Tackling the burden of injury in Australasia : developing a binational trauma registry

Existing trauma registries in Australia and New Zealand play an important role in monitoring the management of injured patients. Over the past decade, such monitoring has been translated into changes in clinical processes and practices. Monitoring and changes have been ad hoc, as there are currently no Australasian benchmarks for “optimal” injury management. A binational trauma registry is urgently needed to benchmark injury management to improve outcomes for injured patients.

Indigenous research and broader issues in the Academy

The Rudd Labour Government rode to power in Australia on the education promise of 'an education revolution'. The term 'education revolution' carries all the obligatory marketing metaphors that an aspirant government might want recognised by the general public on the eve government came to power however in revolutionary terms it fades into insignificance in comparison to the real revolution in Australian education. This revolution simply put is to elevate Indigenous Knowledge Systems, in Australian Universities. In the forty three years since the nation setting Referendum of 1967 a generation has made a beach head on the educational landscape. Now a further generation who having made it into the field of higher degrees yearn for the ways and means to authentically marshal Indigenous knowledge? The Institute of Koorie Education at Deakin has for over twenty years not only witnessed the transition but is also a leader in the field. With the appointment of two Chairs of Indigenous Knowledge Systems to build on to its already established research profile the Institute moved towards what is the 'real revolution' in education – the elevation of Indigenous Knowledge as a legitimate knowledge system. This paper lays out the Institute of Koorie Education‘s Research Plan and the basis of an argument put to the academy that will be the driver for this pursuit.

New media pathways : navigating the links between home, school and the workplace

The terms ‘literacy’ and ‘technology’ remain highly contentious within the field of education. What is meant by ‘literacy’ and the methods used to measure it vary quite markedly in educational and historical contexts across the world. Similarly, while there is a shared concern to research the potential impact of new information and communication technologies (ICTs) on patterns of teaching and learning, there are major discrepancies about which aspects and uses of these technologies should be incorporated into formal learning environments and how this can be accomplished. While government policy makers tend to regard ICTs in relation to ideas of ‘smartness’, efficiency, and the ‘knowledge’ (or ‘new’) economy, educators and educational researchers promote them as offering new tools for learning and critical thinking and the development of new literacies and socio-cultural identities. This clearly has ramifications for the ways literacy is taught and conceptualised throughout the years of schooling, K-12. Outside school, meanwhile, students engage with ICTs on another level entirely, as tools for the maintenance of social networks, for leisure, and for learning and participating in the cultures of their peers. Whatever the differences in perspective, it remains the case that a society’s dominant understandings about literacy and technology will have significant implications for the development of school curriculum.

Crown copyright

Copyright protects much of the creative, cultural, educational, scientific and informational material generated by federal, State/Territory and local governments and their constituent departments and agencies. Governments at all levels develop, manage and distribute a vast array of materials in the form of documents, reports, websites, datasets and databases on CD or DVD and files that can be downloaded from a website. Under the Copyright Act 1968 (Cth), with few exceptions government copyright is treated the same as copyright owned by non-government parties insofar as the range of protected materials and the exclusive proprietary rights attaching to them are concerned. However, the rationale for recognizing copyright in public sector materials and vesting ownership of copyright in governments is fundamentally different to the main rationales underpinning copyright generally. The central justification for recognizing Crown copyright is to ensure that government documents and materials created for public administrative purposes are disseminated in an accurate and reliable form. Consequently, the exclusive rights held by governments as copyright owners must be exercised in a manner consistent with the rationale for conferring copyright ownership on them. Since Crown copyright exists primarily to ensure that documents and materials produced for use in the conduct of government are circulated in an accurate and reliable form, governments should exercise their exclusive rights to ensure that their copyright materials are made available for access and reuse, in accordance with any laws and policies relating to access to public sector materials. While copyright law vests copyright owners with extensive bundles of exclusive rights which can be exercised to prevent others making use of the copyright material, in the case of Crown copyright materials these rights should rarely be asserted by government to deviate from the general rule that Crown copyright materials will be available for “full and free reproduction” by the community at large.

Copyright future copyright freedom

If copyright law does not liberate us from restrictions on the dissemination of knowledge, if it does not encourage expressive freedom, what is its purpose? This volume offers the thinking and suggestions of some of the finest minds grappling with the future of copyright regulation. The Copyright Future Copyright Freedom conference held in 2009 at Old Parliament House Canberra brought together Lawrence Lessig, Julie Cohen, Leslie Zines, Adrian Sterling, Sam Ricketson, Graham Greenleaf, Anne Fitzgerald, Susy Frankel, John Gilchrist, Michael Kirby and others to share the rich fruits of their experience and analysis. Zines, Sterling and Gilchrist outline their roles in the genesis and early growth of Australian copyright legislation, enriching the knowledge of anyone asking urgent questions about the future of information regulation.

The impact of location on contribution schedule lot entitlements

Should the owner of a penthouse unit pay more in body corporate levies than the ground floor unit owner? A decision of the Queensland Court of Appeal (McPherson JA, Chesterman and Atkinson JJ) will be of great interest to those seeking to challenge contribution schedule lot entitlements imposed under the Body Corporate and Community Management Act 1997 (Qld) (‘the Act’). The decision is Fischer v Body Corporate for Centrepoint Community Title Scheme 7779 [2004] QCA 214.