Search results

Quality assurance in higher education has been a subject of much interest and debate among academics, management of higher educational institutions, and the funding bodies, for some time now. Almost every higher educational institution has adopted some form of student evaluation mechanism as a part of this drive for quality assurance. This paper argues that evaluation systems existing in many institutions are not specific enough to provide useful guidelines for staff and management to improve on their provision. Many evaluation systems the authors have come across are too general, being institution‐wide, standard questionnaires which fail to provide much insight into how students evaluate instructor‐related factors and module‐specific factors. Under these circumstances, the objective of this paper is to present a model of instructor and module evaluation as a guideline for the development of more focused student evaluations within the context of marketing education.

The purpose of this paper is to examine the effect of portrayed smoking status of actors on their popularity with both smoking and non‐smoking young people, as well as their perceptions of the prevalence of smoking

Two experimental studies were conducted with Australian undergraduate university students, in which students were exposed to different versions of mock magazines featuring images of actors smoking and not smoking, as well as control actors.

The attitudes of young people towards well‐known actors were little influenced by the presence or absence of cigarettes, but non‐smoking actors were perceived more favourably when depicted in a group with smoking actors. Smoking actors tended to be preferred by young people who smoked. The results of both studies confirm that young people's estimates of smoking prevalence are considerably inflated.

The results of the current study suggest two key implications for health education: the need to address young people's elevated perceptions of smoking prevalence among their peers, parents, and celebrities by communicating the social norm of non‐smoking; and the potential use of celebrities – such as actors – as spokespersons or role models in anti‐smoking campaigns.

THE BODLEIAN LIBRARY at the beginning of the eighteenth century is described in some detail in the diary kept by Zacharias Conrad von Uffenbach during his visit to England in 1710, when he was accompanied by his younger brother Johann Friedrich. Though the diary is, in M. R. James's phrase, full of ‘girdings and sniffings’, it also contains keen observations and intelligent criticisms, and the remarks are those of a scholar.

The literature on the history of the pub presents an invaluable background to any study of the industry, the very special place it fills in our society, and the wider context of its role in British tourism heritage. Most authors acknowledge that the pub is changing with the times, although a mere glance through such comment bears testatment to the way in which the pub's enduring qualities have survived by gradual evolution and adaptation. Of more topical interest, newspaper articles draw the public's attention to the latest developments and trends in the entertainment and leisure spectrum, and comment on their implications for the community and specifically the public house. For the most part, these are of a nationally introspective nature and the pub is not portrayed as a tourist attraction in its own right This article contrasts the views of three stakeholders within the retail pub industry, namely, the tourist, the landlord and the brewer. It charts their views on the evolution of the public house.

At a recent inquest upon the body of a woman who was alleged to have died as the result of taking certain drugs for an improper purpose, one of the witnesses described himself as “an analyst and manufacturing chemist,” but when asked by the coroner what qualifications he had, he replied : “I have no qualifications whatever. What I know I learned from my father, who was a well‐known ‘F.C.S.’” Comment on the “F.C.S.” is needless.

The two sets of notes, taken only three years apart are substantially similar in organization and content. We document differences identified in a line-by-line comparison in Table 1. Generally, the 1996 course notes reproduced here more prominently feature the work of legal scholars, from Oliver Wendell Holmes to St. George Tucker. Curiously, many of these references were removed from the later version, as well as nearly all discussion on legal precedent established by Supreme Court cases. The overall effect of these changes is a marked shift away from a critical legal studies approach to the economic role of government and toward a more focused neoclassical lens.

The decision of the Wolverhampton Stipendiary in the case of “Skim‐milk Cheese” is, at any rate, clearly put. It is a trial case, and, like most trial cases, the reasons for the judgment have to be based upon first principles of common‐sense, occasionally aided, but more often complicated, by already existing laws, which apply more or less to the case under discussion. The weak point in this particular case is the law which has just come into force, in which cheese is defined as the substance “usually known as cheese” by the public and any others interested in cheese. This reliance upon the popular fancy reads almost like our Government's war policy and “the man in the street,” and is a shining example of a trustful belief in the average common‐sense. Unfortunately, the general public have no direct voice in a police court, and so the “usually known as cheese” phrase is translated according to the fancy and taste of the officials and defending solicitors who may happen to be concerned with any particular case. Not having the general public to consult, the officials in this case had a war of dictionaries which would have gladdened the heart of Dr. JOHNSON; and the outcome of much travail was the following definition: cheese is “ coagulated milk or curd pressed into a solid mass.” So far so good, but immediately a second definition question cropped up—namely, What is “milk?”—and it is at this point that the mistake occurred. There is no legal definition of new milk, but it has been decided, and is accepted without dispute, that the single word “milk” means an article of well‐recognised general properties, and which has a lower limit of composition below which it ceases to be correctly described by the one word “milk,” and has to be called “skim‐milk,” “separated milk,” “ milk and water,” or other distinguishing names. The lower limits of fat and solids‐not‐fat are recognised universally by reputable public analysts, but there has been no upper limit of fat fixed. Therefore, by the very definition quoted by the stipendiary, an article made from “skim‐milk” is not cheese, for “skim‐milk” is not “milk.” The argument that Stilton cheese is not cheese because there is too much fat would not hold, for there is no legal upper limit for fat; but if it did hold, it does not matter, for it can be, and is, sold as “Stilton” cheese, without any hardship to anyone. The last suggestion made by the stipendiary would, if carried out, afford some protection to the general public against their being cheated when they buy cheese. This suggestion is that the Board of Agriculture, who by the Act of 1899 have the legal power, should determine a lower limit of fat which can be present in cheese made from milk; but, as we have repeatedly pointed out, it is by the adoption of the Control system that such questions can alone be settled to the advantage of the producer of genuine articles and to that of the public.

Presents the case that in the 1990s further and higher education in the UK is facing unprecedented and increasing levels of market accountability precipitated by the legislative processes of Conservative administrations. Linked to their new responsibilities and freedoms (made possible by the 1988 and 1992 Education Acts), management in the newly incorporated institutions is becoming increasingly “business‐like”. The need for managers to justify their actions and demonstrate quality and effectiveness has never been greater. Hence the proliferation of league tables, performance indicators and the focus by audit units on measurement of an increasingly complex array of process and output statistics. The result has been a preoccupation with quality, among other issues, which is linked to performance appraisal and management techniques synonymous with the commercial sector of the economy. Points to the limitations of such models as TQM and of management‐driven approaches to quality which deprofessionalize, and proposes the need for a collegial model of organizations which accepts the central importance of interactive professionalism in assuring real quality of teaching and learning. Acknowledges the existence of common strategic drivers within the international and European arena and points to the need for quality assessment systems which overlay professional practice and serve to provide relevant information in a comparative international context.

This article focuses on one key aspect of industrial buying behaviour, namely the buying process itself. Using a common questionnaire, a large sample of respondents in Australia, Canada, the UK and the US were interviewed by mail from two sectors, the paper and pulp and chemical and allied products industries. The similarity of results between the different industries and the countries — as well as similarities between this and previous surveys in the UK and US — allows generalisations to be made about the respective involvement of corporate departments in the purchase process for equipment, materials and components.

Entrepreneurs and their ventures are often portrayed as unambiguously positive forces in society. Specifically, high technology and equity-funded startups are heralded for their innovative products and services that are believed to alter the economic, social, and even political fabric of life in advantageous ways. This paper draws on established theory on the causes of misconduct in and by organizations to elaborate the factors that can give rise to misconduct in entrepreneurial ventures, illustrating our arguments with case material on both widely known and less well-known instances of entrepreneurial misconduct. In venturing into the dark side of entrepreneurship, we hope to contribute to theory on entrepreneurship and organizational misconduct, augment entrepreneurship pedagogy, and offer ideas and examples that can enhance entrepreneurs’ awareness of their susceptibility to wrongdoing.