Search results

The purpose of this paper is to report the formative evaluation results from the Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development Healthy School Communities (HSC) pilot project.

This study utilized 11 HSC pilot sites in the USA (eight sites) and Canada (three sites). The evaluation question was “What are the levers of change in a school community that allow for the initiation and implementation of best practice and policy for improving school health?” Pre- and post-site visits along with in-depth interviews with school teams, teachers, students, administrators, community stakeholders and other involved individuals, school site report reviews, Healthy School Report Card results and school improvement plans were used for evaluation purposes.

This study identified nine levers of change: principal as leader of the HSC efforts; active and engaged leadership; distributive team leadership; effective use of data for continuous school improvement; integration of the HSC process with the school improvement process; ongoing and embedded professional development; authentic and mutually beneficial community collaborations; stakeholder support of the local HSC effort; and creation or modification of school policy related to HSC that increased the likelihood that school improvement via health promotion would be pursued and sustained.

Owing to the qualitative methods used in this study and the number of schools in the pilot project, the research results may lack generalizability. Therefore, researchers are encouraged to test the proposed evaluation question further.

This study has implications for schools seeking to create sustainable, systemic integration of health and education for effective health-promoting schools and continuous school improvement.

This study provides evidence that integration of health and education can become a sustainable and integral part of a school’s culture.

THE enterprise of two London newspapers, the Tribune (for the second time) and the Daily Chronicle, in organizing exhibitions of books affords a convenient excuse for once again bringing forward proposals for a more permanent exhibition. On many occasions during the past twenty years the writer has made suggestions for the establishment of a central book bazaar, to which every kind of book‐buyer could resort in order to see and handle the latest literature on every subject. An experiment on wrong lines was made by the Library Bureau about fifteen years ago, but here, as in the exhibitions above mentioned, the arrangement was radically bad. Visiting the Daily Chronicle show in company with other librarians, and taking careful note of the planning, one was struck by the inutility of having the books arranged by publishers and not by subjects. Not one visitor in a hundred cares twopence whether books on electricity, biography, history, travel, or even fairy tales, are issued by Longmans, Heinemann, Macmillan, Dent or any other firm. What everyone wants to see is all the recent and latest books on definite subjects collected together in one place. The arrangements at the Chronicle and Tribune shows are just a jumble of old and new books placed in show‐cases by publishers' names, similar to the abortive exhibition held years ago in Bloomsbury Street. What the book‐buyer wants is not a miscellaneous assemblage of books of all periods, from 1877 to date, arranged in an artistic show‐case and placed in charge of a polite youth who only knows his own books—and not too much about them—but a properly classified and arranged collection of the newest books only, which could be expounded by a few experts versed in literature and bibliography. What is the use of salesmen in an exhibition where books are not sold outright? If these exhibitions were strictly limited to the newest books only, there would be much less need for salesmen to be retained as amateur detectives. Another decided blemish on such an exhibition is the absence of a general catalogue. Imagine any exhibition on business lines in which visitors are expected to cart away a load of catalogues issued separately by the various exhibitors and all on entirely different plans of arrangement! The British publisher in nearly everything he does is one of the most hopeless Conservatives in existence. He will not try anything which has not been done by his grandfather or someone even more remote, so that publishing methods remain crystallized almost on eighteenth century lines. The proposal about to be made is perhaps far too revolutionary for the careful consideration of present‐day publishers, but it is made in the sincere hope that it may one day be realized. It has been made before without any definite details, but its general lines have been discussed among librarians for years past.

It is one thing to discuss the clauses of a prospective Bill; but to get that Bill through Parliament is a vastly different affair. It was at the Buxton L. A. Conference, in 1896, that the matter was considered, and now, after four years' working and waiting, we have advanced just so far as to have got through the House of Lords “a Bill intituled an Act to amend the Acts relating to Public Libraries, Museums, and Gymnasiums, and to regulate the liability of managers of Libraries to proceedings for libel.” At the present moment this Bill is awaiting an opportunity of coming before the Commons. With this position it must be perfectly familiar, for it was only on account of Lord Avebury's despair at finding no opening for it in the House of Commons that the Association induced Lord Windsor to pilot it through the House of Lords. If the present Parliament lives long enough there is just a chance of the measure being entered upon the statute book; but, with forecasts of an early dissolution confronting us, and with Mr. Balfour's recent announcement of the Government appropriation of private members’ days this session, the prospect is not particularly encouraging. If these slender hopes are not realised, the Bill will be none the forwarder for passing the Upper House; whilst, if it should be so fortunate as to pass the Commons without further amendment, it would at once pass into law. Lord Balcarres has been good enough to take charge of the Bill in the House of Commons, and as it is well “backed,” and has been pruned down by the Standing Committee, and has really nothing of a contentious nature in its provisions, we may reasonably hope that if it once gets a start in the House it will reach a successful finish.

This review integrates and builds linkages among existing theoretical and empirical literature from across disciplines to further broaden our understanding of the relationship between inequality, imprisonment, and health for black men. The review examines the health impact of prisons through an ecological theoretical perspective to understand how factors at multiple levels of the social ecology interact with prisons to potentially contribute to deleterious health effects and the exacerbation of race/ethnic health disparities.

This review finds that there are documented health disparities between inmates and non-inmates, but the casual mechanisms explaining this relationship are not well-understood. Prisons may interact with other societal systems – such as the family (microsystem), education, and healthcare systems (meso/exosystems), and systems of racial oppression (macrosystem) – to influence individual and population health.

The review also finds that research needs to move the discussion of the race effects in health and crime/justice disparities beyond the mere documentation of such differences toward a better understanding of their causes and effects at the level of individuals, communities, and other social ecologies.

WE have to announce with deep regret the death of Mr. I. Chalkley Gould, founder and director of the Library World since its establishment in 1898. Mr. Gould was a member of an old Essex family associated with Loughton and its neighbourhood, and was born in 1844, his father being the late George Gould, of Traps Hill House, Loughton. His connection with the firm of Marlborough, Gould & Co. and other stationery and printing concerns led him many years ago to give some attention to library and museum work, towards which he had always been attracted because of his personal interest in archaeology and literature. In this way he became associated with many museums, libraries and antiquarian societies, and identified himself more particularly with the movement for the preservation of ancient British earthworks. He was a Fellow of the Society of Antiquaries, vice‐president of the Essex Archaeological Society, the Essex Field Club, and the British Archaeological Association. Within recent years he acted as hon. secretary of the Committee for Recording Ancient Earthworks and Fortified Enclosures—a committee for the formation of which he was largely responsible and in the work of which he took a very deep interest. He was chairman of the Committee for the Exploration of the Red Hills of Essex—an important undertaking which is not yet completed. He also contributed several valuable papers to the Victoria History of Essex, and assisted the editor of that publication in revising the earthworks sections of other counties.

Aversion to liberalism and socialism was indeed a trademark of Catholic economic thought from Rerum Novarum onwards and therefore many Catholic economists are to be found among those looking for a third way. François Perroux and Maurice Byé were among the most prominent of them. They partook a closeness to the Catholic church and a good knowledge of Brazil through their missions in this country. But they differed in their methodology and in their approach to the European Union. Byé remained firmly rooted in the methodological individualism whereas Perroux’ approach seem too fuzzy to be characterized. These differences are obvious in their treatment of the European issues where Perroux’ stance for a Europe without shores contrasts with Byé’s successful recommendations for a step-by-step construction of the Little Europe. After six decades it is time to bring Byé out of the shadows.

IN the death of Mr. JAMES DUFF BROWN, the library profession loses one of its most striking personalities and librarianship its most powerful influence for progress. Any attempt at present to estimate the extent of his influence upon the modern public library must necessarily be inadequate, because not only are some of the movements he started only beginning to gather force, but his retiring nature made him refrain from labelling many things as his own. With the possible reservation that he was unable to do himself justice on the platform, he was the ideal born public librarian. As an organiser and teacher of librarianship, as a keen and discerning student and critic of tendencies, methods and results, and as an expounder of professional knowledge through the medium of the written page, he was without an equal. Like all pioneers and men of strong opinions, he did not make only friends ; but he had world‐wide friendships, and he forced the attention and respect of all library workers. On another page of this issue an old friend and one‐time colleague of his gives a brief outline of his life and works, and we need not do the same again here. But as his successors in the editorship of THE LIBRARY WORLD, which he founded and edited until a year or two ago, we cannot refrain from adding our tribute to his memory. Representing the best type of efficiency and progress in librarianship, he was a real friend and teacher, and his death leaves a sad gap in our ranks.

EVEN when it rains, and it did rain, Edinburgh has many attractions. It is a fine centre for a conference with some splendid libraries to visit and this year, as in other years, our hosts put themselves out to make us welcome.

WHEN the Public Library was in its infancy it was looked upon as being a mere storehouse, and the librarian a distributor of books. The librarian of today, however, must not only guard and preserve the books in his charge, but make them and their contents, as far as possible, accessible to all those who desire to consult them.

FOR ME PERSONALLY, The library world has completed a circle in the last decade. From 1958 to 1962 I was concerned in its publication, first with Grafton & Co, and then with André Deutsch Ltd. When Sydney Hyde of WHS Advertising Ltd told me in December that the journal would not fit into their proposed re‐organisation, sentiment alone would probably have been sufficient to arouse my interest in acquiring it.