Winner, Coalition for Community Writing Outstanding Book Award 2019 Doing Time, Writing Lives offers a much-needed analysis of the teaching of college writing in U.S. prisons, a racialized space that—despite housing more than 2 million people—remains nearly invisible to the general public. Through the examination of a college-in-prison program that promotes the belief that higher education in prison can reduce recidivism and improve life prospects for the incarcerated and their families, author Patrick W. Berry exposes not only incarcerated students’ hopes and dreams for their futures but also their anxieties about whether education will help them. Combining case studies and interviews with the author’s own personal experience of teaching writing in prison, this book chronicles the attempts of incarcerated students to write themselves back into a society that has erased their lived histories. It challenges polarizing rhetoric often used to describe what literacy can and cannot deliver, suggesting more nuanced and ethical ways of understanding literacy and possibility in an age of mass incarceration.
Winner, Coalition for Community Writing Outstanding Book Award 2019 Doing Time, Writing Lives offers a much-needed analysis of the teaching of college writing in U.S. prisons, a racialized space that—despite housing more than 2 million people—remains nearly invisible to the general public. Through the examination of a college-in-prison program that promotes the belief that higher education in prison can reduce recidivism and improve life prospects for the incarcerated and their families, author Patrick W. Berry exposes not only incarcerated students’ hopes and dreams for their futures but also their anxieties about whether education will help them. Combining case studies and interviews with the author’s own personal experience of teaching writing in prison, this book chronicles the attempts of incarcerated students to write themselves back into a society that has erased their lived histories. It challenges polarizing rhetoric often used to describe what literacy can and cannot deliver, suggesting more nuanced and ethical ways of understanding literacy and possibility in an age of mass incarceration.
In the modern globalized world, some estimates suggest that around 40 million people now work in jobs that ‘translate’ or mediate advances in social science research for use in business, government and public agencies, health care systems, and civil society organizations. Many large corporations and organizations across these sectors in the United States are increasingly prioritizing access to social science knowledge. Yet the impacts of university social science continue to be fiercely disputed. This key study demonstrates the essential role of university social science in the ‘human-dominated’ and ‘human-influenced’ systems now central to our civilization. It focuses empirically on Britain, the second most influential country for social science research after the US. Using in-depth research the authors show how the growth of a services economy, and the success of previous scientific interventions, mean that key areas of advance for corporations, public policy-makers and citizens alike now depend on our ability to understand our complex societies and economies. This is a landmark study in the evidence-based analysis of social science impacts. Foreword in the US edition "The Impact of the Social Sciences in the UK – A View from the US" is by Kenneth Prewitt, Columbia University.
Who owned the first newspapers in New Zealand and how did they get started? What were the logistics of such an enterprise? What sort of readership did they attract? What exactly was the role of the newspaper in colonial society? Patrick Day gives a comprehensive account of the evolving forms and functions of newspapers in this crucial period. He describes those changes which saw newspapers shift from being political discussion forums for higher status politicians to profit oriented businesses concerned with advertising and newsgiving. Offering a revealing picture of how power was organised through a nascent press, this book is a significant contribution to our understanding of the forces that shaped journalism."--Back cover.
Researchers studying the health of migrants frequently use standard quantitative instruments to assess psychological constructs. Such instruments are often validated only in the respective source population of migrants. For example, when studying Turkish migrants in Germany, instruments validated in Turkey are applied. However, considerable differences in culture and language may have developed between migrants and their source population. These differences limit the validity and reliability of quantitative instruments, a problem that is often overlooked. Using the example of the Revised Illness Perception Questionnaire (IPQ-R), the authors demonstrate that instruments known to be valid and reliable in source populations may lead to biased results when applied to migrant populations.
Thank you for visiting our website. Would you like to provide feedback on how we could improve your experience?
This site does not use any third party cookies with one exception — it uses cookies from Google to deliver its services and to analyze traffic.Learn More.