The objective of Working Group 4 of the COST Action NET4Age-Friendly is to examine existing policies, advocacy, and funding opportunities and to build up relations with policy makers and funding organisations. Also, to synthesize and improve existing knowledge and models to develop from effective business and evaluation models, as well as to guarantee quality and education, proper dissemination and ensure the future of the Action. The Working Group further aims to enable capacity building to improve interdisciplinary participation, to promote knowledge (...) exchange and to foster a cross-European interdisciplinary research capacity, to improve cooperation and co-creation with cross-sectors stakeholders and to introduce and educate students SHAFE implementation and sustainability. To enable the achievement of the objectives of Working Group 4, the Leader of the Working Group, the Chair and Vice-Chair, in close cooperation with the Science Communication Coordinator, developed a template to map the current state of SHAFE policies, funding opportunities and networking in the COST member countries of the Action. On invitation, the Working Group lead received contributions from 37 countries, in a total of 85 Action members. The contributions provide an overview of the diversity of SHAFE policies and opportunities in Europe and beyond. These were not edited or revised and are a result of the main areas of expertise and knowledge of the contributors; thus, gaps in areas or content are possible and these shall be further explored in the following works and reports of this WG. But this preliminary mapping is of huge importance to proceed with the WG activities. In the following chapters, an introduction on the need of SHAFE policies is presented, followed by a summary of the main approaches to be pursued for the next period of work. The deliverable finishes with the opportunities of capacity building, networking and funding that will be relevant to undertake within the frame of Working Group 4 and the total COST Action. The total of country contributions is presented in the annex of this deliverable. (shrink)
This paper reflects on the continued potency of veillance theories to traverse beyond the taxonomies of surveillance inside liberal democracies. It provides a commentary on the ability of sousveillance to destabilise and disrupt suer/violence by shifting its focus from the centre to the periphery, where Big Data surveillance is tantamount to sur/violence. In these peripheral political spaces, surveillance is not framed by concerns over privacy, democracy and civil society; rather, it is a matter of life and death, a technique of (...) both biopolitical and thanatopolitical power. I argue that the universalist, and universalizing, debates over surveillance cannot be mapped through the anxieties of privileged middle classes as they would neither transcend nor make possible alternative ways of tackling the intersection of surveillance and violence so long as they are couched in the liberal concerns for democracy. I call this phenomenon “liberal luxury,” whereby debates over surveillance have over-emphasised liberal proclivities at the expense of disengaging those peripheral populations most severely affected by sur/violence. (shrink)
In many countries, including patients are legally entitled to request copies of their clinical notes. However, this process remains time-consuming and burdensome, and it remains unclear how much of the medical record must be made available. Online access to notes offers a way to overcome these challenges and in around 10 countries worldwide, via secure web-based portals, many patients are now able to read at least some of the narrative reports written by clinicians. However, even in countries that have implemented (...) the practice many clinicians have resisted the idea remaining doubtful of the value of opening notes, and anticipating patients will be confused or anxious by what they read. Against this scepticism, a growing body of qualitative and quantitative research reveals that patients derive multiple benefits from reading their notes. We address the contrasting perceptions of this practice innovation, and claim that the divergent views of patients and clinicians can be explained as a case of epistemic injustice. Using a range of evidence, we argue that patients are vulnerable to epistemic injustice. Nonetheless, we conclude that the marginalisation of patients’ access to their health information exemplifies a form of epistemic exclusion, one with practical and ethical consequences including for patient safety. (shrink)
The study aims to lay the groundwork for systematically investigating children’s peer discourse at different age levels with a view to delimiting the role of peer talk for pragmatic development. An interdisciplinary stance to the study of children’s peer talk is argued for, considering it simultaneously as the arena for the co-construction of childhood cultures as well as an arena for development. We propose a four-dimensional model of discursive events, meant to capture both dimensions simultaneously. The model takes into account (...) the dynamic interplay among the type of activity children are engaged in, the overall thematic frame of the event, its internal framing by the children themselves and the genre used. The model is applied to the analysis of natural peer talk at two age levels, preschoolers and fourth graders, focusing mainly on variation along the dimension of keying. The two age groups studied are shown to share a rich repertoire of keyings and genres, but to differ in their relative salience and modes of realization by age. Our analysis suggests that peer talk offers children ample opportunities to listen in, practice and display conversational as well as academic discursive skills, and hence may very well prove a crucial site for pragmatic development. (shrink)
Rinard (2019) brings to our attention the fact that, typically, the questions What should I believe? and What should I do? are treated differently. A typical answer to the first question is Believe according to the evidence, and a typical answer to the second question is Do what is right. But Rinard rejects this dichotomy. In its place, she argues for a view which she calls “Equal Treatment” in which one should believe according to the same considerations that govern what (...) one should do. Christensen (forthcoming) aptly situates Equal Treatment as a limit case of a recent movement towards taking pragmatic factors as partly determining what one should believe, in that Equal Treatment is a purely pragmatic view. Does Rinard’s case for a purely pragmatic view succeed? This paper argues that the answer is no. Three objections that target key parts of Rinard’s case for Equal Treatment are presented. The upshot is that the dichotomy between the answers to What should I believe? and What should I do? seems robust against strong attempts to dismantle it. (shrink)
This book focuses on the impacts of global and transnational trends in higher education policy in Albania and provides a window into the variable interplay of local and global forces in an under-studied Balkan nation.
The use of student evaluations of teaching has become a widespread practice in higher education despite inconclusive evidence reported in the literature around its validity. Not surprisingly, the question of the validity of SET continues to be a current debate in higher education, pointing to the need for more research in this area. This paper is a part of a larger scale study, which aims to contribute to broadening the knowledge and understanding of SET validity by analysing the process within (...) the South East European University in North Macedonia in order to determine whether student evaluations are objective and critical. A likert scale questionnaire, containing 9 questions, was designed for the purpose of the analysis. The questionnaire was sent to all students from the five Faculties: Business and Economics, Law, Contemporary Sciences and Technologies, Contemporary Social Sciences and Faculty of Languages, Cultures and Communications, in both campuses, Tetovo and Skopje. Three hundred and thirty three students participated in the survey. Statistical Package for Social Science was used for analysing the results. Findings revealed that the information students received about the reputation, experience and qualifications of the professors had the highest influence on their perceptions, which in turn influenced the evaluations. As an addition, the present paper also compares two methods on a data set of actual SET. For illustrative purposes, only data from one faculty have been analysed. It is shown that the traditional method of considering the average values can misrepresent a teacher’s performance as it can be highly sensitive to any extreme grades, being either very positive or very negative. (shrink)
The paper analyses Ukraine’s geopolitical position and argues that Ukraine is slowly gravitating towards West. The paper gives a small hint of approximation process of Ukraine within EU and NATO, and argues how this approximation process is opposed by Russia, who wants Ukraine back to its influence. Occupation off Crimea by Russia violated international order, opening way to unstructured international ties out traditional UN bodies. The Ukraine’s destiny is unclear, Dnieper River may divide country in two, and the West faces (...) biggest security and political threat after WWII. (shrink)
The objective of the paper is to create a concept of what securing the claim is, based on the positive legislation of Kosovo’s law, comparing its regulation with laws of somewhat similar legislations of neighbouring regions, understanding its implementation in practice, to achieve conclusions and remarks based on law, facts, practice, and the comparative aspect. The Civil Procedure Law in the Republic of Kosovo is regulated with contested, non-contested or enforcement procedure. Securing the claim is an institute expressively regulated by (...) the “Law on Contested Procedure of the Republic of Kosovo” on its XXI Chapter that defines its means and types. Considering securing the claim measures are present in civil law to prevent any possible threat of protected rights until the final verdict is given, this paper tends to achieve a realization of how these measures practically succeed in actual cases, if they meet the criteria set in the law, or if securing the claim proposal is approved by the court, if they unintentionally restrain the respondent from using their rights. Moving forward, how one distinguishes claim security and interim measures from one-another although they describe the main concept, is strictly reviewed under this article, to finally achieve conclusions and remarks based on questions raised as above. (shrink)
