No abstract

Over the last decade, higher education policy in the United Kingdom (UK) has increasingly focused on the impact of academic research. This has resulted in the emergence of specialist knowledge brokers within UK universities in the social sciences and humanities. Our empirical research identified a tension between the research impact agenda and the value placed on knowledge brokerage. Based on interviews with knowledge brokers at the University of Edinburgh, we argue that funding models, short-term contracts, and posts combining knowledge brokerage with other functions result in a transient population and a squeeze on knowledge brokerage, which may limit its effectiveness in achieving research impact.

Through reflections on our own experiences, this paper explores one approach to knowledge exchange that appears to be being used increasingly in social sciences in Scottish universities: the employment of dedicated “knowledge exchange professionals” or knowledge brokers. We argue that the ambiguity and hybridity of specialist knowledge exchange roles as they are emerging currently in university social science settings lead to challenges, though also opportunities, at different stages of knowledge exchange appointments. We discuss issues relating to recruitment; management and accountability; recognition and integration; professional support and development; and reward, promotion and career pathways

No abstract

This article aims to reexamine the development and scope of evidence-based practice (EBP) in community corrections by exploring three sets of issues. Firstly, we examine the relationships between the contested purposes of community supervision and their relationships to questions of evidence. Secondly, we explore the range of forms of evidence that might inform the pursuit of one purpose of supervision—the rehabilitation of offenders—making the case for a fuller engagement with “desistance” research in supporting this process. Thirdly, we examine who can and should be involved in conversations about EBP, arguing that both ex/offenders' and practitioners' voices need to be respected and heard in this debate.

Knowledge exchange (KE)/transfer is seen as priority areas for research and innovation policy development across many countries. What is distinctive over the past 30 years is the 'institutionalization' of KE between academic researchers within the higher education sector and knowledge users outside the sector, and more recently 'incentivization' of such activities at national and sub-national policy and at the institutional levels. Critically adopting the framework of Bozeman's 'Contingent Effectiveness Model' of technology transfer, this article develops analytical frameworks in order to examine the policy conditions and dynamics through which knowledge flows and interactions are promoted. Given the recent 'asymmetric' devolution processes of higher education, and the UK national research policy objectives and structures, a combination of different 'policy effectiveness models' are pursued in England and Scotland. We show that the two higher education funding councils, the Higher Education Funding Council for England (HEFCE) and the Scottish Funding Councils (SFC), act as 'policy transfer agent'-along with the set of relevant stakeholders, they have chosen different strategies for policy incentives and funding allocation mechanisms. One of the key challenges for each of the funding councils seems to be the establishment of criteria to distribute these funds across the sector. We discuss limits of supply side incentivization and suggest some alternative approaches by combining different policy effectiveness models and criteria.

Graduated compression stockings can reduce the incidence of deep vein thrombosis by 60 per cent1, by providing a decreasing compression gradient from the ankle towards the thigh. There is both theoretical and clinical evidence that compression of the thigh as well as the calf does not give extra benefit2,3. Although regarded as safe, improperly used stockings are not without risk. Problems are usually due to areas of localized high pressure, especially under ‘rucked up’ constricting bands of stocking. This is particularly so in the presence of ischaemia; manufacturers state that ischaemia is a contraindication to stocking use. Cases of arterial thrombosis have been reported4, as well as more frequent skin necrosis, when stockings have been used in the presence of reduced arterial blood supply5.

No abstract