Search

This paper examines how museums can address and raise awareness of histories of incarceration through a case study—the Bad Bridget exhibition, which opened at the Ulster American Folk Park in Omagh, Northern Ireland, in April 2022. Originating as an academic research project (2015–2019) led by Dr Leanne McCormick (Ulster University) and Dr Elaine Farrell (Queen's University Belfast), it tells the stories of women who left Ireland for North America between 1838 and 1918 and ended up in trouble with the authorities for one reason or another. A unique mix of sights, sounds, and smells, further enhanced by first‐person narration, is used within the exhibition to encourage visitors to emotionally engage with the experiences of these women. For much of the nineteenth century, Irish‐born migrants were the biggest group in American prisons, and there were disproportionate numbers of Irish girls and women in the justice system, court, and prison (Farrell & McCormick, 'Bad Bridgets': The criminal and deviant Irish women convicted in America. Irish Times, 2019). Bad Bridget has provided us with a platform to reveal this previously unexplored aspect of the Irish migration story at the museum, contrary to the "American Dream." [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper presents the findings from a systematic review of 29 websites and 13 frameworks that provide STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering, Mathematics) educational resources for parents, educators, and children (birth–8 years of age). Our theoretical approach is rooted within a social semiotic perspective that has indicated that multimodality enables children to use different types of expression to communicate a message or share an idea. Using the PRISMA methodology and the narrative document analysis approach, the themes that emerged included how the content and resources available on the websites addressed whether multimodality supported STEM engagement in an inclusive manner. The findings revealed that there were scarce multimodal resources that engaged children with fun, interactive, and meaningful opportunities to be autonomous learners (e.g., children had agency) (n = 11 out of 29), moving between the digital and hands-on physical spaces (n = 8 out of 29), employing gamification for deep learning (n = 4 out of 29), and piquing children's imagination, inquiry, and creativity, and links to everyday STEM scenarios were hardly present (n = 10 out of 29). The implications lie in addressing early STEM engagement by considering children's learning abilities and agency, bearing in mind parents/educators' sociocultural backgrounds, confidence in STEM awareness, and multimodal avenues for communicating STEM learning and inquiry. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper investigates rationality and its relationship to trust in science in the context of three proposed spaces of science education: the formal, informal and casual. It begins with the place of science as a trusted institution and its role in formal and informal education across the world. Through educational systems, we have come to trust that students are being educated about science and its trustworthiness. However, formal and informal education spaces are not the only spaces in which individuals and society seek science understanding. While the science education literature has long concerned itself with science education in these spaces, this paper proposes a third space, the casual space. The casual space is decentralised and provides access to a range of norms and explanations about the world. We investigate how each of the formal, informal and casual spaces privileges particular forms of rationality as a means for understanding trust in science in each of these spaces. This paper considers the implications for education's response to the challenge of equipping students to make rational judgements about science. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In the last decade, the term STEM has been increasingly picked up internationally and come to represent a solution to a range of issues. Within education, STEM is being translated as a curriculum organiser that has the possibility of engaging and retaining students and is interdisciplinary and skills focussed. This paper takes the STEM curriculum as its focus and investigates the influences that have resulted in the current interpretation of STEM as well as the epistemological questions, tensions and issues that this curriculum raises. The paper does this through a consideration of previous and current curriculum movements and debates and in doing so raises questions about the underlying assumptions, form and focus that STEM curriculum take before considering some possible future directions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

There is a concern in many countries with participation rates in science. One response to this has been a proliferation of university run science outreach programs that aim to both engage and retain students in science. Previous studies of outreach programs have tended to take into account the perspectives of just a few stakeholders in the program. Although this approach has led to some understanding of outreach programs it underplays the level of complexity in running outreach programs and leaves a gap in understanding how student identity and aspirations toward science are supported in science outreach. This research has investigated the perspectives of students, teachers, parents and scientists in one university run astronomy outreach program with the aim of better understanding the role that communities of practice play in science outreach in developing students' science identity. The study confirms the importance of sustained support rather than single interventions and highlights how the development of community within science outreach contributes to shared affective experiences of astronomical phenomena and practices. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Outcomes for patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction continue to improve, largely due to timely provision of reperfusion by primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PPCI). However, despite prompt and successful PPCI, a small proportion of patients require ventilatory and hemodynamic support in an intensive care unit (ICU). The outcome of these patients remains poorly defined. Methods: A retrospective review of all consecutive admissions post-PPCI pathway to a single ICU between January 2009 and May 2014 was performed. Patients were analysed based on survival and indication for admission. Preadmission characteristics and ICU course were reviewed. Univariate and multivariable regression analysis was performed to determine predictors of outcome. Results: During the study period 2902 PPCI were performed and 101 patients were admitted to ICU following PPCI (incidence 3.5%). ICU mortality post-PPCI was 33.7%. Pre-ICU admission factors in a multivariable logistic regression analysis associated with increased mortality included requirement for an intra-aortic balloon pump and a high SOFA score. Conclusions: ICU admission post PPCI is associated with significant mortality. Mortality was related to high presenting SOFA score and need for IABP. These results provide important prognostic information and an acceptable method for risk-stratifying patients with acute myocardial infarction requiring intensive care. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A stream of debate (including a previous special issue of this journal (25(1) 2014)) has made claims not just for 'bringing knowledge back in' as the framing underpinning of the school curriculum, but that subjects associated with disciplinary and disciplined knowledge forms have a particular power and that these characteristics are important to preserve in curriculum frameworks. This paper draws on a major Australian research project studying school and university physics in the context of these arguments to revisit the issue of the 'discipline' of physics and the curriculum logics for physics. Given that disciplines are social in origin and changing and expanding over time, can school curriculum be logically derived from the discipline to which they relate? Are questions about student engagement only questions about pedagogy and not curriculum? Does a focus on disciplinary knowledge mean that the role of school in forming identities and values is avoidable as a significant feature of what the curriculum does? The findings from the project are used both to illustrate and test these questions, and to challenge some over-simple assumptions about the verticality of this form of knowledge for education purposes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In response to the current demands and trends within education, the disciplines as one of the core long-standing organizing structures within knowledge production and transmission are questioning and shifting what and how they teach. Universities are increasingly offering interdisciplinary subjects and programmes as an alternative to or alongside disciplinary subjects. This paper investigates the underlying themes and principles that inform curriculum debate around the value of the disciplines and interdisciplinarity in Australia when compared to the views and practices of academics. A focus on the knowledge that is included in discipline-based and interdisciplinary curricula reveals interdisciplinary knowledge to be more weakly classified and framed than discipline-based knowledge. This has consequences for the depth of interdisciplinary knowledge and requires the consideration of the structure and place of interdisciplinary curricula in university education. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper identifies what can be called the 'paradox of interdisciplinarity' (Weingart ) in Australian higher education research governance and explores some of its constitutive dimensions. In the Australian context, the paradox of interdisciplinarity primarily concerns the proliferation of a programmatic discourse of interdisciplinarity in government reports and government policy and strategy documents, often tied to notions of innovation and applicability, parallel to the persistence or even reinforcement of modes of governance and associated mechanisms that almost exclusively rely on rigid discipline-based classification systems to evaluate and fund research. Two interrelated dimensions of this apparent paradox are discussed. First, the conceptions of knowledge that underpin the use of notions of disciplinarity as well as interdisciplinarity in Australian government reports and policy and strategy papers are analysed. Second, an analysis of the Australian research governance system and its underlying mechanisms is presented, as they pertain to interdisciplinary forms of research. On the basis of these analyses, it is concluded that there is a significant mismatch between the discourse of interdisciplinarity and associated conceptions of knowledge on the one hand, and current, relatively inflexible governmental research funding and evaluation practices on the other. It is finally proposed that the occurrence and perpetuation of such a mismatch in the Australian context can only be understood properly if placed in the context of a more general paradox of research governance, where a politically charged rhetoric of innovation conflicts with the actual trend toward an increasingly diminishing scope for the self-organisation of knowledge. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In the original publication of this article [1], one author's name was misspelling. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]