The ‘thinking’ in thinking-for-speaking: where is it?

According to the thinking-for-speaking (TFS) hypothesis, speakers of different languages think differently while in the process of mentally preparing content for speech. The aim of the present paper is to critically discuss the research carried out within the TFS paradigm, against the background of the basic tenets laid out by the proponents of this framework. We will show that despite substantial progress in the investigation of crosslinguistic differences in the organisation of information in discourse, the studies that actually examine the cognitive aspects of speech production are, to date, vanishingly few. This state of affairs creates a gap in our knowledge about the thought processes that co-occur with speech production during language use and acquisition. We will argue that in order to reach a more comprehensive picture of the cognitive processes and outcomes of speech production, methodologies additional to the analysis of information organisation must be used.

Thinking out of the box – skills for work

Since the Dearing Report .1 there has been an increased emphasis on the development of employability and transferable (‘soft’) skills in undergraduate programmes. Within STEM subject areas, recent reports concluded that universities should offer ‘greater and more sustainable variety in modes of study to meet the changing demands of industry and students’.2 At the same time, higher education (HE) institutions are increasingly conscious of the sensitivity of league table positions on employment statistics and graduate destinations. Modules that are either credit or non-credit bearing are finding their way into the core curriculum at HE. While the UK government and other educational bodies argue the way forward over A-level reform, universities must also meet the needs of their first year cohorts in terms of the secondary to tertiary transition and developing independence in learning.

Only connect: an annotated bibliography reflecting the breadth and diversity of systems thinking

The field of systems thinking is both broad and diverse. This paper tries to provide assistance to outsiders wishing to find out what systems thinking is and also to insiders interested in exploring areas of the systems movement other than their own. A selection of books, papers and articles is given. Each has a full reference and a brief annotation, this being an account of, and a critical comment on, its content. The selection does not aim to be definitive or authoritative and obviously displays the predilections of the authors. However, the hope is that it will convey a sense of the intellectual and practical endeavours that, to the authors, constitute systems thinking and that it may aid the exploration of the range of holistic ideas that people have found useful in thinking about and acting in the world.

Trying to think systematically about 'systems thinking'

I noticed with interest that Peter Checkland has now contributed' to the debate on the use of the term 'systems thinking' in a paper by Eric Wolstenholme2. However, due to the self-confessed lag in his reading schedule, Peter is responding to the original piece and not to any of the subsequent observations on it3'4 (although he is kind enough to reference some of my other work on the matter).

Whole life thinking and engineering the future

Whole-life thinking for engineers working on the built environment has become more important in a fast changing world.Engineers are increasingly concerned with complex systems, in which the parts interact with each other and with the outside world in many ways – the relationships between the parts determine how the system behaves. Systems thinking provides one approach to developing a more robust whole life approach. Systems thinking is a process of understanding how things influence one another within a wider perspective. Complexity, chaos, and risk are endemic in all major projects. New approaches are needed to produce more reliable whole life predictions. Best value, rather than lowest cost can be achieved by using whole-life appraisal as part of the design and delivery strategy.

Blending systems thinking approaches for organisational analysis: reviewing child protection in England

This paper concerns the innovative use of a blend of systems thinking ideas in the ‘Munro Review of Child Protection’, a high-profile examination of child protection activities in England, conducted for the Department for Education. We go ‘behind the scenes’ to describe the OR methodologies and processes employed. The circumstances that led to the Review are outlined. Three specific contributions that systems thinking made to the Review are then described. First, the systems-based analysis and visualisation of how a ‘compliance culture’ had grown up. Second the creation of a large, complex systems map of current operations and the effects of past policies on them. Third, how the map gave shape to the range of issues the Review addressed and acted as an organising framework for the systemically coherent set of recommendations made. The paper closes with an outline of the main implementation steps taken so far to create a child protection system with the critically reflective properties of a learning organisation, and methodological reflections on the benefits of systems thinking to support organisational analysis.

Thinking about a limited future enhances the positivity of younger and older adults’ recall: support for socioemotional selectivity theory

Compared with younger adults, older adults have a relative preference to attend to and remember positive over negative information. This is known as the “positivity effect,” and researchers have typically evoked socioemotional selectivity theory to explain it. According to socioemotional selectivity theory, as people get older they begin to perceive their time left in life as more limited. These reduced time horizons prompt older adults to prioritize achieving emotional gratification and thus exhibit increased positivity in attention and recall. Although this is the most commonly cited explanation of the positivity effect, there is currently a lack of clear experimental evidence demonstrating a link between time horizons and positivity. The goal of the current research was to address this issue. In two separate experiments, we asked participants to complete a writing activity, which directed them to think of time as being either limited or expansive (Experiments 1 and 2) or did not orient them to think about time in a particular manner (Experiment 2). Participants were then shown a series of emotional pictures, which they subsequently tried to recall. Results from both studies showed that regardless of chronological age, thinking about a limited future enhanced the relative positivity of participants’ recall. Furthermore, the results of Experiment 2 showed that this effect was not driven by changes in mood. Thus, the fact that older adults’ recall is typically more positive than younger adults’ recall may index naturally shifting time horizons and goals with age.

Advancing construction industry development, innovative research and new thinking

Academic writing has a tendency to be turgid and impenetrable. This is not only anathema to communication between academics, but also a major barrier to advancing construction industry development. Clarity in our communication is a prerequisite to effective collaboration with industry. An exploration of what it means to be an academic in a University is presented in order to provide a context for a discussion on how academics might collaborate with industry to advance development. There are conflicting agendas that pull the academic in different directions: peer group recognition, institutional success and industry development. None can be achieved without the other, which results in the need for a careful balancing act. While academics search for better understandings and provisional explanations within the context of conceptual models, industry seeks the practical application of new ideas, whether the ideas come from research or experience. Universities have a key role to play in industry development and in economic development.

Science is Primary - Children Thinking and Learning in theChemistry Laboratory

The goal of primary science education is to foster children’s interest, develop positive science attitudes and promote science process skills development. Learning by playing and discovering provides several opportunities for children to inquiry and understand science based on the first–hand experience. The current research was conducted in the children’s laboratory in Heureka, the Finnish science centre. Young children (aged 7 years) which came from 4 international schools did a set of chemistry experiments in the laboratory. From the results of the cognitive test, the pre-test, the post-test, supported by observation and interview, we could make the conclusion that children enjoyed studying in the laboratory. Chemistry science was interesting and fascinating for young children; no major gender differences were found between boys and girls learning in the science laboratory. Lab work not only encouraged children to explore and investigate science, but also stimulated children’s cognitive development.