The Internet and the Narrow Tailoring Dilemma for “Asian” Democracies

The Internet has become a medium for contentious political journalism in Malaysia and Singapore, two countries known for their enthusiastic adoption of information technologies as well as their illiberal controls on political expression. These alternative sites inhabit a regulatory gap within an otherwise closed media system. Internet laws in these two settings provide a degree of freedom that is significantly greater than experienced in print and broadcast media. This article tries to explain this anomaly. It argues that the Internet’s perceived economic value dominated the authorities’ policy formulation, subordinating the goal of political control that historically shaped media policy. When dealing with print and broadcast media, the authorities had been able to tailor their political interventions narrowly, such that these actions did not smother their economic priorities. In contrast, the Internet was not as amenable to narrow tailoring. The two governments decided to tolerate a lesser degree of political control than that to which they were accustomed. While the governments maintained the prerogative to mete out after-the-fact punishments against any offending Internet publication, they were less capable of imposing prior restraints or encouraging self-censorship-their more routine forms of media control. It is not argued that the resulting advantage for radical journalism was either absolute or permanent, only that it presented a sufficiently attractive opportunity for action.     

Can a systematic assessment moderation process assure the quality and integrity of assessment practice while supporting the professional development of casual academics?

There has been a threefold increase in the employment of casual academics in Australian universities within the last 20 years, to the extent that most teaching and marking is now undertaken by casual academics, also known as sessional staff. Yet, casualised teaching and assessment has been considered a risk to student engagement and success, and casual academics report a lack of professional development and increased feelings of marginalisation within the academy. Concurrently, the quality assurance of teaching and assessment in higher education has become a central focus of the government-funded regulatory organisation, the Tertiary Education Quality and Standards Agency (TEQSA). Situated within this context, we report on an assessment moderation process that could support casual academics’ contextualised professional development, generate a sense of connectedness and collegiality and fulfil the requirements of TEQSA. Such processes may ensure that workforce growth in the higher education system supports a robust quality assurance and regulatory framework.     

Judging readability

Individuals are frequently called upon to judge the readability of written text. The accuracy of such judgments, studies show, ranges from high to low. This paper provides another look at the problem, based upon the judgments of 56 professional writers on five passages of text taken from a reading test. The judges were asked to rank the five passages from most readable to least readable. The results showed wide variability in the judgments. Only a few of the judges were able individually to put the passages in the tested order of readability, but the consensus of the entire group put them in exactly that order. Further examination of the results suggested that a relatively small number of gross errors in judgment were made. Accuracy of judgments, it appeared, might greatly increase with selection and/or training of judges, a procedure followed in certain studies where highly accurate judgments had been found. A readability formula was suggested as an accurate and convenient way of getting readability scores under most circumstances. Use of a formula might also, it was suggested, help a judge to increase his accuracy, but human interpretation of the scores was still felt to be needed.     

The effects of hands-on and teacher demonstration laboratory methods on science achievement in relation to reasoning ability and prior knowledge

The present study compared the relative effects of hands-on and teacher demonstration laboratory methods on declarative knowledge (factual and conceptual) and procedural knowledge (problem-solving) achievement. Of particular interest were (a) whether these relationships vary as a function of reasoning ability and (b) whether prior knowledge and reasoning ability predict student achievement. Ninth-grade physical science students were randomly assigned to classes taught by either a hands-on or a teacher demonstration laboratory method. Students' reasoning ability and prior knowledge of science were assessed prior to the instruction. The two instructional methods resulted in equal declarative knowledge achievement. However, students in the hands-on laboratory class performed significantly better on the procedural knowledge test than did students in the teacher demonstration class. These results were unrelated to reasoning ability. Prior knowledge significantly predicted performance on the declarative knowledge test. Both reasoning ability and prior knowledge significantly predicted performance on the procedural knowledge test, with reasoning ability being the stronger predictor.