History and nomenclature of the theropod dinosaur tracks Bueckeburgichnus and Megalosauripus

The most recent account of Bueckeburgichnus maximus Kuhn 1958, a distinctive theropod dinosaur track from the Lower Cretaceous of Germany, is shown to be based on a referred specimen mistakenly identified as the holotype and the correct name of this taxon is deemed to be Megalosauripus maximus (Kuhn 1958). This minor revision has important consequences for nomenclature of the many European, Asian, North American and Australian dinosaur tracks attributed to megalosaurian theropods. Many of those tracks were named Megalosauripus, but that name has a confusing multiplicity of meanings and it should be restricted to the highly characteristic dinosaur track formerly identified as Bueckeburgichnus. Other tracks named "Megalosauripus”; (in its several other senses) will require new nomenclature, despite their extensive and repeated revision since 1996. It is recommended that future revision should adopt conventions of the International Code of Zoological Nomenclature. Although previous revisions expressed an intention to adhere to those conventions, these were not put into practice, with the unfortunate result of multiplying the problems that surround the nomenclature of megalosaur tracks. Introduction of the name Megalosauripus maximus (Kuhn 1958) eliminates those burgeoning problems and permits the introduction of new and objective nomenclature for presumed megalosaur tracks.

Recording and preserving legal history

The lack of a systematic approach in Australia to recording and preserving legal history was highlighted in the article by Catherine Hutchins in the August 2002 issue of the Australian Bar Review. This article describes the modest, albeit continuing, efforts on the part of the Supreme Court Library to meet this need in the State of Queensland. The efforts began in 1983 and have recently escalated with a series of exhibitions, talks, displays, interviews and preservations of documents (from online publication).

Issues in Australian Foreign Policy: January to June 2002

No abstract

'Why does cultural studies want history?'

Cultural studies has often been accused of maintaining too strong a focus on the contemporary and the immediate as a result of its primary interest in popular culture and the media. The role of history, such criticisms suggest, has been displaced by this contemporary emphasis. Nonetheless, much cultural studies work takes a principled stand on the necessity of historicising the products of its research. Consequently, it is worth asking, with British historian Carolyn Steedman--'why does cultural studies want history?' This article begins to answer that question through the discussion of some aspects of a specific research project within Australian cultural studies.

Assessing clinical reasoning: a method to monitor its development in a PBL curriculum

The aim of this study was to develop and trial a method to monitor the evolution of clinical reasoning in a PBL curriculum that is suitable for use in a large medical school. Termed Clinical Reasoning Problems (CRPs), it is based on the notion that clinical reasoning is dependent on the identification and correct interpretation of certain critical clinical features. Each problem consists of a clinical scenario comprising presentation, history and physical examination. Based on this information, subjects are asked to nominate the two most likely diagnoses and to list the clinical features that they considered in formulating their diagnoses, indicating whether these features supported or opposed the nominated diagnoses. Students at different levels of medical training completed a set of 10 CRPs as well as the Diagnostic Thinking Inventory, a self-reporting questionnaire designed to assess reasoning style. Responses were scored against those of a reference group of general practitioners. Results indicate that the CRPs are an easily administered, reliable and valid assessment of clinical reasoning, able to successfully monitor its development throughout medical training. Consequently, they can be employed to assess clinical reasoning skill in individual students and to evaluate the success of undergraduate medical schools in providing effective tuition in clinical reasoning.