Lecturing and the limits of laughter

The literature on humour in teaching frequently defaults to a series of maxims about how it can be used most appropriately: ‘Never tease students', ‘Don't joke about sensitive issues', ‘Never use laughter for disciplinary purposes'. This paper outlines recent research into the boundaries of humour-use within teacher education, which itself forms one part of a large scale, broadly-based study into the use of humour within tertiary teaching. This particular part of the research involves semi-structured, in-depth interviews with university academics. Following the ‘benign violations' theory of humour - wherein, to be funny, a situation/statement must be some kind of a social violation, that violation must be regarded as relatively benign, and the two ideas must be held simultaneously - this paper suggests that the willingness of academics to use particular types of humour in their teaching revolves around the complexities of determining the margins of ‘the benign'. These margins are shaped in part by pedagogic limitations, but also by professional delimitations. In terms of limitations, the boundaries of humour are set by the academic environment of the university, by the characteristics of different cohorts of students, and by what those students are prepare to laugh at. In terms of delimitations, most academics are prepared to tease their student, and many are prepared to use laughter as a form of discipline, however their own humour orientation, academic seniority, and employment security play a large role in determining what kinds of humour will be used, and where boundaries will be set. The central conclusion here is that formal maxims of humour provide little more than vague strategic guidelines, largely failing to account for the complexity of teaching relationships, for the differences between student cohorts, and for the talents and standing of particular teachers.

Community food security gaps in surveillance and monitoring

This paper describes the gaps in monitoring and surveillance identified while conducting Community Food Security assessments in three geographical areas located in south-east Queensland, Australia

Indigenous knowledge and IP food security : a review of concepts and cases

Dáwat, Pamahándí, Tawíd, Ságda, Lampísa, Ibabások, Lapát, Panedlák: for most of us gathered here, these are words that we don’t usually use in our daily lives. Others may consider them as exotic, alien, funny and even backward. However, for indigenous kindred among us, these words denote an intimate identity and deep understanding of the world around them. It constitutes a broader knowledge system, be written or otherwise, which guides them in the management of resources within their ancestral land. This paper will provide a brief theoretical framework of the concepts of indigenous knowledge systems—hereinafter called IKS, and indigenous peoples food security, and hopefully a deeper or continued appreciation in the study of both concepts in general.

Taking culture seriously : the case of Indigenous knowledge and food security

Mainstream discourse on the revolving around food security is often portrayed by macro level indicators on nutrition, consumption and food production. While these indicators may prove significant in addressing food security in the national and regional levels, it falls short in addressing it among the indigenous peoples’ (IP) communities in the Philippines. Reflecting through the experiences in agricultural production, indigenous knowledge and socio-political institutions are relevant factors that must be seriously considered when food security among IPs are concerned. It is argued that disregarding micro level interactions over macro development policies will not address the issue of food security among marginalized sectors. The paper presents policy recommendations in taking cultural systems seriously in addressing food security among indigenous peoples.

Career mentoring : a career development-enhancing strategy for university students in transition to employment

In 1992 the Queensland University of Technology (QUT) Convocation initiated the Mentor Scheme to assist students to better prepare for the transition to employment. The scheme has developed over the past six years and in 1998 more than 130 pairs of employers and students from 12 different disciplines participated in it. Evaluations indicate the positive impact the scheme has made on both mentors and mentees, particularly in enhancing mentees' career development.

Beyond Employment: The Legal Regulation of Work Relationships

Australian labour law, at least from the mid-twentieth century, was dominated by the employment paradigm: the assumption that labour law’s scope was the regulation of employment relationships –full-time and part-time, and continuing, fixed term or casual – with a single (usually corporate) entity employer. But no sooner had the employment paradigm established and consolidated its shape, it began to fall apart. Since the 1980s there has been a significant growth of patterns of work that fall outside this paradigm, driven by organisational restructuring and management techniques such as labour hire, sub-contracting and franchising. Beyond Employment analyses the way in which Australian labour law is being reframed in this shift away from the pre-eminence of the employment paradigm. Its principal concern is with the legal construction and regulation of various forms of contracting, including labour hire arrangements, complex contractual chains and modern forms like franchising, and of casual employment. It outlines the current array of work relationships in Australia, and describes and analyses the way in which those outside continuous and fixed term employment are regulated. The book seeks to answer the central question: How does law (legal rules and principles) construct these work relationships, and how does it regulate these relationships? The book identifies the way in which current law draws the lines between the various work relationships through the use of contract and property ownership, and describes, analyses and synthesises the legal rules that govern these different forms of work relationships. The legal rules that govern work relationships are explored through the traditional lens of labour law’s protective function, principally in four themes: control of property, and the distribution of risks and rewards; maintenance of income security; access to collective voice mechanisms, focusing on collective bargaining; and health, safety and welfare. The book critically evaluates the gaps in the coverage and content of these rules and principles, and the implications of these gaps for workers. It also reflects upon the power relationships that underpin the work arrangements that are the focus of the book and that are enhanced through the laws of contract and property. Finally, it frames an agenda to address the gaps and identified weaknesses insofar as they affect the economic wellbeing, democratic voice, and health and safety of workers.