Search

This paper examines how inherency, established in statements universities produce asserting the core abilities necessary to enter and qualify for their degrees, connects with employment in accredited professions, creating barriers for people with disabilities and related conditions. There is no consistent definition of inherent requirements (ir s) across higher education internationally. To assist the ongoing development of ir s, our discussion is set out across three parts. We start by reviewing the origins of ir s highlighting an inconsistency in form and content across the sector. We then provide an analysis of two ir statements from actual institutions noting how they position disability, ability, and the competencies deemed inherent to teaching and learning. Finally, we examine areas where governance and policy, teaching and learning, and employability, can potentially change how ir s are deployed in future practice. Our goal is to shift academic and work-related requirements beyond inherent possessive limitations to coherent performative prospects.

Aim:Psychology can be implicated in the mitigation and exacerbation of injustice. Arguably, this results from conventional ways of knowing/being supported by long held distinctions between individual/community and psychology/sociality. The aim of this analysis is to offer a way to think about knowing, being, justice and relationships that transcend polemics to realise just practices in education. This orientation invites the pursuit of psychosocial justice.Rationale:Psychology plays a contradictory and complicated role in the pursuit of social justice. Practitioners in educational settings may claim they are challenging equity and fairness through their application of psychological frameworks and methods yet do so employing reductionist and ableist models implicated in reproducing inequality. Examples are reflected in commitments to measure and cultivate characteristics such as grit, growth mindset, lifelong learning and emotion regulation.Implications:Distinctions between research and applied psychologists are rendered redundant as historically separated actions and matters remerge. Resonant within and across all aspects of our work then is an ethic of relationality. There we recognise the consequence of theory in practice, the entangled nature of people and institutions and the continuing emergence of psychosocial life.Conclusions:Thinking about relationality in this way fundamentally challenges and changes how psychology impacts the use of certain concepts and methods, as well as the formation of assumptions and conclusions about education. If committed to just practice educational psychologists cannot be given to finding finalised outcomes because there is and always will be morethan to consider.

Critical educational psychology has developed in response to traditional psychological applications taking place in education. Common amongst this area of work are concerns with reductionist and pathological ways of understanding those involved in teaching and learning. Further alignments occur with the promotion of social justice, empowerment, and recognition of difference, particularly in relation to ableism, racism, and other forms of prejudice. Critical educational psychologists rely upon varieties of psychological theory to support their work including social constructionism, sociocultural theories, and psychoanalytics. The intimate connection between theory and practice is regularly made explicit in critical educational psychology. Depending on geographic location, more regularly outside of North America, the referents educational and school psychology can be interchanged. Areas of applied work in educational settings include assessment, counseling, and working collaboratively with professionals such as teachers and speech pathologists. Critical educational psychologists examine the givenness of hegemonic psychological research and how this informs ways of knowing/being. Scientific methods are commonly targeted in this regard. Whether scientific accounts of people and the world should be dispelled outright provides grounds for ongoing debate. Even so, many critical educational psychologists are committed to working inclusively within and across different cultures and epistemologies. To this end, critical educational psychology is informed by explanations that are often marginalized from psychological discussion, such as critical race theory, contributions recognizing the global south, indigenous knowledges, as well as critical disability studies, posthuman theory, and new materialism. A central interest for critical educational psychology is championing difference differently. This is achieved through acknowledging the relationality of all things—human, nonhuman, material, and discursive—to affirm what is yet to be.

In order to mark the significance of John Shotter’s life and work, this paper sets out and reflects upon two of his central concepts and emphasises their ongoing relevance. Shotter’s work is first situated in its intellectual and cultural-historical contexts. His linked concepts of ‘joint action’ and ‘knowing of the third kind’ are then briefly explained, and their relevance for recent social science developments including the ‘new materialism’ and the ‘affective turn’ is highlighted. We conclude that, in these turbulent times, Shotter’s is a legacy of hopeful aspiration.

Refereed/Peer-reviewed

Are ontological meanings somehow sacrosanct in arguments concerning psychology - particularly those scored by discursive accounts of human being? Or is the purposeful deferment of ontological concerns in discursive psychology (DP) another instance of method-fetishism (Koch, 1981)? Shotter's (1995) understanding of joint action and Chouliaraki's (2002) critical realist account of social action combine to support an alternate position to the predominant discursive psychological approach informed by epistemological constructionism (DPEC). The DPEC position is here contrasted with a discursive psychological approach informed by ontological constructionism (DPOC). Via this distinction, a path for future discursive psychological studies is charted, one which values understanding the kinds of practical-moral knowledges (Shotter, 1993) available to people in accounting for themselves and their actions as psychosocial agents. Contrary to claims that the DPEC/DPOC distinction is supercilious (Edley, 2001) or oxymoronic (Drewery, 2000), the importance of debating what ontology can mean for psychology is herein seen as central to the pursuit of personal, relational and collective wellness in contemporary life.

Background Bronchiolitis Obliterans Syndrome (BOS) is a late-onset non-infectious pulmonary complication of HSCT, resulting in obstructive lung disease. BOS is thought to be a manifestation of chronic graft versus host disease (cGVHD). BOS can also occur after lung transplantation, where it is believed to represent chronic rejection of the lung allograft. In both conditions, the mainstay of therapy includes augmentation of systemic immunosuppression. However, this approach has limited efficacy and is associated with deleterious consequences including an increased risk of infection and decreased graft versus tumor/leukemia effects. We investigated whether targeted, local delivery of inhaled cyclosporine could improve or stabilize lung function in BOS patients. Methods HSCT recipients with BOS, ages 10-80, were eligible if they met the following inclusion criteria: FEV110% compared to pre-transplant FEV1, no evidence of pulmonary infection as a causative etiology, and one of the following: FEV1/FVC ratio Results Eleven subjects (nine evaluable) have been enrolled (median age: 45 years; range: 14-73). Nine subjects had HSCT-associated BOS, and 2 had lung-transplant-associated BOS. Patients were transplanted for various underlying conditions (MDS, aplastic anemia, DLBCL, MM, ALL, Gata-2 deficiency, alpha-1 anti-trypsin deficiency, and idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis). HSCT recipients received both reduced intensity (n=4) and myeloablative (n=5) conditioning, with allografts from HLA matched relatives (n=5) or unrelated donors (n=4). The median time from BOS diagnosis to study enrollment was 9 months (range: 2-37 mos). The median FEV1 at study entry was 1.11 liters (range: 0.5-2.11), with 4 subjects having progressive disease and 7 stable disease. Adverse events associated with CIS occurred in 9/10 patients and included cough, bronchospasm, and dyspnea. Most adverse events were grade 2 (range:1-3) and occurred only during the inhalation. Three subjects went off-study (patient choice) prior to completion of the 18 weeks due to adverse events and were considered non-responders. Four of the 8 (50%) HSCT- associated BOS subjects had a response, including 3 patients with progressive disease and 1 with stable disease at study entry. Among these responders, the improvements in absolute FEV1 from baseline were 19.5%, 15%, 12.7%, and 3.4% respectively (figure). Among the responding patients, 2 were also able to decrease their systemic steroid administration by 50% and 43%. An improvement in 6MWT was noted in 1/4 responders. Four responders have enrolled onto an extension protocol. The median peak systemic absorption of cyclosporine was 99 mcg/L (Range: 32-263) 20 minutes post-CIS inhalation. Lung deposition studies showed the total deposited dose averaged 12% (range: 4-20 %) of the inhaled dose. Conclusions Inhaled cyclosporine can be delivered safely and can stabilize or improve lung function in HSCT recipients with severe BOS, allowing systemic immunosuppression to be reduced. Use of local, targeted therapy with CIS resulted in minimal systemic absorption compared to typical oral administration, and achieved high drug levels in the lung tissue as demonstrated by the lung deposition results. Disclosures: No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.