Even though classroom discussion is considered an essential element of citizenship education, research indicates that pre-vocational students have fewer opportunities to practice with these discussions than their pre-academic peers. To provide more insight into pre-vocational teaching strategies to facilitate citizenship-related classroom discussions that allow for variation in familiarity with discussion, we analyzed observations of plenary discussion moments during 26 lessons at three Dutch secondary schools. Classrooms less familiar with discussion seem to benefit from a focus on structural aspects of discussion and avoiding strict content regulation, whereas classrooms more familiar with discussion profit from reflection on both process and content.
To examine the association of adolescents' snack and soft drink consumption with friendship group snack and soft drink consumption, availability of snacks and soft drinks at school, and personal characteristics, snack and soft drink consumption was assessed in 749 adolescents (398 girls, 351 boys, age 12.4 - 17.6 years), and their friends, and snack and soft drink availability at schools was measured. In regression analysis, consumption by friends, snack and soft drink availability within school, and personal characteristics (age, gender, education level, body mass index) were examined as determinants of snack and drink consumption. Snack and soft drink consumption was higher in boys, soft drink consumption was higher in lower educated adolescents, and snack consumption was higher in adolescents with a lower body weight. Peer group snack and soft drink consumption were associated with individual intake, particularly when availability in the canteen and vending machines was high. The association between individual and peer snack consumption was strong in boys, adolescents with a lower education level, and adolescents with lower body weights. Our study shows that individual snack and soft drink consumption is associated with specific combinations of consumption by peers, availability at school, and personal characteristics.
Objectives There is a broad call for change towards € new era' quality systems in healthcare, in which the focus lies on learning and improving. A promising way to establish this in general practice care is to combine audit and feedback with peer group discussion. However, it is not known what different stakeholders think of this type of quality improvement. The aim of this research was to explore the opinions of different stakeholders in general practice on peer discussion of audit and feedback and on its opportunities and risks. Second, their thoughts on transparency versus accountability, regarding this system, were studied. Design An exploratory qualitative study within a constructivist paradigm. Semistructured interviews and focus group discussions were held and coded using thematic analysis. Included stakeholders were general practitioners (GP), patients, professional organisations and insurance companies. Setting General practice in the Netherlands. Participants 22 participants were purposively sampled for eight interviews and two focus group discussions. Results Three main opportunities of peer discussion of audit and feedback were identified: deeper levels of reflection on data, adding context to numbers and more ownership; and three main risks: handling of unwilling colleagues, lacking a safe group and the necessity of patient involvement. An additional theme concerned disagreement on the amount of transparency to be offered: insurance companies and patients advocated for complete transparency on data and improvement of outcomes, while GPs and professional organisations urged to restrict transparency to giving insight into the process. Conclusions Peer discussion of audit and feedback could be part of a change movement, towards a quality system based on learning and trust, that is initiated by the profession. Creating a safe learning environment and involving patients is key herein. Caution is needed when complete transparency is asked, since it could jeopardise practitioners' reflection and learning in safety.
The automobile industry is presently going through a rapid transformation towards autonomous driving. Nearly all vehicle manufacturers (such as Mercedes Benz, Tesla, BMW) have commercial products, promising some level of vehicle automation. Even though the safe and reliable introduction of technology depends on the quality standards and certification process, but the focus is primarily on the introduction of (uncertified) technology and not on developing knowledge for certification. Both industry and governments see the lack of knowledge about certification, which can ensure the safety of autonomous technology and thus will guarantee the safety of the driver, passenger, and environment. HAN-AR recognized the lack of knowledge and the need for novel certification methodology for emerging vehicle technology and initiated the PRAUTOCOL project together with its SME partners. The PRAUTOCOL project investigated certification methodology for two use-cases: certification for automated highway overtaking pilot; and certification for automatic valet parking. The PRAUTOCOL research is conducted in two parallel streams: certification of the driver by human factors experts and certification of vehicle by technology experts. The results from both streams are published and presented in respective but limited target groups. Also, an overview of the PRAUTOCOL certification methodology is missing, which can enable its translation to different use-cases of automated technology (other than the used ones). Therefore, to realize a better pass-through of PRAUTOCOL's results to a broader audience, the top-up is required. Firstly, to write a (peer-reviewed) Open Access article, focusing on the application and translation of PRAUTOCOL's methodology to other automated technology use-cases. Secondly, to write a journal article, focusing on the validation of automatic highway overtaking system using naturalistic driving data. Thirdly, to organize a workshop to present PRAUTOCOL's results (valorization) to industrial, research, and government representatives and to discuss a follow-up initiative.
