Situating relational ontology and transformative activist stance within the ‘everyday’ practice of coteaching and cogenerative dialogue.

This paper attempts to advance the thinking in Stetsenko’s paper by situating the concepts of relational ontology and transformative activist stance in the context of coteaching and cogenerative dialogue. In so doing, we hope to make Stetsenko’s ideas more operational in terms of access and application by researchers, teachers, policy makers and other stakeholders in education. Stetsenko argues that moving from relational ontology to a transformative activist stance can be considered as moving from participation to contribution. When this model was applied to coteaching and cogenerative dialogue, it was apparent that the coteaching and cogenerative dialogue moved further, from contribution to shared contribution, adding even greater potential for transformation. The paper also discusses the use of cultural historical activity theory in articulating the relationships, dynamics and interpretations of coteaching and cogenerative dialogue in relation to the wider context of their application.

The Ontology of Thisness

The paper seeks to give an account of what it is for an individual to instantiate thisness, and how an individual and its thisness are related (where the thisness of an individual x is the property of being identical to x). Such an account is completely lacking in the literature, even among those who defend and make use of thisness. My approach is to seek out a model for the instantiation of thisness by canvassing realist accounts of the substance/attribute relation , and then make appropriate modifications to the most likely candidate in order to accommodate an individual's instantiation of thisness (the accounts cannot be strictly identical for reasons that I explain). I go on to suggest that the model can be appropriately applied in the case of other individuals which might instantiate thisness: for example, persons and events (where these are conceived as fundamental categories of ontology distinct from material substances).

Demos and Denomination::flags, fealty, and the political ontology of protests in Northern Ireland

This paper will examine some of the ways in which processes of denomination
have shaped Northern Irish politics before and after the ‘Belfast’, or ‘Good Friday
Agreement’ of 1998. We concentrate on the formation of the ‘Unionist’ or ‘Loyalist
community’, principally because the flag protests of 2012-2013 have brought the
issue of this community identity to the fore again. The flag is part of a whole
machinery of what we, in this paper, will call ‘denomination’ in Northern Irish
politics and elsewhere. The religious overtones of the term are neither accidental
nor incidental. Acts of denomination posit (assertively, authoritatively) a
collective identity, conceived and constituted ontologically, as an existent entity,
and stake a claim to a whole territory.

Behavioral Model Generation from Use Cases Based on Ontology Mapping and GRASP Patterns

This paper contributes a new approach for developing UML software designs from Natural Language (NL), making use of a meta-domain oriented ontology, well established software design principles and Natural Language Processing (NLP) tools. In the approach described here, banks of grammatical rules are used to assign event flows from essential use cases. A domain specific ontology is also constructed, permitting semantic mapping between the NL input and the modeled domain. Rules based on the widely-used General Responsibility Assignment Software Principles (GRASP) are then applied to derive behavioral models.

Collaborative Planning in an Uncollaborative World

The purpose of this paper is to expose the concept of collaborative planning to the reality of planning, thereby assessing its efficacy for informing and explaining what planners 'really' do and can do. In this systematic appraisal, collaborative planning is disaggregated into four elements that can enlighten such conceptual frameworks: ontology, epistemology, ideology and methodology. These four lenses help delimit and clarify collaborative planning's strengths and weaknesses. The conceptual debate is related to an empirical investigation of planning processes, ranging from region-wide to local and from statutory to visionary in an arena where special care has been invested in participatory deliberation processes. The final analysis provides a systematic gauge of collaborative planning in light of the extensive empirical evidence, deploying the four conceptual dimensions introduced in part one. This exposes a range of problems not only with the concept itself but also regarding its affinity with the uncollaborative world within which it has to operate. The former shed light on those aspects where collaborative planning as a conceptual tool for practitioners needs to be renovated, while the latter highlight inconsistencies in a political framework that struggles to accommodate both global competitiveness and local democratic collaboration.