to animals. In bacteriology the addition of very small amounts of certain dyes to the culture medium will retard the growth of particular organisms and therefore it would seem possible that some dyes might adversely affect the action of enzymes in the body. So it would seem of importance that, if possible, all colouring matters, before being permitted to be used in food, should be proved by a competent authority to be harmless to human beings. If the effects of colouring matters upon the human digestive processes cannot be easily carried out in the body then it might be possible to perform such tests in vitro, using artificial gastric juice. It may be argued that the proportion of colouring matter added to food, ranging from about 1 part in 2,000 to about 1 part in 300,000, is so small that any particular colouring agent would need to be a deadly poison before any appreciable injurious effect upon health would occur. This argument does not, however, take into account the possible injurious effects which may be caused by the frequent ingestion of colouring matters which may have but mild toxic properties. It is known, for instance, that many synthetic colours have marked antiseptic properties even in highly diluted solutions, and therefore they may adversely affect the digestive processes. In any case, surely it would be wiser to eliminate all risks by requiring that official physiological tests should be carried out upon colouring matters before they are permitted to be used in food. One has to safeguard not only the healthy person but also the very young, the old and those who are of a delicate constitution. A harmless colour has been defined in Canada as one “which will not retard digestion nor have special physiological effects when consumed in quantities corresponding to 2 grains per day per adult.” The Departmental Committee in its report on “The use of preservatives and colouring matters in food,” published in 1924, stated that “It appears to us that definite evidence from direct experiments should be obtained as to the harmlessness of a dye before its use should be permitted in food. We have therefore come to the conclusion that a list of permitted colours should be prepared and that no colours other than those in such a list should be allowed to be used in the preparation of food. The list should, in our opinion, be prepared by the Minister of Health and issued by him, provision being made for the consideration of claims advanced by traders for the recognition and approval of additional colours on satisfactory evidence of harmlessness. We do not think that action such as this should seriously embarrass manufacturing interests, or is a course on which it is unreasonable, in view of the importance of the subject, to insist.” Yet, in spite of these recommendations of the Committee, no list of permitted colours was passed into law, and one wonders why. One argument against the drawing up of a list of prohibited colours is that even if a non‐prohibited colour is proved to the satisfaction of a given Court to be injurious to health that decision is not binding on other Courts and so there may be a lack of uniformity. A certain colour may be permitted in one town and prohibited in the next, which fact might add to the difficulties of the large scale manufacturer whose products are sold over a wide area. The leading manufacturers of dyes for use in food no doubt exercise great care in their preparation and such products are normally free from objectionable impurities, but it is possible that other dyestuff manufacturers are not so particular concerning the purity of their products. For instance, about 1938 a firm was fined for selling “Damson Blue” containing 540 parts of lead per million. Therefore it would seem necessary that some official control over the dyes that are sold for use in food should be introduced. The manufacture of some dyes involves complicated processes, and it is stated that in the production of one particular colour over 100 different chemicals are used and thirty different reactions, occupying several weeks, must be carried out before the finished colour is produced.
One can easily see that there is abundant opportunity for the introduction of harmful impurities unless every care is taken to avoid contamination due to impure ingredients or by metals, if used, in the plant. The Departmental Committee already referred to considered that the maximum permissible quantity of arsenic in any colouring substance used for food purposes should be 1/100th of a grain a pound, and that the total amount of lead, copper, tin and zinc should not exceed 20 parts per million. Thus a dyestuff should be of a high degree of purity in spite of the fact that it is only added in very small proportions to food. In America the Food and Drug Authorities issue certificates for each batch of dyestuff after it has passed thorough physiological and chemical tests. There is no doubt that if such tests were carried out in this country by officially appointed chemists and physiologists the health of the community would be more securely safeguarded from the possible ill effects of ingested dyestuffs. Under the present system it is apparently no one's business to detect the presence of harmful colours in food other than those actually prohibited, for obviously such work does not come within the scope of the Public Analyst. My last point is concerning the labelling of food containing added colouring matter. It has already been seen that colours are very frequently added to conceal inferior quality, or to simulate a valuable ingredient which is not actually present in the food. Therefore, in my opinion, the presence of added colouring matter should definitely be declared to the purchaser either by a label attached to the article or by a notice displayed in the shop. Such a declaration would help to counteract unfair competition. It is true that the Departmental Committee reported that “If a list of permitted colours is prepared in the way we have suggested, we do not think that, as far as health considerations are concerned, a declaration of their use need be required.” It is obvious that the Committee made that recommendation from health reasons alone and did not take into account cases where colour was added to conceal inferior quality. The food laws of this country lag far behind those of some others, and the tightening up of legislation in this respect is overdue. It is interesting to note that the following countries make the declaration of added colours to some or all types of food compulsory: The United States of America, Canada, New Zealand, Australia, Germany, Italy and France. Argentina takes a bold stand and prohibits absolutely the use of artificial colours in food, only harmless natural colours in certain instances are allowed. In America a food is not covered by a declaration of the addition of colouring if it is added to make the food appear of better quality or of greater value than it is. Also in America the labels of compound food such as confectionery must have a list of the quantities of the separate ingredients, exemption being allowed where there is of necessity insufficient space on the label to accommodate all the statements and information required. Unpacked confectionery, owing to the difficulty of labelling satisfactorily, is exempt. It has been remarked that a certain proposed label for use in America looked like a newspaper, and even the Readers' Digest could not condense it! Still, I feel sure that the intelligent purchaser would far rather have too much information, if that is possible, regarding the quality of the food he eats rather than too little, and those who, owing to lack of knowledge, are less discriminating in their choice of food, need to be protected. In conclusion, then, in my view, there is no objection to the artificial colouring of food provided that the colouring agent employed has no adverse effect upon the human organism, that it is not added to imply superior quality or to otherwise deceive, and that its presence, where practicable, is declared to the purchaser.