Regulating Academic Pressure: From Fast to Slow

This paper investigates the impact of publication pressure on the ethics and the scientific integrity in the domain of mathematics and of the arts. Both research fields are specific in their methodology, being that they do not start from a classical hypothesis and researchers in these areas are not knowing what the outcome will be. The research design is open, and creativity is a main part of the research investigation. Both research fields do not rely on empirical cases nor on data collection or data handling. This could be a reason why mathematics and arts seem to be less subject to scientific misconduct. After presenting the (inter)national regulations on ethics and integrity, we will investigate a philosophical analysis in which we consider possible influences from publication pressure that became widespread over all disciplines. We will clarify if and how mathematics and the arts are sensitive to scientific research misconduct or questionable research practices.     

Essential Characteristics of Master's Level Counselors: Perceptions of Agency Administrators

The purpose of this study was to determine to what degree the Council for Accreditation of Counseling and Related Educational Programs (CACREP) standards represent skills and knowledge that mental health agency employers use to judge candidates for master's level counseling positions. A total of 84 professionals who hired master's level counselors in their agencies rated the likely effect of each CACREP knowledge and skill area on their judgment of a potential candidate. Respondents also checked specific knowledge and skills they considered important and the type(s) of master's degrees typically possessed by counselors hired by their agency. Data suggested that each knowledge and skill area may have a moderate to significant impact on the employers' judgments, although some competencies were clearly seen to be more relevant than others. Family intervention was the most highly endorsed specialization, and candidates with social work degrees were hired far more frequently than was any other single type. Implications for counselor education programs and graduates are discussed.     

Use of the Support Group Method to Tackle Bullying, and Evaluation From Schools and Local Authorities in England

The Support Group Method (SGM), formerly the No Blame Approach, is widely used as an anti-bullying intervention in schools, but has aroused some controversy. There is little evidence from users regarding its effectiveness. We aimed to ascertain the use of and support for the SGM in Local Authorities (LAs) and schools; and obtain ratings of satisfaction with its use; sources of evidence for such ratings; and comments on how it is used in practice. Questionnaires were sent to LAs and schools in England, and were available on a website; useful replies were obtained from 57 LAs and 59 schools. Some two-thirds of LAs were supportive of the SGM in general terms, although fewer said they had sufficient evidence to judge effectiveness. The modal rating when given was 'satisfactory'. Most schools had used SGM for 1–5 years, often across the whole school. Two-thirds received direct training in the method. Over one-half of schools gave a rating of effectiveness, based on teachers, pupils and parents; the modal rating was 'very satisfactory'. Responses and open-ended comments revealed that details of use varied considerably and that some schools had substantially modified the method. In summary, a majority of LAs and schools that responded were satisfied or very satisfied with SGM. However, some confusion about the ways of implementing SGM was evident; this might explain some hostile comments reported elsewhere. Issues of parental involvement, and backup availability of sanctions, were commonly mentioned. Further research based directly on pupils and parents would supplement the findings of this survey.