Understanding the physical processes of pollutant build-up and wash-off on roof surfaces

Pollutants originating with roof runoff can have a significant impact to urban stormwater quality. This signifies the importance of understanding pollutant processes on roof surfaces. Additionally, knowledge of pollutant processes on roof surfaces is important as roofs are used as the primary catchment surface for domestic rainwater harvesting. In recent years, rainwater harvesting has become one of the primary sustainable water management techniques to counteract the growing demand for potable water. Similar to all impervious services, pollutants associated with roof runoff undergo two primary processes: build-up and wash-off. The knowledge relating to these processes is limited. This paper presents outcomes of an in-depth research study into pollutant build-up and wash-off for roof surfaces. The knowledge will be important in order to develop appropriate strategies to safeguard rainwater users from possible health risks.

Social scientists don’t say titwank’

Drawing on the textual evidence of a number of referees’ reports, this article maps key differences between the humanities and social sciences approaches to the study of pornography, in order to facilitate better understanding and communication between the areas. 1. Social scientists avoid ‘vulgar’ language to describe sex. Humanities scholars need not do so. 2. Social scientists remain committed to the idea of ‘objectivity’ while humanities scholars reject the idea – although this may be a confusion in language, with the term in the social sciences used to mean something more like ‘falsifiability’. 3. Social science assumes that the primary effects of exposure to pornography must be negative. 4. More generally, social science resists paradigm changes, insisting that all new work agrees with research that has gone before. 5. Social science believes that casual sex and sadomasochism are negative; humanities research need not do so.

Nursing care of the mechanically ventilated patient: what does the evidence say? Part one.

The care of the mechanically ventilated patient is at the core of a nurse's clinical practice in the Intensive Care Unit (ICU). Published work relating to the numerous nursing issues of the care of the mechanically ventilated patient in the ICU is growing significantly. Literature focuses on patient assessment and management strategies for patient stressors, pain and sedation. Yet this literature is fragmentary by nature. The purpose of this paper is to provide a single comprehensive examination of the evidence related to the care of the mechanically ventilated patient. In part one of this two-part paper, the evidence on nursing care of the mechanically ventilated patient is explored with specific focus on patient safety: particularly patient and equipment assessment. Part two of the paper examines the evidence related to the mechanically ventilated patient's comfort, the patient/family unit, patient position, hygiene, management of stressors, pain management and sedation.

Nursing care of the mechanically ventilated patient: What does the evidence say?: Part two

The care of the mechanically ventilated patient is a fundamental component of a nurse's clinical practice in the intensive care unit (ICU). Published work relating to the numerous nursing issues of the care of the mechanically ventilated patient in the ICU is growing significantly, yet is fragmentary by nature. The purpose of this paper is to provide a single comprehensive examination of the evidence related to the care of the mechanically ventilated patient. In part one of this two-part paper, the evidence on nursing care of the mechanically ventilated patient was explored with specific focus on patient safety: particularly patient and equipment assessment. This article, part two, examines the evidence related to the mechanically ventilated patient's comfort: patient position, hygiene, management of stressors (such as communication, sleep disturbance and isolation), pain management and sedation.

Thomas Young's contribution to visual optics : the Bakerian lecture "On the mechanism of the eye"

Thomas Young (1773-1829) carried out major pioneering work in many different subjects. In 1800 he gave the Bakerian Lecture of the Royal Society on the topic of the “mechanism of the eye”: this was published in the following year (Young, 1801). Young used his own design of optometer to measure refraction and accommodation, and discovered his own astigmatism. He considered the different possible origins of accommodation and confirmed that it was due to change in shape of the lens rather than to change in shape of the cornea or an increase in axial length. However, the paper also dealt with many other aspects of visual and ophthalmic optics, such as biometric parameters, peripheral refraction, longitudinal chromatic aberration, depth-of-focus and instrument myopia. These aspects of the paper have previously received little attention. We now give detailed consideration to these and other less-familiar features of Young’s work and conclude that his studies remain relevant to many of the topics which currently engage visual scientists.

Where does it say I have to do that? How can secondary schools enact assessment policy for students with disabilities

This paper describes effective ways secondary school leaders can enact curriculum policy, particularly assessment practices, to support learning for students with disabilities in mainstream schools. Assessment for learning (AfL) as a pedagogic practice, has gained recent importance through inclusion in curriculum policy in Queensland, Australia. AfL is the frequent assessment of student progress that identifies learning needs and informs future teaching and learning. Assessment of student progress of the standards based curriculum has provided challenges for schools attempting to meet the needs of “all” learners. This paper highlights findings of a small case study to model successful leadership practices used in an inclusive secondary school to improve achievement of students with disabilities through assessment. Successful leadership practices that can be generalized to improve achievement of all learners include making sense of policy for staff; developing staff common and shared beliefs and actions; organizing professional learning opportunities and arranging collaborative curriculum planning and co-teaching.

Equity in the twenty-first century

Issues of equity and inequity have always been part of employment relations and are a fundamental part of the industrial landscape. For example, in most countries in the nineteenth century and a large part of the twentieth century women and members of ethnic groups (often a minority in the workforce) were barred from certain occupations, industries or work locations, and received less pay than the dominant male ethnic group for the same work. In recent decades attention has been focused on issues of equity between groups, predominantly women and different ethnic groups in the workforce. This has been embodied in industrial legislation, for example in equal pay for women and men, and frequently in specific equity legislation. In this way a whole new area of law and associated workplace practice has developed in many countries. Historically, employment relations and industrial relations research has not examined employment issues disaggregated by gender or ethnic group. Born out of concern with conflict and regulation at the workplace, studies tended to concentrate on white, male, unionized workers in manufacturing and heavy industry (Ackers, 2002, p. 4). The influential systems model crafted by Dunlop (1958) gave rise to The discipline’s preoccupation with the ‘problem of order’ [which] ensures the invisibility of women, not only because women have generally been less successful in mobilizing around their own needs and discontents, but more profoundly because this approach identifies the employment relationship as the ultimate source of power and conflict at work (Forrest, 1993, p. 410). While ‘the system approach does not deliberately exclude gender . . . by reproducing a very narrow research approach and understanding of issues of relevance for the research, gender is in general excluded or looked on as something of peripheral interest’ (Hansen, 2002, p. 198). However, long-lived patterns of gender segregation in occupations and industries, together with discriminatory access to work and social views about women and ethnic groups in the paid workforce, mean that the employment experience of women and ethnic groups is frequently quite different to that of men in the dominant ethnic group. Since the 1980s, research into women and employment has figured in the employment relations literature, but it is often relegated to a separate category in specific articles or book chapters, with women implicitly or explicitly seen as the atypical or exceptional worker (Hansen, 2002; Wajcman, 2000). The same conclusion can be reached for other groups with different labour force patterns and employment outcomes. This chapter proposes that awareness of equity issues is central to employment relations. Like industrial relations legislation and approaches, each country will have a unique set of equity policies and legislation, reflecting their history and culture. Yet while most books on employment and industrial relations deal with issues of equity in a separate chapter (most commonly on equity for women or more recently on ‘diversity’), the reality in the workplace is that all types of legislation and policies which impact on the wages and working conditions interact, and their impact cannot be disentangled one from another. When discussing equity in workplaces in the twenty-first century we are now faced with a plethora of different terms in English. Terms used include discrimination, equity, equal opportunity, affirmative action and diversity with all its variants (workplace diversity, managing diversity, and so on). There is a lack of agreed definitions, particularly when the terms are used outside of a legislative context. This ‘shifting linguistic terrain’ (Kennedy-Dubourdieu, 2006b, p. 3) varies from country to country and changes over time even within the one country. There is frequently a division made between equity and its related concepts and the range of expressions using the term ‘diversity’ (Wilson and Iles, 1999; Thomas and Ely, 1996). These present dilemmas for practitioners and researchers due to the amount and range of ideas prevalent – and the breadth of issues that are covered when we say ‘equity and diversity in employment’. To add to these dilemmas, the literature on equity and diversity has become bifurcated: the literature on workplace diversity/management diversity appears largely in the business literature while that on equity in employment appears frequently in legal and industrial relations journals. Workplaces of the twenty-first century differ from those of the nineteenth and twentieth century not only in the way they deal with individual and group differences but also in the way they interpret what are fair and equitable outcomes for different individuals and groups. These variations are the result of a range of social conditions, legislation and workplace constraints that have influenced the development of employment equity and the management of diversity. Attempts to achieve employment equity have primarily been dealt with through legislative means, and in the last fifty years this legislation has included elements of anti-discrimination, affirmative action, and equal employment opportunity in virtually all OECD countries (Mor Barak, 2005, pp. 17–52). Established on human rights and social justice principles, this legislation is based on the premise that systemic discrimination has and/or continues to exist in the labour force and particular groups of citizens have less advantageous employment outcomes. It is based on group identity, and employment equity programmes in general apply across all workplaces and are mandatory. The more recent notions of diversity in the workplace are based on ideas coming principally from the USA in the 1980s which have spread widely in the Western world since the 1990s. Broadly speaking, diversity ideas focus on individual differences either on their own or in concert with the idea of group differences. The diversity literature is based on a business case: that is diversity is profitable in a variety of ways for business, and generally lacks a social justice or human rights justification (Burgess et al., 2009, pp. 81–2). Managing diversity is represented at the organizational level as a voluntary and local programme. This chapter discusses some major models and theories for equity and diversity. It begins by charting the history of ideas about equity in employment and then briefly discusses what is meant by equality and equity. The chapter then analyses the major debates about the ways in which equity can be achieved. The more recent ideas about diversity are then discussed, including the history of these ideas and the principles which guide this concept. The following section discusses both major frameworks of equity and diversity. The chapter then raises some ways in which insights from the equity and diversity literature can inform employment relations. Finally, the future of equity and diversity ideas is discussed.