Staff and students co-creating curricula in UK higher education: exploring process and evidencing value

Student engagement in learning and teaching is receiving a growing level of interest from policy makers, researchers, and practitioners. This includes opportunities for staff and students to co-create curricula, yet there are few examples within current literature which describe and critique this form of staff-student collaboration (Bovill (2013a), Healey et al (2014), Cook-Sather et al (2014). The competing agendas of neoliberalism and critical, radical pedagogies influence the policy and practice of staff and students co-creating curricula and, consequently, attempt to appropriate the purpose of it in different ways. Using case-based research methodology, my study presents analysis of staff and students co-creating curricula within seven universities. This includes 17 examples of practice across 14 disciplines. Using an inductive approach, I have examined issues relating to definitions of practice, conceptualisations of curricula, perceptions of value, and the relationship between practice and institutional strategy. I draw upon an interdisciplinary body of literature to provide the conceptual foundations for my research. This has been necessary to address the complexity of practice and includes literature relating to student engagement in learning and teaching, conceptual models of curriculum in higher education, approaches to evidencing value and impact, and critical theory and radical pedagogies. The study makes specific contributions to the wider scholarly debate by highlighting the importance of dialogue and conversational scholarship as well as identifying with participants what matters as well as what works as a means to evidence the value of collaborations. It also presents evidence of a new model of co-creating curricula and additional approaches to conceptualising curricula to facilitate collaboration. Analysis of macro and micro level data shows enactment of dialogic pedagogies within contexts of technical-rational strategy formation and implementation.

Original sin: divine and symbolic violence in the turn to the Apostle Paul

When we take a step back from the imposing figure of physical violence, it becomes possible to examine other structurally violent forces that constantly shape our cultural and political landscapes. One of the driving interests in the “turn to Paul” in recent continental philosophy stems from wrestling with questions about the real nature of contemporary violence. Paul is positioned as a thinker whose messianic experience began to cut through the violent masquerade of the existing order. The crucifixion and resurrection of the Messiah (a slave and a God co-existing in one body) exposed the empty grounding upon which power resided. The Christ-event signifies a moment of violent interruption in the existing order which Paul enjoins the Gentiles to participate in through a dedication of love for the neighbour. This divine violence aims to reveal and subvert the “powers,” epitomised in the Roman Empire, in order to fulfil the labour of the Messianic now-time which had arrived. The impetus behind this research comes from a typically enigmatic and provocative section of text by the Slovene philosopher, cultural critic, and Christian atheist Slavoj Žižek. He claims that 'the notion of love should be given here all its Paulinian weight: the domain of pure violence… is the domain of love' (2008a, 173). In this move he links Paul’s idea of love to that of Walter Benjamin’s divine violence; the sublime and the cataclysmic come together in this seemingly perverse notion. At stake here is the way in which uncovering violent forces in the “zero-level” of our narrative worldviews aids the diagnosis of contemporary political and ethical issues. It is not enough to imagine Paul’s encounter with the Christ-event as non-violent. This Jewish apocalyptic movement was engaged in a violent struggle within an existing order that God’s wrath will soon dismantle. Paul’s weak violence, inspired by his fidelity to the Christ-event, places all responsibility over creation in the role of the individual within the collective body. The centre piece of this re-imagined construction of the Pauline narrative comes in Romans 13: the violent dedication to love understood in the radical nature of the now-time. 3 This research examines the role that narratives play in the creation and diagnosis of these violent forces. In order to construct a new genealogy of violence in Christianity it is crucial to understand the role of the slave of Christ (the revolutionary messianic subject). This turn in the Symbolic is examined through creating a literary structure in which we can approach a radical Nietzschean shift in Pauline thought. The claim here, a claim which is also central to Paul’s letters, is that when the symbolic violence which manipulates our worldviews is undone by a divine violence, if even for a moment, new possibilities are created in the opening for a transvaluation of values. Through this we uncover the nature of original sin: the consequences of the interconnected reality of our actions. The role of literature is vital in the construction of this narrative; starting with Cormac McCarthy’s No Country for Old Men, and continuing through works such as Melville’s Bartleby the Scrivener, this thesis draws upon the power of literature in the shaping of our narrative worlds. Typical of the continental philosophy at the heart of this work, a diverse range of illustrations and inspirations from fiction is pulled into its narrative to reflect the symbolic universe that this work was forged through. What this work attempts to do is give this theory a greater grounding in Paul’s letters by demonstrating this radical kenotic power at the heart of the Christ-event. Romans 13 reveals, in a way that has not yet been picked up by Critchley, Žižek, and others, that Paul opposed the biopolitical power of the Roman Empire through the weak violence of love that is the labour of the slaves of Christ on the “now-time” that had arrived.

Biochemical and epidemiological investigations of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug usage and related side effects in equids

Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are widely used in equine veterinary practice. These drugs exert their effect by inhibiting cyclooxygenase (COX) enzymes, which control prostaglandin production, a major regulator of tissue perfusion. Two isoforms of COX enzymes exist: COX-1 is physiologically present in tissues, while COX-2 is up-regulated during inflammation and has been indicated as responsible for the negative effects of an inflammatory response. Evidence suggests that NSAIDs that inhibit only COX-2, preserving the physiological function of COX-1 might have a safer profile. Studies that evaluate the effect of NSAIDs on COX enzymes are all performed under experimental conditions and none uses actual clinical patients. The biochemical investigations in this work focus on describing the effect on COX enzymes activity of flunixin meglumine and phenylbutazone, two non-selective COX inhibitors and firocoxib, a COX-2 selective inhibitor, in clinical patients undergoing elective surgery. A separate epidemiological investigation was aimed at describing the impact that the findings of biochemical data have on a large population of equids. Electronic medical records (EMRs) from 454,153 equids were obtained from practices in the United Kingdom, United States of America and Canada. Information on prevalence and indications for NSAIDs use was extracted from the EMRs via a text mining technique, improved from the literature and described and validated within this Thesis. Further the prevalence of a clinical sign compatible with NSAID toxicity, such as diarrhoea, is reported along with analysis evaluating NSAID administration in light of concurrent administration of other drugs and comorbidities. This work confirms findings from experimental settings that NSAIDs firocoxib is COX-2 selective and that flunixin meglumine and phenylbutazone are non-selective COX inhibitors and therefore their administration carries a greater risk of toxicity. However the impact of this finding needs to be interpreted with caution as epidemiological data suggest that the prevalence of toxicity is in fact small and the use of these drugs at the labelled dose is quite safe.