Do Students Not Care about Extra Credit Opportunities? Investigating Student Perceptions of Extra Credit Value vs. Effort

Giving “extra credit” work to students has been a controversial and hotly debated pedagogical issue for the last 20 years (Blood et al. 1993; Groves 2000; Muztaba Fuad and Jones 2012; Norcross et al. 1989; Weimer 2011). Previous work has focused on the faculty perspective discussing benefits and drawbacks associated with extra credit work (e.g. Hill et al. 1993; Norcross et al. 1989). Other scholars have investigated the use and effects of pop quizzes and other extra credit assignments on students’ final grades (Thorne 2000; Oley 1993). Some authors have criticized that the empirical exploration of understanding students’ motivational and performance efforts remains scarce and “rarely appears in the literature” (Mays and Bower 2005, p. 1). Besides a gap of empirical work it further appears that most existing studies stem from Psychology or Information Science. Yet it is surprising that, even though the topic of extra credit is considered a common practice in marketing education (Ackerman and Kiesler 2007), there is a wide gap within the marketing education literature. For example, a quick search in the Journal of Marketing Education for the keyword “extra credit” shows only 25 search results; yet none of those papers address motivational or performance effects of extra credit. A further search in Marketing Education Review yielded no results at all. To the authors’ knowledge, the topic has only been addressed once by Ackerman and Kiesler in the 2007 MEA Proceedings who conclude that for “such a common part of the marketing education curriculum, we know surprisingly little about its impact on students” (p. 123).

Beyond Bingo: A phenomenographic exploration of leisure in aged care

How do older adults living in residential aged care experience leisure activities? What restricts and facilitates participation? These two research questions guided this semi-longitudinal qualitative research, tracking the lived experience of aged care from the perspective of twenty new aged care residents over 18 months (average age, 80 years) through repeated in-depth semi-structured interviews. Interview data were analyzed using phenomenography, an under-utilized qualitative analysis technique that identifies the variations in how people experience, understand, or conceive of a phenomenon. Phenomenography revealed three qualitatively different ways of understanding residents’ leisure experience: - (1) as a structure for living, - (2) creating social connections, and; - (3) maintaining ability. By illustrating the variation and similarities in how these older Australian residents conceptualise and experience leisure in aged care, the findings may help facilitate a more thoughtful understanding that informs theory, policy and practice.

Paper and electronic antenatal records: What do women and health care providers tell us about their use?

The antenatal paper hand-held record (PHR) has been used extensively in general practice (GP) shared-care management of pregnant women, but recently the antenatal electronic health record (EHR) was introduced. This study aimed to examine the experiences of women and health care providers who use the PHR and the EHR, and find out the relative role of these records in the integration of care. Purposive homogenous samples of women and health care providers were interviewed as users of the PHR in phase 1 and the EHR in phase 2 of the study. Qualitative data were collected via interview with women and GPs and focus groups held with hospital health care providers. Interviews were coded manually and analysed using qualitative content analysis. Fifteen women participated in phase 1 and 12 in phase 2. Seventeen GPs participated in phase 1 and 15 in phase 2. Five focus groups with hospital health care providers were conducted in each phase. Results were categorised into four themes: 1. Record purpose; 2. Perception of the record; 3. Content of the record, and; 4. Sharing information in the record. Both women and health care providers were familiar with the PHR, but identified that some information was missing or not utilised well, and reported underuse of the EHR. The study identified continued widespread use of the PHR and several issues concerning the use of the EHR. An improvement in the strategic implementation of the EHR is suggested as a mechanism to facilitate its wider adoption.

End-of-life care practices of critical care nurses: A national cross-sectional survey

Background: The critical care context presents important opportunities for nurses to deliver skilled, comprehensive care to patients at the end of life and their families. Limited research has identified the actual end-of-life care practices of critical care nurses. Objective: To identify the end-of-life care practices of critical care nurses. Design: A national cross-sectional online survey. Methods: The survey was distributed to members of an Australian critical care nursing association and 392 critical care nurses (response rate 25%) completed the survey. Exploratory factor analysis using principal axis factoring with oblique rotation was undertaken on survey responses to identify the domains of end-of-life care practice. Descriptive statistics were calculated for individual survey items. Results: Exploratory factor analysis identified six domains of end-of-life care practice: information sharing, environmental modification, emotional support, patient and family centred decision-making, symptom management and spiritual support. Descriptive statistics identified a high level of engagement in information sharing and environmental modification practices and less frequent engagement in items from the emotional support and symptom management practice areas. Conclusions: The findings of this study identified domains of end-of-life care practice, and critical care nurse engagement in these practices. The findings highlight future training and practice development opportunities, including the need for experiential learning targeting the emotional support practice domain. Further research is needed to enhance knowledge of symptom management practices during the provision of end-of-life care to inform and improve practice in this area.

Supporting staff to identify residents in pain: A controlled pretest-posttest study in residential aged care

Practical strategies are needed to improve pain awareness among aged care staff and promote a systematic approach to pain identification using evidence-based tools. The purpose of this study was to evaluate a pain identification tool for use by nursing and non-professional staff in residential aged care facilities (RACFs). A controlled pretest-posttest intervention design was conducted in two RACFs in Brisbane, Australia. Completed surveys were returned by 216 staff and 74 residents at baseline and 218 staff and 94 residents at 3-month follow-up. Chart audits were conducted on 308 residents at baseline and 328 at follow-up. Groups were compared on: (1) staff knowledge and attitudes regarding pain, perceived confidence and skills for pain assessment, and perceived quality of pain management, (2) frequency of pain assessments and use of pain interventions, and (3) residents’ perceptions of the quality of pain management. Both groups had high knowledge scores and reported high levels of confidence, skills and perceived quality of pain management at baseline and follow-up. The intervention group showed significant improvement in routine pain assessment and use of non-drug pain interventions. However, due to unexpected changes in control group conditions, both groups increased episodic pain assessment. Overall, staff believed the intervention was clinically useful and fostered a team approach to pain assessment. We found the introduction of pain identification resources with implementation strategies to support frontline staff was partially effective in improving staff and resident outcomes. Nonetheless, our findings confirm the need for change and importance of translational pain research in RACFs.

Trick or treaty?: The Australian debate over the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement

The secretive 2011 Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement – known in short by the catchy acronym ACTA – is a controversial trade pact designed to provide for stronger enforcement of intellectual property rights. The preamble to the treaty reads like pulp fiction – it raises moral panics about piracy, counterfeiting, organised crime, and border security. The agreement contains provisions on civil remedies and criminal offences; copyright law and trademark law; the regulation of the digital environment; and border measures. Memorably, Susan Sell called the international treaty a TRIPS Double-Plus Agreement, because its obligations far exceed those of the World Trade Organization's TRIPS Agreement 1994, and TRIPS-Plus Agreements, such as the Australia-United States Free Trade Agreement 2004. ACTA lacks the language of other international intellectual property agreements, which emphasise the need to balance the protection of intellectual property owners with the wider public interest in access to medicines, human development, and transfer of knowledge and technology. In Australia, there was much controversy both about the form and the substance of ACTA. While the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade was a partisan supporter of the agreement, a wide range of stakeholders were openly critical. After holding hearings and taking note of the position of the European Parliament and the controversy in the United States, the Joint Standing Committee on Treaties in the Australian Parliament recommended the deferral of ratification of ACTA. This was striking as representatives of all the main parties agreed on the recommendation. The committee was concerned about the lack of transparency, due process, public participation, and substantive analysis of the treaty. There were also reservations about the ambiguity of the treaty text, and its potential implications for the digital economy, innovation and competition, plain packaging of tobacco products, and access to essential medicines. The treaty has provoked much soul-searching as to whether the Trick or Treaty reforms on the international treaty-making process in Australia have been compromised or undermined. Although ACTA stalled in the Australian Parliament, the debate over it is yet to conclude. There have been concerns in Australia and elsewhere that ACTA will be revived as a ‘zombie agreement’. Indeed, in March 2013, the Canadian government introduced a bill to ensure compliance with ACTA. Will it be also resurrected in Australia? Has it already been revived? There are three possibilities. First, the Australian government passed enhanced remedies with respect to piracy, counterfeiting and border measures in a separate piece of legislation – the Intellectual Property Laws Amendment (Raising the Bar) Act 2012 (Cth). Second, the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade remains supportive of ACTA. It is possible, after further analysis, that the next Australian Parliament – to be elected in September 2013 – will ratify the treaty. Third, Australia is involved in the Trans-Pacific Partnership negotiations. The government has argued that ACTA should be a template for the Intellectual Property Chapter in the Trans-Pacific Partnership. The United States Trade Representative would prefer a regime even stronger than ACTA. This chapter provides a portrait of the Australian debate over ACTA. It is the account of an interested participant in the policy proceedings. This chapter will first consider the deliberations and recommendations of the Joint Standing Committee on Treaties on ACTA. Second, there was a concern that ACTA had failed to provide appropriate safeguards with respect to civil liberties, human rights, consumer protection and privacy laws. Third, there was a concern about the lack of balance in the treaty’s copyright measures; the definition of piracy is overbroad; the suite of civil remedies, criminal offences and border measures is excessive; and there is a lack of suitable protection for copyright exceptions, limitations and remedies. Fourth, there was a worry that the provisions on trademark law, intermediary liability and counterfeiting could have an adverse impact upon consumer interests, competition policy and innovation in the digital economy. Fifth, there was significant debate about the impact of ACTA on pharmaceutical drugs, access to essential medicines and health-care. Sixth, there was concern over the lobbying by tobacco industries for ACTA – particularly given Australia’s leadership on tobacco control and the plain packaging of tobacco products. Seventh, there were concerns about the operation of border measures in ACTA. Eighth, the Joint Standing Committee on Treaties was concerned about the jurisdiction of the ACTA Committee, and the treaty’s protean nature. Finally, the chapter raises fundamental issues about the relationship between the executive and the Australian Parliament with respect to treaty-making. There is a need to reconsider the efficacy of the Trick or Treaty reforms passed by the Australian Parliament in the 1990s.

A dangerous investment: Australia, New Zealand and the Trans-Pacific Partnership

This week, San Diego is hosting the latest round of talks over the Trans-Pacific Partnership. Australia and New Zealand are at loggerheads over this secretive new trade treaty spanning the Pacific Rim. The rift between the neighbours over the Trans-Pacific Partnership was revealed after the investment chapter of the agreement was leaked to the public.

A mercurial treaty: The Trans-Pacific Partnership (# TPP) and the United States

According to the United States Trade Representative (USTR), Ron Kirk, the Trans-Pacific Partnership is “an ambitious, next-generation, Asia-Pacific trade agreement that reflects U.S. priorities and values”.

Trade war in the Pacific: ASEAN and the Trans-Pacific Partnership

Australian politicians are keen to project our participation in two major international trade talks - the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP), and the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) - as unproblematic.

The Trans-Pacific Partnership, the environment, and climate change

The Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) is a sweeping, plurilateral free-trade agreement spanning the Pacific Rim.The ongoing, secretive treaty negotiations involve Australia and New Zealand; countries from South East Asia such as Brunei Darussalam, Malaysia, Singapore and Vietnam; the South American nations of Peru and Chile; and the members of the 1994 North American Free Trade Agreement, Canada, Mexico and the United States. There has also been some discussion as to whether Japan should be included in the negotiations.

Will Obama fast-track the Trans-Pacific Partnership?

This week there has been discussions between leaders from the Pacific Rim over the Trans-Pacific Partnership in Bali, Indonesia at APEC...

Will the Pacific Rim become a gasland? Dirty fracking and the Trans-Pacific Partnership

There has been much debate about the relationship between international trade, and intellectual property, the environment, biodiversity protection, and climate change. The Obama Administration has pushed such issues into sharp relief, with its advocacy for sweeping international trade agreements, such as the Trans-Pacific Partnership. There has been much public concern about the impact of the Pacific Rim Treaty upon the protection of the environment. In particular, there has been a debate about whether the Trans-Pacific Partnership will promote dirty fracking...

New Zealand, plain packaging, and the Trans-Pacific Partnership

The New Zealand Parliament is considering the adoption of plain packaging of tobacco products with the introduction of the Smoke-Free Environments (Tobacco Plain Packaging) Amendment Bill 2014 (NZ). There has been strong support for the measure amongst the major parties – including the National Party; the Maori Party; the Labor Party; and the Greens. The New Zealand parliamentary debate has considered matters of public health and tobacco control; the role of intellectual property law; and the operation of international trade and investment law.

No logo: Brand bullies, trade mark law, and the Trans-Pacific Partnership

The Trans-Pacific Partnership is a sweeping trade agreement, spanning the Pacific Rim, and covering an array of topics, including intellectual property. There has been much analysis of the recently leaked intellectual property chapter of the Trans-Pacific Partnership by WikiLeaks. Julian Assange, WikiLeaks’ Editor-in-Chief, observed “The selective secrecy surrounding the TPP negotiations, which has let in a few cashed-up megacorps but excluded everyone else, reveals a telling fear of public scrutiny. By publishing this text we allow the public to engage in issues that will have such a fundamental impact on their lives.” Critical attention has focused upon the lack of transparency surrounding the agreement, copyright law and the digital economy; patent law, pharmaceutical drugs, and data protection; and the criminal procedures and penalties for trade secrets. The topic of trade mark law and related rights, such as internet domain names and geographical indications, deserves greater analysis.