Neolithic Diet at the Brochtorff Circle Malta

Richards, M., Hedges, R., Walton, I; Stoddart, S., Malone, C.,

Stylistics, criticism and mythrepresentation again: squaring the circle with Ray Mackay's subjective solution for all problems

This article is a response to an article by Ray Mackay (1996) which constitutes an attack on stylistic analysis in general, and the writings of the above authors and Ron Carter in particular. Mackay's article (in Language and Communication) accuses stylistics of 'scientificness' and claims that its attempt to provide objective analyses of literary texts is futile.1 We suggest that Mackay has misrepresented what stylisticians have said about objectivity, and that his understanding of objectivity, science and the nature of text-interpretative argument is seriously flawed.

Boys Reading Boys’ Writing

In this study stories written by boys were commented on and assessed by other boys and also by both male and female teachers. The results reveal boys’ attitudes and preferences with regard to writing and also indicate some differences in the responses of male and female teachers. For boys, the performative aspect of narrative writing is important. While English teachers, who are predominantly female, can identify the weaknesses in boys’ writing, they less often note what boys attempt and may do well, for example, ambitious plots, and lack ways to acknowledge and reward such efforts. A number of recommendations are made on ways in which teachers can assist boys both to enjoy their writing but also to improve at it.

Critical reading of science-based news reports: Establishing a knowledge skills and attitudes framework

A recognised aim of science education is to promote critical engagement with science in the media. Evidence would suggest that this is challenging for both teachers and pupils and that at science education does not yet adequately prepare young people for this task. Furthermore, in the absence of clear guidance as to what this means and how this may be achieved it is difficult for teachers to develop approaches and resources that address the matter and that systematically promote such critical engagement within their teaching programmes. Twenty-six individuals with recognised expertise or interest in science in the media, drawn from a range of disciplines and areas of practice, constituted a specialist panel in this study. The question this research sought to answer was ‘what are the elements of knowledge, skill and attitude which underpin critical reading of science based news reports’? During in-depth individual interviews the panel were asked to explore what they considered to be essential elements of knowledge, skills and attitude which people need to enable them to respond critically to news reports with a science component. Analysis of the data revealed fourteen fundamental elements which together contribute to an individual’s capacity to engage critically with science-based news. These are classified in five categories ‘knowledge of science’, ‘knowledge of writing and language’, ‘knowledge about news, newspapers and journalism’, ‘skills’ and ‘attitudes’. Illustrative profiles of each category along with indicators of critical engagement are presented. The implications for curriculum planning and pedagogy are considered.