Summary This companion paper to the introduction of the International League Against Epilepsy (ILAE) 2017 classification of seizure types provides guidance on how to employ the classification. Illustration of the classification is enacted by tables, a glossary of relevant terms, mapping of old to new terms, suggested abbreviations, and examples. Basic and extended versions of the classification are available, depending on the desired degree of detail. Key signs and symptoms of seizures (semiology) are used as a basis for categories of seizures that are focal or generalized from onset or with unknown onset. Any focal seizure can further be optionally characterized by whether awareness is retained or impaired. Impaired awareness during any segment of the seizure renders it a focal impaired awareness seizure. Focal seizures are further optionally characterized by motor onset signs and symptoms: atonic, automatisms, clonic, epileptic spasms, or hyperkinetic, myoclonic, or tonic activity. Nonmotor‐onset seizures can manifest as autonomic, behavior arrest, cognitive, emotional, or sensory dysfunction. The earliest prominent manifestation defines the seizure type, which might then progress to other signs and symptoms. Focal seizures can become bilateral tonic–clonic. Generalized seizures engage bilateral networks from onset. Generalized motor seizure characteristics comprise atonic, clonic, epileptic spasms, myoclonic, myoclonic–atonic, myoclonic–tonic–clonic, tonic, or tonic–clonic. Nonmotor (absence) seizures are typical or atypical, or seizures that present prominent myoclonic activity or eyelid myoclonia. Seizures of unknown onset may have features that can still be classified as motor, nonmotor, tonic–clonic, epileptic spasms, or behavior arrest. This “users’ manual” for the ILAE 2017 seizure classification will assist the adoption of the new system.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

This article analyses the National Council of Educational Research and Training textbooks of environmental studies using critical discourse analysis to shed light on questions such as how the environment is dealt with in the text, using what kind of language are environmental concerns framed, how is the current environment crisis contextualized both in terms of ecological and social justice, if at all, and what solutions are suggested in this regard. The article finds that though the content of the textbooks exhibits strong social contextualizing of learners’ surroundings, the thrust is anthropocentric, and the environment figures only as a peripheral concern. Themes such as gender, caste, hygiene, culture, equality and discrimination emerge stronger than those of biodiversity, conservation, pollution, water crisis and global warming. While the in-built thrust on conviviality in the textbooks is necessary and heartening, a better infusion of the current predicament in terms of the environment crisis and how it could be mitigated is recommended.

This is the author manuscript accepted for publication and has undergone full peer review but has not been through the copyediting, typesetting, pagination and proofreading process, which may lead to differences between this version and the Version of Record. Please cite this article as