Parents as coteachers of science and technology in a middle-school classroom

This study explores coteaching/cogenerative dialoguing with parents to investigate how it may be employed to engage parents more meaningfully in schools. The cogens provided a space where participants became aware of resources available for coteaching, made decisions about planning and enacting coteaching, as well as interstitial culture that facilitated positive parent-teacher relationships.

Reconciling the supply of and demand for carbon cycle science in the US agricultural sector

When asking the question, ``How can institutions design science policies for the benefit of decision makers?'' Sarewitz and Pielke Sarewitz, D., Pielke Jr., R.A., this issue. The neglected heart of science policy: reconciling supply of and demand for science. Environ. Sci. Policy 10] posit the idea of ``reconciling supply and demand of science'' as a conceptual tool for assessment of science programs. We apply the concept to the U.S. Department of Agriculture's (USDA) carbon cycle science program. By evaluating the information needs of decision makers, or the ``demand'', along with the supply of information by the USDA, we can ascertain where matches between supply and demand exist, and where science policies might miss opportunities. We report the results of contextual mapping and of interviews with scientists at the USDA to evaluate the production and use of current agricultural global change research, which has the stated goal of providing ``optimal benefit'' to decision makers on all levels. We conclude that the USDA possesses formal and informal mechanisms by which scientists evaluate the needs of users, ranging from individual producers to Congress and the President. National-level demands for carbon cycle science evolve as national and international policies are explored. Current carbon cycle science is largely derived from those discussions and thus anticipates the information needs of producers. However, without firm agricultural carbon policies, such information is currently unimportant to producers. (C) 2006 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Don't sell social science short

The News of the Week article that reports on Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison (R-TX) questioning the need to fund social science research at the National Science Foundation is alarming and shortsighted ("Senate panel chair asks why NSF funds social sciences," 12 May, p. 829). Social science research is at the fundamental core of basic research and has much to contribute to the economic viability of the United States. Twenty years of direct and jointly funded social and ecosystem science research at Colorado State University's Natural Resource Ecology Laboratory has produced deep insights into environmental and societal impacts of political upheaval, land use, and climate change in parts of Africa, Asia, and the Americas. Beyond greatly advancing our understanding of the coupled human-environmental system, the partnership of social and ecosystem science has brought scientists and decision-makers together to begin to develop solutions to difficult problems.

Science and technology supervision resources

This document is an adaptation of a report submitted to the ALTC in 2009, with additional data collected through subsequent interviews with science supervisors. The organisation of the contents also reflects a development of thought since the original project. The framework presented in this document is intended to provide science and technology supervisors with a range of options with respect to supervisory pedagogy. It has been developed to highlight different aspects of thinking about supervision as a teaching and learning practice; as well as approaches, strategies and roles associated with supervision. It will enable science and technology supervisors to become aware of the diverse options available to them and provide systematic ways of thinking about supervisory practices. Use of this framework will encourage supervisors to make choices based on broader, rather than more limited, repertoires. It will also encourage thinking about supervision as a teaching and learning practice.

Cultural Science and Methodological Challenge!

The processes of digitization and deregulation have transformed the production, distribution and consumption of information and entertainment media over the past three decades. Today, researchers are confronted with profoundly different landscapes of domestic and personal media than the pioneers of qualitative audience research that came to form much of the conceptual basis of Cultural Studies first in Britain and North America and subsequently across all global regions. The process of media convergence, as a consequence of the dual forces of digitisation and deregulation, thus constitutes a central concept in the analysis of popular mass media. From the study of the internationalisation and globalisation of media content, changing regimes of media production, via the social shaping and communication technologies and conversely the impact of communication technology on social, cultural and political realities, to the emergence of transmedia storytelling, the interplay of intertextuality and genre and the formation of mediated social networks, convergence informs and shapes contemporary conceptual debates in the field of popular communication and beyond. However, media convergence challenges not only the conceptual canon of (popular) communication research, but poses profound methodological challenges. As boundaries between producers and consumers are increasingly fluent, formerly stable fields and categories of research such as industries, texts and audiences intersect and overlap, requiring combined and new research strategies. This preconference aims to offer a forum to present and discuss methodological innovations in the study of contemporary media and the analysis of the social, cultural,and political impact and challenges arising through media convergence. The preconference thus aims to focus on the following methodological questions and challenges: *New strategies of audience research responding to the increasing individualisation of popular media consumption. *Methods of data triangulation in and through the integrated study of media production, distribution and consumption. *Bridging the methodological and often associated conceptual gap between qualitative and quantitative research in the study of popular media. *The future of ethnographic audience and production research in light of blurring boundaries between media producers and consumers. *A critical re-examination of which textual configurations can be meaningfully described and studied as text. *Methodological innovations aimed at assessing the macro social, cultural and political impact of mediatization (including, but not limited to, "creative methods"). *Methodological responses to the globalisation of popular media and practicalities of international and transnational comparative research. *An exploration of new methods required in the study of media flow and intertextuality.

A new undergraduate model for broadly based spatial science curriculum at Queensland University of Technology : diversity in surveying curriculum

This paper provides an overview of the current QUT Spatial Science undergraduate program based in Brisbane, Queensland, Australia. It discusses the development and implementation of a broad-based educational model for the faculty of built environment and engineering courses and specifically to the course structure of the new Bachelor of Urban Development (Spatial Science) study major. A brief historical background of surveying courses is discussed prior to the detailing of the three distinct and complementary learning themes of the new course structure with a graphical course matrix. Curriculum mapping of the spatial science major has been undertaken as the course approaches formal review in late 2010. Work-integrated learning opportunities have been embedded into the curriculum and a brief outline is presented. Some issues relevant to the tertiary surveying/ spatial sector are highlighted in the context of changing higher education environments in Australia.

Spatial science news from the School of Urban Development, QUT April, 2010

EDM calibration/comparison at Coombabah,Gold Coast; Survey Staffer wins Vice-Chancellor’s Performance Fund Award; Focus on Surveying Service Teaching; Flexible Spatial Science Minor units; Reminder: Staff and Laboratories moving end of April.

Spatial science news from QUT : industry report : JULY 2010

Real-World Survey practical at Coombabah with GPS surveying; BEE student prizes Evening; Engaging Students in real-world learning at SERF.

Preservice teachers’ memories of their secondary science education experiences

Understanding preservice teachers’ memories of their education may aid towards articulating high-impact teaching practices. This study describes 246 preservice teachers’ perceptions of their secondary science education experiences through a questionnaire and 28-item survey. ANOVA was statistically significant about participants’ memories of science with 15 of the 28 survey items. Descriptive statistics through SPSS further showed that a teacher’s enthusiastic nature (87%) and positive attitude towards science (87%) were regarded as highly memorable. In addition, explaining abstract concepts well (79%), and guiding the students’ conceptual development with practical science activities (73%) may be considered as memorable secondary science teaching strategies. Implementing science lessons with one or more of these memorable science teaching practices may “make a difference” towards influencing high school students’ positive long-term memories about science and their science education. Further research in other key learning areas may provide a clearer picture of high-impact teaching and a way to enhance pedagogical practices.

Fusing curricula : science, technology and ICT

Curriculum demands continue to increase on school education systems with teachers at the forefront of implementing syllabus requirements. Education is reported frequently as a solution to most societal problems and, as a result of the world’s information explosion, teachers are expected to cover more and more within teaching programs. How can teachers combine subjects in order to capitalise on the competing educational agendas within school timeframes? Fusing curricula requires the bonding of standards from two or more syllabuses. Both technology and ICT complement the learning of science. This study analyses selected examples of preservice teachers’ overviews for fusing science, technology and ICT. These program overviews focused on primary students and the achievement of two standards (one from science and one from either technology or ICT). These primary preservice teachers’ fused-curricula overviews included scientific concepts and related technology and/or ICT skills and knowledge. Findings indicated a range of innovative curriculum plans for teaching primary science through technology and ICT, demonstrating that these subjects can form cohesive links towards achieving the respective learning standards. Teachers can work more astutely by fusing curricula; however further professional development may be required to advance thinking about these processes. Bonding subjects through their learning standards can extend beyond previous integration or thematic work where standards may not have been assessed. Education systems need to articulate through syllabus documents how effective fusing of curricula can be achieved. It appears that education is a key avenue for addressing societal needs, problems and issues. Education is promoted as a universal solution, which has resulted in curriculum overload (Dare, Durand, Moeller, & Washington, 1997; Vinson, 2001). Societal and curriculum demands have placed added pressure on teachers with many extenuating education issues increasing teachers’ workloads (Mobilise for Public Education, 2002). For example, as Australia has weather conducive for outdoor activities, social problems and issues arise that are reported through the media calling for action; consequently schools have been involved in swimming programs, road and bicycle safety programs, and a wide range of activities that had been considered a parental responsibility in the past. Teachers are expected to plan, implement and assess these extra-curricula activities within their already overcrowded timetables. At the same stage, key learning areas (KLAs) such as science and technology are mandatory requirements within all Australian education systems. These systems have syllabuses outlining levels of content and the anticipated learning outcomes (also known as standards, essential learnings, and frameworks). Time allocated for teaching science in obviously an issue. In 2001, it was estimated that on average the time spent in teaching science in Australian Primary Schools was almost an hour per week (Goodrum, Hackling, & Rennie, 2001). More recently, a study undertaken in the U.S. reported a similar finding. More than 80% of the teachers in K-5 classrooms spent less than an hour teaching science (Dorph, Goldstein, Lee, et al., 2007). More importantly, 16% did not spend teaching science in their classrooms. Teachers need to learn to work smarter by optimising the use of their in-class time. Integration is proposed as one of the ways to address the issue of curriculum overload (Venville & Dawson, 2005; Vogler, 2003). Even though there may be a lack of definition for integration (Hurley, 2001), curriculum integration aims at covering key concepts in two or more subject areas within the same lesson (Buxton & Whatley, 2002). This implies covering the curriculum in less time than if the subjects were taught separately; therefore teachers should have more time to cover other educational issues. Expectedly, the reality can be decidedly different (e.g., Brophy & Alleman, 1991; Venville & Dawson, 2005). Nevertheless, teachers report that students expand their knowledge and skills as a result of subject integration (James, Lamb, Householder, & Bailey, 2000). There seems to be considerable value for integrating science with other KLAs besides aiming to address teaching workloads. Over two decades ago, Cohen and Staley (1982) claimed that integration can bring a subject into the primary curriculum that may be otherwise left out. Integrating science education aims to develop a more holistic perspective. Indeed, life is not neat components of stand-alone subjects; life integrates subject content in numerous ways, and curriculum integration can assist students to make these real-life connections (Burnett & Wichman, 1997). Science integration can provide the scope for real-life learning and the possibility of targeting students’ learning styles more effectively by providing more than one perspective (Hudson & Hudson, 2001). To illustrate, technology is essential to science education (Blueford & Rosenbloom, 2003; Board of Studies, 1999; Penick, 2002), and constructing technology immediately evokes a social purpose for such construction (Marker, 1992). For example, building a model windmill requires science and technology (Zubrowski, 2002) but has a key focus on sustainability and the social sciences. Science has the potential to be integrated with all KLAs (e.g., Cohen & Staley, 1982; Dobbs, 1995; James et al., 2000). Yet, “integration” appears to be a confusing term. Integration has an educational meaning focused on special education students being assimilated into mainstream classrooms. The word integration was used in the late seventies and generally focused around thematic approaches for teaching. For instance, a science theme about flight only has to have a student drawing a picture of plane to show integration; it did not connect the anticipated outcomes from science and art. The term “fusing curricula” presents a seamless bonding between two subjects; hence standards (or outcomes) need to be linked from both subjects. This also goes beyond just embedding one subject within another. Embedding implies that one subject is dominant, while fusing curricula proposes an equal mix of learning within both subject areas. Primary education in Queensland has eight KLAs, each with its established content and each with a proposed structure for levels of learning. Primary teachers attempt to cover these syllabus requirements across the eight KLAs in less than five hours a day, and between many of the extra-curricula activities occurring throughout a school year (e.g., Easter activities, Education Week, concerts, excursions, performances). In Australia, education systems have developed standards for all KLAs (e.g., Education Queensland, NSW Department of Education and Training, Victorian Education) usually designated by a code. In the late 1990’s (in Queensland), “core learning outcomes” for strands across all KLA’s. For example, LL2.1 for the Queensland Education science syllabus means Life and Living at Level 2 standard number 1. Thus, a teacher’s planning requires the inclusion of standards as indicated by the presiding syllabus. More recently, the core learning outcomes were replaced by “essential learnings”. They specify “what students should be taught and what is important for students to have opportunities to know, understand and be able to do” (Queensland Studies Authority, 2009, para. 1). Fusing science education with other KLAs may facilitate more efficient use of time and resources; however this type of planning needs to combine standards from two syllabuses. To further assist in facilitating sound pedagogical practices, there are models proposed for learning science, technology and other KLAs such as Bloom’s Taxonomy (Bloom, 1956), Productive Pedagogies (Education Queensland, 2004), de Bono’s Six Hats (de Bono, 1985), and Gardner’s Multiple Intelligences (Gardner, 1999) that imply, warrant, or necessitate fused curricula. Bybee’s 5 Es, for example, has five levels of learning (engage, explore, explain, elaborate, and evaluate; Bybee, 1997) can have the potential for fusing science and ICT standards.

A model for integrating clinical care and basic science research, and pitfalls of performing complex research projects for addressing a clinical challenge

The collaboration of clinicians with basic science researchers is crucial for addressing clinically relevant research questions. In order to initiate such mutually beneficial relationships, we propose a model where early career clinicians spend a designated time embedded in established basic science research groups, in order to pursue a postgraduate qualification. During this time, clinicians become integral members of the research team, fostering long term relationships and opening up opportunities for continuing collaboration. However, for these collaborations to be successful there are pitfalls to be avoided. Limited time and funding can lead to attempts to answer clinical challenges with highly complex research projects characterised by a large number of "clinical" factors being introduced in the hope that the research outcomes will be more clinically relevant. As a result, the complexity of such studies and variability of its outcomes may lead to difficulties in drawing scientifically justified and clinically useful conclusions. Consequently, we stress that it is the basic science researcher and the clinician's obligation to be mindful of the limitations and challenges of such multi-factorial research projects. A systematic step-by-step approach to address clinical research questions with limited, but highly targeted and well defined research projects provides the solid foundation which may lead to the development of a longer term research program for addressing more challenging clinical problems. Ultimately, we believe that it is such models, encouraging the vital collaboration between clinicians and researchers for the work on targeted, well defined research projects, which will result in answers to the important clinical challenges of today.

Becoming “Librarian 2.0” : the skills, knowledge, and attributes required by library and information science professionals in a Web 2.0 world (and beyond)

In 2005, Stephen Abram, vice president of Innovation at SirsiDynix, challenged library and information science (LIS) professionals to start becoming “librarian 2.0.” In the last few years, discussion and debate about the “core competencies” needed by librarian 2.0 have appeared in the “biblioblogosphere” (blogs written by LIS professionals). However, beyond these informal blog discussions few systematic and empirically based studies have taken place. This article will discuss a research project that fills this gap. Funded by the Australian Learning and Teaching Council, the project identifies the key skills, knowledge, and attributes required by “librarian 2.0.” Eighty-one members of the Australian LIS profession participated in a series of focus groups. Eight themes emerged as being critical to “librarian 2.0”: technology, communication, teamwork, user focus, business savvy, evidence based practice, learning and education, and personal traits. This article will provide a detailed discussion on each of these themes. The study’s findings also suggest that “librarian 2.0” is a state of mind, and that the Australian LIS profession is undergoing a significant shift in “attitude.”

Paradigm shifters : tricksters and cultural science

This paper seeks to link anthropological and economic treatments of the process of innovation and change, not only within a given ‘complex system’ (e.g. a cosmology; an industry) but also between systems (e.g. cultural and economic systems; but also divine and human systems). The role of the ‘Go-Between’ is considered, both in the anthropological figure of the Trickster (Hyde 1998) and in the Schumpeterian entrepreneur. Both figures parlay appetite (economic wants) into meaning (cultural signs). Both practice a form of creativity based on deception, ‘creative destruction’; renewal by disruption and needs-must adaptation. The disciplinary purpose of the paper is to try to bridge two otherwise disconnected domains – cultural studies and evolutionary economics – by showing that the traditional methods of the humanities (e.g. anthropological, textual and historical analysis) have explanatory force in the context of economic actions and complex-system evolutionary dynamics. The objective is to understand creative innovation as a general cultural attribute rather than one restricted only to accredited experts such as artists; thus to theorise creativity as a form of emergence for dynamic adaptive systems. In this context, change is led by ‘paradigm shifters’ – tricksters and entrepreneurs who create new meanings out of the clash of difference, including the clash of mutually untranslatable communication systems (language, media, culture).

Cultivating Innovation through Social Relationships: A Qualitative Study of Outstanding Australian Innovators in Science, Technology and the Creative Industries

In this chapter, we describe and explore social relationship patterns associated with outstanding innovation. In doing so, we draw upon the findings of 16 in-depth interviews with award-winning Australian innovators from science & technology and the creative industries. The interviews covered topics relating to various influences on individual innovation capacity and career development. We found that for all of the participants, innovation was a highly social process. Although each had been recognised individually for their innovative success, none worked in isolation. The ability to generate innovative outcomes was grounded in certain types of interaction and collaboration. We outline the distinctive features of the social relationships which seem to be important to innovation, and ask which ‘social network capabilities’ might underlie the ability to create an optimal pattern of interpersonal relationships. We discuss the implications of these findings for universities, which we argue play a key role in the development of nascent innovators.

The concept of 'Organismic Asymmetry' in sport science

The concept of organismic asymmetry refers to an inherent bias for seeking explanations of human performance and behaviour based on internal mechanisms and referents. A weakness in this tendency is a failure to consider the performer–environment relationship as the relevant scale of analysis. In this paper we elucidate the philosophical roots of the bias and discuss implications of organismic asymmetry for sport science and performance analysis, highlighting examples in psychology, sports medicine and biomechanics.