Search results

In this chapter, the author provides empirical research that supports the implementation of DLPs as programs that provide cogitative learning, high academic achievement, and the opportunity to be competitive in a global economy for all students – including culturally and linguistically diverse students – in order to achieve education equity. The author utilizes Arizona as an example of education policy that excludes and further marginalizes language minority students by requiring English proficiency as a requirement to be part of Dual Language Programs (DLPs). Furthermore, the author frames the current education climate and language policy affecting DLPs through an Interest Convergence theoretical lens.

August 9, 1966 Harrogate, Yorkshire Assessment to levy‐reduction in scope of trade of appellants ‐number of employees reduced — calculation of levy — whether fact that appellants will not benefit from scheme valid ground for resisting assessment — Industrial Training Levy (Wool) Order 1965.

This chapter reviews and synthesizes three major strands of recent research, alongside discipline-specific research design, from scholars of Language Issues in Comparative and International Education. The first strand is mixed methods research on the policy and practice of L1-based multilingual education programs, and their contribution to raising educational quality and addressing equity and inclusiveness worldwide. The second strand is qualitative, community-based research of educational programs aimed toward revitalization of minoritized, indigenous, and/or endangered languages. The third strand is empirical and theoretical research that seeks to document, contest, and reconceptualize the dynamics among dominant and non-dominant languages within and between international contexts. The authors explore points of synergy between studies, examine publication in the field from a meta-perspective, and suggest encouraging directions of future research, while highlighting the value of non-dominant languages as resources for education and life.

This essay provides an overview of key contemporary issues researched by scholars of Language Issues in Comparative and International Education. The authors present this scholarship around three main themes: L1-based multilingual education; language revitalization and education; and the power dynamics between dominant and non-dominant languages in educational settings. Research in all three themes challenges the view of monolingualism as the norm and invites the view that all languages are resources. These perspectives are relevant to the goals of educational development, particularly to equitable access to quality schooling. Recent research examines some stakeholders’ resistance to supporting and sustaining local languages and cultural practices. While language-in-education policy change may be slow, there are promising directions in research on how educators and communities exercise agency in transforming educational institutions to support plurilingualism and intercultural understandings. Scholars highlight the ideological, pedagogical, and policy-level supports needed for sustainable development of multiple languages, literacies and learning across contexts.

Language is a social and engaging process (Bloom & Lahey, 1978), which is not fully formed until a child is six or seven (Roseberry-McKibben, 2007). Language is developed through social experiences, modeling, observing, and experimenting. Yet our educational system operates on the premise that typically developing children enter kindergarten, at age five with a firm foundation in speaking and listening, and equivalent exposures to pre-literacy skills (Roseberry-McKibben, 2007). For many children who speak a first language other than English, this is not the case. Typically, their first language is not supported in school, and the expectation is that they will learn to speak, communicate, and use English in order to understand grade level core content. Thus, they begin their education at a disadvantage. For many children this expectation creates an initial learning knowledge gap that appears to widen annually. This chapter will examine the literature related to language development and second language learning and the laws and mandates that drive our classroom practice.

The volume and range of food law enforcement in the field of purity and quality control has grown dramatically in recent times. Only those able to recall the subject from upwards of half a century ago can really appreciate the changes. Compositional control now appears as more of a closely knit field of its own, keeping pace with the advances of food processing, new methods and raw materials. It has its problems but enforcement agencies appear well able to cope with them, e.g. the restructuring of meat, excess water content, fat content, the application of compositional standards to new products, especially meat products, but the most difficult of all areas is that of securing and maintaining acceptable standards of food hygiene. This is one of the most important duties of environmental health officers, with a considerable impact on health and public concern; and one of the most intractible problems, comparable in its results with the insidious onslaught of the ever‐growing problem of noise, another area dependent on the reactions of people; to use an oft repeated cliche — “the human element”.

Enforcement as a concept imports compulsion to comply with a particular norm. Of course, the nature of enforcement might vary considerably with the norm in question or society within which action is desired. Professor Gower, in his ‘Review of Investor Protection’, expressed the view that a rule that could not be or was not enforced brought the system, within which that rule was supposed to operate, into disrepute. Whether this is true or not may be a matter for debate. Most systems of control envisage rules that in practical terms are unenforceable, but that are expected to have a normative or educational effect. Such functions, in the context of securities regulation, may be thought to be of some significance. Thus, the fact that simply because a rule cannot either in its terms or in practice be sanctioned by a predictable and determinate action intended to promote compliance, does not necessarily undermine that rule let alone the system within which it exists. To assume without more that a rule that cannot be enforced is not a legal rule, or to be precise a rule of law, while no doubt appealing enough to the positivist school of jurisprudence, is simplistic and outdated. Furthermore, in the context of the sort of economic regulation that we are discussing, whether a rule is characterised as one of law or not may or may not have significance. While there is a problem with determining the appropriate degree of interface between rules bearing differing qualities, purely in terms of achieving a defined regulatory objective it might well be that a rule which is not law in the formal sense of having been promulgated by an authority with legislative power, promotes a satisfactory degree of compliance. Therefore, many of the rules that pertained prior to the creation of the regime of regulation under the Financial Services Act 1986 were essentially non‐legal in the sense that they did not carry determinate sanctions ordained by a legal process consequent upon a violation and were not promulgated by an authority with legislative power. However, to dismiss them because they were unenforceable at law would give a very false picture of the efficacy of what was for many years a satisfactory regulatory structure. Even today, although the interrelationships of legal and non‐legal rules is very much more complex, it is still the case that significant areas of regulation have been left to non‐legal authorities.

An accelerometer is a device that measures force due to gravity or a change in speed or direction of travel. This paper describes accelerometers and their application in other disciplines and, by way of an example, explores the utility of accelerometers for studying aggression. We end with a discussion of additional ways accelerometers might be used in group processes research.

We first review the use of accelerometers in other disciplines. We then present the results of four studies that demonstrate the use of accelerometers to measure aggression. Study 1 establishes the measure’s concurrent validity. Study 2 concerns its stability and representative reliability. Study 3 seeks to establish the measure’s predictive validity by associating it with an existing measure. Study 4 demonstrates the ability of accelerometers to address a sociological research question.

In Studies 1 and 2, we find that accelerometers can be used to differentiate between distinct levels of aggression. In Study 3, we find that men’s average peak acceleration correlates with a previously validated measure of aggression. Study 4 uses accelerometers to reproduce a well-established finding in the aggression literature.

We conclude that accelerometers are a flexible tool for group processes’ researchers and social scientists more broadly. Our findings should prove useful to social scientists interested in measuring aggression or in employing accelerometers in their work.

The WISARD recognition system invented at Brunei University has been developed into an industrialised product by Computer Recognition Systems under licence from the British Technology Group. Using statistical pattern classification it already shows great potential in rapid sorting, and research indicates that it will track objects with positional feedback, rather like the human eye.

When managers wish to raise external capital, investors must be able to trust that brokers and managers will not cheat them out of their money. To what extent is government regulation necessary for the existence of advanced financial transactions and, for that matter, the well functioning of markets in general? A growing literature argues that strong state enforcement is needed to foster financial markets (La Porta et al, 1997, Glaeser et al, 2001). The problem of contractual performance and, more generally, the problem of social order are some of the most enduring questions in the social sciences. German sociologist Georg Simmel may have put it most eloquently in his 1910 essay when he asked, “How is Society Possible?” but the question is rooted in a discourse dating back at least to Thomas Hobbes’s (1651) Leviathan. Hobbes contended that social order was impossible without external enforcement, and in a similar manner many modern commentators in law and finance maintain that the state must play an active role for markets to function. In his study of emerging financial markets in post‐Soviet Russia, Timothy Frye (2000:2) argues that, “politics underpins social order”.