University gatekeepers’ use of the rhetoric of citizenship to relegate the status of students with disabilities in Canada

Despite affirmation that students with disabilities should have equal access to education, individuals with disabilities are still not participating to the same degree as individuals without disabilities, particularly within postsecondary institutions. Students in Health and Human Service (HHS) programs experience many unique challenges and disadvantages. In-depth focus groups and interviews were conducted with 14 university stakeholders in HHS programs regarding their perceptions and experiences of working with students with disabilities. We found that the rhetoric of citizenship, specifically notions of rationality, autonomy, and productivity, interacts with beliefs about students with disabilities to allow stakeholders to justify their exclusion or limited participation. Our findings demonstrate how taken-for-granted beliefs can limit the inclusion of students with disabilities in ways that seem natural and unproblematic.     

‘We are not anything alike’: marginalization of health professionals with disabilities

Despite inclusive rhetoric, disabled peoples’ participation in the Health and Human Service (HHS) professions remains limited. This study explores the perspectives of individuals in the HHS sector regarding inclusion-related barriers and facilitators. We found three mechanisms that marginalize disabled people in HHS education and professions: dominant disabling discourses; discriminatory design within programmes and universities; and oppressive interactions. The inclusion of disabled individuals is vital for ensuring HHS professionals represent the populations they serve. By challenging the views of educators, professionals, and scholars, these findings may become part of the foundation upon which change can be created.     

Integrating research and teaching in social work: building a strong partnership1

In recent years in social work we have increasingly come to address the issue of how to integrate research into practice. Implicit in the research and practice discourse is an assumption that there is an active and reciprocal relationship between research and teaching. In this paper, we question this assumption and after setting the political context, we review research into the relationship between discipline-based research and teaching. We then explore a proposal to redefine knowledge, research and teaching and examine the concept of scholarship. We go on to review some strategies we will be promoting in the UK Higher Education Funding Council's Learning and Teaching Network Support (ltsn) Social Policy and Social Work Subject Centre (SWAP) to support the development of positive linkages between teaching and discipline-based research, specifically on-line possibilities for supporting research mindedness among academics (and students and practitioners). Finally, we end by briefly discussing the equally important integration of pedagogic research into the practice of teaching.     

Perceptions of Board Chair Leadership Effectiveness in Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Organizations

This article reports on the results of a multi-year, multi-phase international quantitative research investigation into perceptions of board chair leadership impact in nonprofit and voluntary organizations in Canada, the United States, and the United Kingdom. Specifically, this research tests four hypotheses and a hypothesized model derived from theoretical perspectives on chair leadership effectiveness that emerged when the results of a prior grounded theory research investigation were reviewed ex post facto through the lens of leadership literature (see Harrison and Murray, NPML, accepted). The purpose of this phase of the research is to determine: (a) whether there is empirical support for the theoretical perspectives advanced; and (b) which perspective offers the best explanation for why some board chairs are perceived as having more impact in the role than others. The results suggest chair leadership effectiveness is best understood as a multi-dimensional theoretical construct explained by more than one leadership theory. The article concludes with a discussion of the findings and directions for further research.     

Risk factors for femicide-suicide in abusive relationships: results from a multisite case control study

The killing of women by men who then take their own lives (femicide-suicide) is the most common form of homicide-suicide. This study identified femicide-suicide risk factors in an 11-city case-control study of femicide in the United States. Perpetrator, victim, relationship, and incident characteristics were analyzed for femicide-suicide cases (n = 67) and controls (n = 356, women living in the community with nonfatal physical abuse) using logistic regression modeling. Two risk factors emerged that were unique to femicide-suicides cases compared to overall femicide risk analyses: prior perpetrator suicide threats and victims having ever been married to the perpetrator.     

The Division of Labour and Inequalities Between the Sexes: An Ideological Dilemma

This article is concerned with the different assumptions and strategies that respondents in the banking sector and the police force use to account for the existence of inequalities between men and women. We search for a perspective that can theorize the different ways in which these employees deal with the existence of inequalities. We examine conceptualizations of the division of labour and of inequalities between the sexes in mainstream organization studies and in liberal, socialist and postmodernist feminist perspectives to organization studies. While these different perspectives highlight different types and causes of inequalities, no perspective can make sense of all the organizational practices in the banks and the police force. We are of the opinion that Billig's concept of ideological dilemmas offers a fruitful starting point to reflect upon the simultaneous existence of the different concepts and provides a valuable framework for our research. It sheds light on the ideological nature of theories, analyses how people think and argue with ideology by bringing in contrary and conflicting notions and opens the possibility of engaging in open dialogue about strategies for change.     

“Suffragettes in Satin Shorts”? Gender and Competitive Boxing

This study is an empirical and theoretical contribution to the burgeoning literature on gender and competitive boxing. By using Connell's concepts of labor, power, cathexis, and representation and a combination of content and semiotic analysis, interviews, and observations, we argue that competitive boxing can be studied productively as a paradoxical gender regime that simultaneously enables and constrains how women do gender. On one hand, the sport encourages individual women to display physical aggression when such behavior traditionally has been deemed the antithesis of femininity. Some feminists argue that this form of physical feminism enables women to transcend essentialist discourses that restrict their corporeal power. On the other hand, women boxers in general also encounter resistance to their aspirations. For example, they are still positioned by essentialist discourses about both their bodies and capacity to develop the requisite form of controlled aggression. Strongly gendered links between bodily labor and bodily capital also mean that women have less access to resources than do men and, consequently, fewer opportunities to develop their pugilistic capital. We also maintain that competitive women boxers are implicated in a body project that tends to replicate sporting practices that some feminists and pro-feminists argue are damaging to both men and women.     

Ownership differences in the provision of outpatient substance abuse services

The authors examine the assumption of the 1980s that the provision and costs of substance abuse services, among others, could best be met by expanding programs in the private sector. The study presents a comparison of public and private substance abuse services, based on data drawn from a national sample of outpatient units, and develops a profile of treatment and financing within three auspice (ownership) categories--private nonprofit, private for-profit, and public. An input-throughput-output framework was used to assess the public-private differences within a wide range of organizational characteristics.