Capacity-building through English language training to improve long-term resettlement success: A case study of the refugees along the Thailand-Burma border

Achieving long-term resettlement success is a challenge for many refugees seeking to restart their lives after displacement and being uprooted from their lives. Refugees must deal with finding employment, integrating into a society immensely different from what they have known their whole lives, and starting over from scratch. Learning a new language enables refugees to progress towards integration and long-term resettlement success, however, resettled refugees face a multitude of barriers in the U.S. to accessing language classes and attaining English proficiency. This study seeks to bridge this problem by exploring the possibilities of implementing a standardized language training program in the refugee camps to better prepare refugees for resettlement. A case study of the refugees along the Thai-Burma border demonstrated the significance of learning English in the camps on eventual English proficiency as well as the need for increased partnerships to overcome the barriers of lack of motivation and lack of funding. The author explores the possibilities of implementing a language training program in the camps by determining need, interest, barriers, and perceptions through the use of interviews, surveys, and focus groups of camp refugees, resettled refugees, and key organizational representatives. The significance of these results offers the possibility of leveraging and unlocking resettlement as a durable solution for more of the world's refugees in protracted situations.

Psychometric Investigation of the Check-In, Check-Out Fidelity of Implementation Measure

Suspension and expulsion are utilized frequently and disproportionality in schools in the United States. Many schools utilize Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports (PBIS), a tiered framework to prevent problem behavior and reduce the use of discipline practices (Sugai et al., 2000). Check-In, Check-Out (CICO) is a targeted group behavioral intervention that is utilized within this framework in schools to prevent severe problem behavior in students that are beginning to exhibit externalizing and/or internalizing behavioral needs; thus, preventing the use of exclusionary discipline practices (Crone et al., 2010; Hawken & Horner, 2003). As the use of CICO in schools continues to grow, so too does the need for an instrument measuring its fidelity of implementation. The purpose of this study was to investigate the reliability and validity of the Check-In, Check-Out Fidelity of Implementation Measure (Crone et al., 2010), an instrument created to measure the fidelity of implementation of CICO intervention. This study assessed the psychometric properties of the instrument utilizing an archival data set collected by the statewide PBIS initiative in a western state in the U.S. The results demonstrated promising content validity, construct validity, internal consistency, and interrater reliability. A unidimensional structure was determined to be the best structure for the instrument based on parsimony and the strong results obtained from the item loadings, internal consistency, and interrater reliability. Implications for use and future research are discussed.

Employee Motivation: Effective Incentives Targeted at Keeping the Baby Boomers in the Workplace beyond Normal Retirement Age

The impending mass retirement of the Baby Boom generation in the United States may cause a drastic talent drain. Companies should pay attention to this upcoming problem now to alleviate an exodus by encouraging Baby Boomers to continue working past their normal retirement age. One solution is to offer them effective incentives. The most compelling incentives for Baby Boomers are the ability to choose their own hours (how many hours they wish to work, and when they wish to work them), the ability to telecommute from wherever they choose, and the offer of extra health care benefits.

Three Dichotomies in Lawyers’ Ethics (With Particular Attention to the Corporation as Client)

Three usually unexpressed, and too often unnoticed, conceptual dichotomies underlie our perception and understanding of lawyers’ ethics. First, the existence of a special body of professional ethics and professional regulation presupposes some special need or risk. Criminal and civil law are apparently insufficient. Ordinary day-to-day morality and ordinary ethics, likewise, are not considered to be enough. What is the risk entailed by the notion of a profession that is special; who needs protection, and from what? Two quite different possible answers to this question provide the first of the three dichotomies examined in this article: one can understand the risk as primarily to a vulnerable client from a powerful professional; or, to the contrary, from a powerful client-lawyer combination toward vulnerable others. Second, what is the foundational orientation of lawyers? Are lawyers serving primarily their particular clients, and those clients’ preferences, choices and autonomy? Or is the primary allegiance of lawyers to some community or collective goal or interest distinct from the particular goals or interests of the client? The third dichotomy concerns not the substance of the risk, or the primary orientation, but the appropriate means of responding to that risk or that fundamental obligation. Should professional ethics be implemented primarily through rules? Or, should we rely on character and the discretion of lawyers to make a thought out, all things considered, decision? Each of these three presents a fundamental difference in how we perceive and address issues of lawyers’ ethics. Each affects our understanding and analysis on multiple levels, from (1) determining the appropriate or requisite conduct in a particular situation, to (2) framing a specific rule or approach for a particular category of situations, to (3) more general or abstract theory or policy. A person’s inclinations in regard to the dichotomies affects the conclusions that person will reach on each of those levels of analysis, yet those inclinations and assumptions are frequently unexamined and unarticulated. One’s position on each of the dichotomies tends to structure the approach and outcome without the issues and choice having been explicitly addressed or possibly even noticed. This article is an effort to ameliorate that problem. Part I addresses the question of what is the risk in the work of lawyers, or the function of lawyers, for which professional ethics is the answer. The concluding section focuses on the particular problem of the corporation as client. Part II then asks the related and possibly consequent question of what is the foundational orientation or allegiance of the lawyer? Is it to the individual client? Or is it to some larger community interest? Again, the concluding section focuses on the corporation. Part III turns to the means or method for addressing the obligations and possible problems of the professional ethics of lawyers. Should lawyers’ ethics guide and confine the conduct of lawyers primarily through rules? Or should it function primarily through reliance on the knowledge, judgment and character of lawyers? If the latter were the guide, ethical decisions would be made on a situation by situation basis under the discretion of each lawyer. Toward the end of each discussion possibilities for bridging the dichotomy are considered (and with such bridges each dichotomy may come to look more like a spectrum or continuum.). At several points after its introduction in Parts I and II, the special problem of the corporation as client is revisited and possible solutions suggested. Illustrating the usefulness of keeping the dichotomies in view, Part IV applies them to several exemplary situations of ethical difficulty in actual lawyer practice. For readers finding it difficult to envision the consequences of these distinctions, turning ahead to Part IV may be useful in making the discussion more concrete. Some commonalities across the dichotomies and connections among them are then developed in the concluding section, Part V.

Three Dichotomies in Lawyers’ Ethics (With Particular Attention to the Corporation as Client)

Three usually unexpressed, and too often unnoticed, conceptual dichotomies underlie our perception and understanding of lawyers’ ethics. First, the existence of a special body of professional ethics and professional regulation presupposes some special need or risk. Criminal and civil law are apparently insufficient. Ordinary day-to-day morality and ordinary ethics, likewise, are not considered to be enough. What is the risk entailed by the notion of a profession that is special; who needs protection, and from what? Two quite different possible answers to this question provide the first of the three dichotomies examined in this article: one can understand the risk as primarily to a vulnerable client from a powerful professional; or, to the contrary, from a powerful client-lawyer combination toward vulnerable others. Second, what is the foundational orientation of lawyers? Are lawyers serving primarily their particular clients, and those clients’ preferences, choices and autonomy? Or is the primary allegiance of lawyers to some community or collective goal or interest distinct from the particular goals or interests of the client? The third dichotomy concerns not the substance of therisk, or the primary orientation, but the appropriate means of responding to that risk or that fundamental obligation. Should professional ethics be implemented primarily through rules? Or, should we rely on character and the discretion of lawyers to make a thought out, all things considered, decision? Each of these three presents a fundamental difference in how we perceive and address issues of lawyers’ ethics. Each affects our understanding and analysis on multiple levels, from (1) determining the appropriate or requisite conduct in aparticular situation, to (2) framing a specific rule or approach for a particular category of situations, to (3) more general or abstract theory or policy. A person’s inclinations in regard to the dichotomies affects the conclusions that person will reach on each of those levels of analysis, yet those inclinations and assumptions are frequently unexamined and unarticulated. One’s position on each of the dichotomies tends to structure the approach and outcome without the issues and choice having been explicitly addressed or possibly even noticed. This article is an effort to ameliorate that problem. Part I addresses the question of what is the risk in the work of lawyers, or the function of lawyers, for which professional ethics is the answer. The concluding section focuses on the particular problem of the corporation as client. Part II then asks the related and possibly consequent question of what is the foundational orientation or allegiance of the lawyer? Is it to the individual client? Or is it to some larger community interest? Again, the concluding section focuses on thecorporation. Part III turns to the means or method for addressing the obligations and possible problems of the professional ethics of lawyers. Should lawyers’ ethics guide and confine the conduct of lawyers primarily through rules? Or should it function primarily through reliance on the knowledge, judgment and character of lawyers? If the latter were the guide, ethical decisions would be made on a situation by situation basis under the discretion of each lawyer. Toward the end of each discussion possibilities for bridging the dichotomy are considered (and with such bridges each dichotomy may come to look more like a spectrum or continuum.). At several points after its introduction in Parts I and II, the special problem of the corporation as client is revisited and possible solutions suggested. Illustrating the usefulness of keeping the dichotomies in view, Part IV applies them to several exemplary situations of ethical difficulty in actual lawyer practice. For readers finding it difficult to envision the consequences of these distinctions, turning ahead to Part IV may be useful in making the discussion more concrete. Some commonalities across the dichotomies and connections among them are then developed in the concluding section, Part V.