Search

This article examined the repositioning of science and technology education for security and economic growth and development in Nigeria. The wreck on the nation's image by the incidences of insurgency has caused negative effects on the nation's security and economic development. Security issues are presently major challenges in Nigeria, especially in Northern Nigeria. Furthermore, the continuous rise in insecurity and deterioration in the economic development in Nigeria has called for concern among researchers and policymakers over the years. This article highlights the need for rebranding Nigerians through the internal process of repositioning the science and technology education system for national security and economic sustainability. Literature and other research papers using to gather information. The paper recommends that the nation adopt a proactive approach to improving the teaching and learning of science and technology education professionally and empowering youth while taking everlasting measures to curtail the issues of insurgencies in Nigeria. In other words, we need to reposition our youth's mental reasoning and economically empower them to certify the demands of the modern world. Repositioning Nigerian is one of the fruitful tools to achieve this objective, and rebranding directs the power and energy of Nigerians toward academic and productive goals.

Following the U.S. Supreme Court's landmark decision in the Pentagon Papers case, the U.S. Government has been disempowered from restraining private news organizations in advance of their publication of classified information. Following that judicial ruling, news organizations that have come into the possession of information that the Government has classified for national security reasons contact the appropriate Government officials and discuss their intent to publish the information. At that point, the parties begin a process of negotiation. This Article spotlights and analyzes a noteworthy example of such a negotiation from 2009, when The Washington Post came into possession of a classified U.S. Government assessment regarding ongoing military operations in Afghanistan, which the Post intended to publish, either in whole or in part. First, this Article reviews the facts and adjudication of the original Pentagon Papers case, as it set the stage for similar negotiations in the future. Second, this Article summarizes the details of the Afghanistan Assessment Negotiation. Third, it discusses why this particular case is worth studying through the lens of negotiation methodology. Fourth, this Article analyzes the case based on principles of negotiation developed in negotiation literature. Fifth, it assesses the overall success of the negotiation and its significance as an example of adherence to interest-based principles in negotiations between the Government and news media in a post-Pentagon Papers context. This analysis aims to provide a valuable example of negotiations between the news media and the Government for further consideration and discussion by lawyers, news editors and reporters, and negotiators alike. This Article is based partially upon general research on the subject, but is derived primarily from resources specific to this particular negotiation. Much of the analysis in this Article was drawn directly from the author's personal interviews with the two key participants involved in this negotiation: Washington Post Investigative Journalist Bob Woodward and former Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Public Affairs Geoff Morrell. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper examines how international education (IE), as an important tool of public diplomacy (PD) and soft power (SP), faces unique challenges as issues of national security (NS) become more prominent in this era of new geopolitics. It presents a model to understand the relationship between PD, SP and NS and then applies this model to a comparative study. The contrasting histories, approaches and perspectives of IE as it operates as a component of foreign policy and at the nexus of PD, SP and NS in both the U.S. and Canada are analysed. The paper concludes with three challenges faced by IE in the contemporary context: first, the diminishing role of the university as a distinct and valued non-state actor; second, the weakening of foreign policy as an outward looking, distinctly international investment; and third, the problem with choosing isolation over engagement as a strategy.

In this era of pandemics, asylum seekers, and conflict between super powers, social sciences are a critical subject that can help develop young people who can not only recognise racial and social discrimination but also injustices at a regional, national, and global scale. Mainstream subjects, such as sociology, routinely support learning in the social sciences area. As a science/biology teacher, I wanted to find out whether biosecurity science could be used to support learning in the social sciences area. My interest in biosecurity stems from personal and professional experiences in New Zealand. Further, in my own pedagogical experience, teaching science/biology in schools, I found young people (15-18 years) were unfamiliar with the concept of biosecurity in New Zealand. Considering my experiences, I set out to conduct research to look at the efficacy of using biosecurity in teaching and learning. This paper reports on the experience of one Year 13 social science teacher who used biosecurity content to teach in the social sciences learning area. Classroom observations and individual teacher interviews were used to gather data. The results show that biosecurity content engaged Year 13 social sciences students in the classroom and that the teacher used transformational learning theory to engage his students into undertaking social action related to biosecurity. Given the importance of biosecurity to New Zealand, this paper shows that social sciences as a learning area could support teaching and learning about biosecurity.

The Prevent Duty requires universities in the United Kingdom to identify and report students who might be seen as 'vulnerable' to radicalisation. Since its introduction in 2015, the duty has been subject to increasing empirical research in the education sector. However, there has been limited research that specifically explores Muslim students' perceptions of Prevent in British universities. This paper directly addresses this gap in research by drawing upon the qualitative experiences of 25 university students who self-identified as 'British Muslims'. Individual, semi-structured interviews were transcribed and analysed using Thematic Analysis. The findings demonstrate the securitisation of higher education and 'policing' of Muslim students. The paper draws on Pantazis and Pemberton's use of the 'new suspect community' thesis in order to examine participants' views and experiences. When analysing the data, three particular themes are especially prominent: as a tool of 'surveillance', Prevent hampers freedom of speech, threatens student activism and forces Muslim students to hide their Muslim identity to avoid being labelled as 'radical' or 'vulnerable' to terrorism. It will be concluded that the 'surveillance' function of Prevent is problematic on the grounds that it renders universities 'modern-day panopticons'.