Search results

Developing intellectual capital and knowledge management measuring systems are two fast growing research areas. Many companies are striving to be known as knowledge organizations and have started measuring and analyzing organizational intellectual capital indicators based on what has been reported in the literature. Very little effort has been made to standardize the measurement and reporting of these indicators with most organizations using very general components. This article discusses a research study that sets out to gain an understanding of management attitudes to the measurement of intellectual capital. The study was conducted with 36 top management participants with at least 20 years of experience in a service‐related industry in Australia. This research investigates the relationship between the perception of the importance of measuring intellectual capital indicators and the level of understanding of these indicators. The strategic implications of understanding the measurements are also discussed within the context of the attitude of top management.

Reporting the value of intellectual capital (IC) in the disclosure process for stakeholders has focused largely on the construction of indicators determined by the companies. This paper reports a study conducted with the investment community to determine the information they need to assist them in making investment decisions. This research project sets out to answer what are the perceptions towards strategic capital information required to assist in decision making and what are perceived as the most important or critical strategic management capital and strategic marketing capital indicators. More specifically, the study addresses the inter‐relationship between the knowledge of indicators and the perceived importance of disclosing the information on these indicators.

The purpose of this paper is to describe a pilot application of the Sustainable Transportation Analysis & Rating System (STARS), and highlight how a sustainability rating system can be used to promote sustainable urban development through a university–city partnership. STARS is an example of a second-generation “green” rating system focused on transportation planning, design, operations and maintenance.

In Fall 2013, James Madison University (JMU) initiated a STARS pilot demonstration using a local corridor that connects the university and the city of Harrisonburg. The pilot’s purposes were to develop attainable transportation-development targets, evaluate infrastructure and programmatic options in the context of a credit-based system and demonstrate a decision-making framework centered on sustainability optimization. The paper provides an overview of the STARS framework and the pilot’s collaborations, analysis, findings and recommendations for credits across sustainability dimensions.

Upon applying the rating system, the research team found that STARS may initially be easier to integrate into a comprehensive transportation planning process than a corridor-level evaluation due to data needs, in-house expertise and planning timelines for campus and city developments. A campus-wide master plan based on STARS would enable a university and a city to apply sustainability principles to their physical and/or policy interfaces to systemically create change and achieve quantifiable targets.

The STARS framework provides a novel approach for integrating multiple stakeholders (faculty, the university and city staff, students and community members) in a process of capacity building, evaluating options, policy-making, implementation and performance monitoring. The JMU pilot is the first application of STARS at a university and the only US East Coast application to date.

IT is fitting that now and again stock should be taken of the present state of the Library Profession as compared with its past, and such an occasion as the commencement of the tenth year of the Library World is as appropriate as any other.

BOOKS and Libraries for the Blind form the subject of a paper by Dr. Robert C. Moon in the May Library Journal. The writer is the son of William Moon, the inventor of the system of embossed writing bearing his name. He describes the systems of writing for the blind in use, and the various agencies for circulating literature. After examining the existing departments for the blind in Public Libraries, he comes to the conclusion that “all the libraries need more books, and if they are to reach and teach the adult blind they must have a fair proportion of them in the Moon type. All Public Libraries should possess a few works printed in the various types, care being taken to have a good supply of those embossed in the special type which is taught in the schools for the blind of the immediate locality, in order that the pupils in vacation time, and the graduates of the schools may be provided with reading matter, but the infirm and aged blind will be found in almost all communities, and for them books printed in the Moon type are indispensable. Alice S. Tyler describes the League of Library Commissions. “The success of the experiment in co‐operation which was inaugurated in 1901 by the library commissions of Wisconsin, Minnesota, and Iowa, whereby printed matter of common interest and equal necessity and value to these commissions was issued jointly, led to the suggestion that a national organization might more economically carry forward these and other lines of co‐operative work, leaving to the overcrowded state commission workers more time and money for the peculiar problems of each state.” This suggestion was brought up at the St. Louis conference, and resulted in an organization being formed under the title of the League of Library Commissions, consisting of one representative from each of the commissions included. The particular directions in which the League will promote co‐operative work are: carefully prepared lists of books for first purchase for small libraries; lists of new books which, upon examination, had been found desirable ; handbook of suggestions and direction as to the organization and management of small libraries; printed statement regarding the aims and methods of state library commissions, with comparison of their laws; definite help and suggestions on the subject of library buildings, especially floor‐plans arranged for economic administration, growing out of the experience of the library commissions in connection with the erection of Carnegie and other library buildings within the last few years; united effort to bring to the attention of book publishers the urgent need of good, durable binding, adequate indexing, &c.

THE hope we expressed in recent pages, that the Library Association might resume its normal methods of life and government, remains a hope. London, where only we suppose the Council could do its work really well, has been of late no place for the meetings of people; and we dare to say that for the key people of any profession or movement to gather there at present would be unwise, even though imagination may increase the risk beyond the warrant of the facts. Nor do we know yet if the worst has been experienced. Meanwhile it is probable that the affairs of librarianship must be delegated to even fewer workers than now. Only the chronically ungracious part of our fraternity will be without gratitude to those who keep things going for us.

This essay engages with scholarship on history as a discipline, curriculum documents and academic and public commentary on the teaching of history in Australian, British and Canadian secondary contexts to better understand the influence of the tension between political pressure and disciplinary practice that drives the history wars in settler-colonial nations, how this plays out in secondary history classrooms and the ramifications this may have on students' democratic dispositions.

This article aims to compare secondary history curricula and pedagogies in Australia, Britain and Canada to better articulate and conceptualise the influence of the “history wars” over the teaching of national histories upon the intended and enacted curriculum and how this contributes to the formation of democratic dispositions within students. A conceptual model, drawing on the curriculum assessment of Porter (2006) and Gross and Terra's definition of “difficult pasts” has been developed and used as the basis for this comparison. This model highlights the competing influences of political pressure upon curriculum creation and disciplinary change shaping pedagogy, and the impact these forces may have upon students' experience.

The debate around what content students learn, and why, is fraught because it is a conversation about what each nation values and how they construct their own national identity(ies). This is particularly timely when the democratic self-identification of many nations is being challenged. The seditious conspiracy to storm the US Capitol on 6 January 2021, Orban's “illiberal democracy” in Hungary and the neo-Nazis in Melbourne, Australia are examples of the rise of anti-democratic sentiment globally. Thus, new consideration of how we teach national histories and the impact this has on the formation of democratic dispositions and skills is pressing.

The new articulation of a conceptual model for the impact of the history wars on education is an innovative synthesis of wide-ranging research on: the impacts of neoliberalism and cultural restorationism upon the development of intended curriculum; discipline-informed inquiry pedagogies used to enact the curriculum; and the teaching of national narratives as a political act. This comprehensive comparison of the ways in which history education in settler-colonial nations has developed over time provides new insight into the common elements of national history education, and the role this education can play in developing democratic dispositions.

Earlier in the year, during the national steel industry strike, the House of Lords overturned a judgment of Lord Denning, MR, that sections of the industry unaffected by the trade dispute could be regarded as outside the Act and its amendments and that unions could be restrained in their application of immune activities to those firms. The decision apart, their Lordships in delivering judgment reaffirmed that only Parliament had power to make the Law; it was not the function of Judges to do this, their's to interpret and apply the Law. In strict legal terms and applying to statutes and statutory instruments, this is true; but in the widest sense, judges have been making law for centuries. Otherwise, from whence cometh the Common Law, one of the wonders of the world, if not from the mouths of H.M. Judges. Much of it is now enshrined in statute form, especially Criminal Law, but initially it was all judge‐made. In most systems of human control and function, complete separation is rarely possible and when attempted the results have not been conspicuously successful.

THE London and Home Counties Branch is fortunate in having close at hand watering places which can house its Autumn or other Conferences conveniently. Hove in fair weather in October is a place of considerable charm; it has many varieties of hotel, from the very expensive to the modest; it is used to conferences and the hospitality of the Town Hall is widely known. This year's conference was focused in the main on problems of book‐selection which, as one writer truly says, is the main purpose of the librarian because all his possibilities hang upon it. The papers read are valuable because they appear to be quite unvarnished accounts of the individual practice of their writers. Of its kind that of Mr. Frank M. Gardner is a model and a careful study of it by the library worker who is in actual contact with the public might be useful. For his methods the paper must be read; they are a clever up‐to‐minute expansion of those laid down in Brown's Manual with several local checks and variations. Their defects are explained most usefully; there is no examination of actual books before purchase and bookshops are not visited, both of which defects are due to the absence in Luton of well‐stocked bookshops; a defect which many sizeable towns share. We find this remark significant: “The librarian of Luton in 1911 had a book‐fund of £280 a year for 30,000 people. I have nearly £9,000 for 110,000. But the Librarian in 1911 was a better book‐selector than we are. He had to be, to give a library service at all. Every possible purchase had to be looked at, every doubt eliminated.” We deprecate the word “better”; in 1911 book‐selection was not always well done, but Brown's methods could be carried out if it was thought expedient to do the work as well as it could be done. The modern librarian and his employers seem to have determined that the whole of the people shall be served by the library; that books shall be made available hot from the press, with as few exclusions as possible. No librarian willingly buys rubbish; but only in the largest libraries can a completely comprehensive selection practice be maintained. Few librarians can be quite satisfied to acquire their books from lists made by other people although they may use them for suggestions. How difficult is the problem Mr. Gardner demonstrates in connexion with books on Bridge; a shelf of apparently authoritative books might possibly contain not one that actually met the conditions of today. If this could be so in one very small subject, what might be the condition of a collection covering, or intended to cover, all subjects? Librarians have to be realists; orthodox methods do not always avail to deal with the cataract of modern books; but gradually, by cooperative methods, mechanical aids and an ever‐increasing staff devoted to this, the principal library job, much more may be done than is now possible.