title: Professional development needs of the international work-integrated learning community

authors: Zegwaard, Karsten E.

subjects: professional development

abstract: Many governments are expecting higher education institutions to make strong links between the educational offerings and employability while many employers are demanding graduates with prior workplace or community engagement before entering the workplace. As higher education institutions respond to these challenges, workintegrated learning (WIL) is increasingly seen as a powerful educational approach in developing and empowering work-ready graduates, with many institutions expanding their WIL offerings. With the expansion of WIL, however, comes the need for more staffing to resource the activity. The type of staff vary from practitioners (placement coordinators, field practitioners), teaching staff, researchers, and curricular designers, all of whom require a relevant skills set and knowledge. However, to date, professional development opportunities directly related to WIL have been limited, with most opportunities offered by some national associations providing webinars and workshops. Furthermore, little work has been undertaken to determine the actual professional development needs of WIL staff. Presented here are the findings of an online, international survey of 668 WIL practitioners which explores their perceived professional development needs.

text: Professional development needs of the international work-integrated learning community Many governments are expecting higher education institutions to make strong links between the educational offerings and employability while many employers are demanding graduates with prior workplace or community engagement before entering the workplace. As higher education institutions respond to these challenges, workintegrated learning (WIL) is increasingly seen as a powerful educational approach in developing and empowering work-ready graduates, with many institutions expanding their WIL offerings. With the expansion of WIL, however, comes the need for more staffing to resource the activity. The type of staff vary from practitioners (placement coordinators, field practitioners), teaching staff, researchers, and curricular designers, all of whom require a relevant skills set and knowledge. However, to date, professional development opportunities directly related to WIL have been limited, with most opportunities offered by some national associations providing webinars and workshops. Furthermore, little work has been undertaken to determine the actual professional development needs of WIL staff. Presented here are the findings of an online, international survey of 668 WIL practitioners which explores their perceived professional development needs.

year: 2019

title: The use of questionnaires in Chinese tourism research

authors: Yang, Jingjing

abstract: The purpose of this research note is to indicate the possible reactions of Chinese respondents to requests to complete questionnaires when used in research in China. Questionnaires are commonly used in western studies and researchers in China have also adopted these methods leading to publications in English and Chinese language academic journals.

text: The use of questionnaires in Chinese tourism research The purpose of this research note is to indicate the possible reactions of Chinese respondents to requests to complete questionnaires when used in research in China. Questionnaires are commonly used in western studies and researchers in China have also adopted these methods leading to publications in English and Chinese language academic journals.

year: 2012

title: Countering gentrification in Tāmaki Makarau: Towards a framework for urban environmental justice

authors: Terruhn, Jessica

abstract: This policy brief argues for urban policies that actively aim to end gentrification.

Gentrification is intimately tied to state-led processes of urban renewal. Though historically understood as the displacement of low-income households as an unfortunate byproduct of socioeconomic and demographic neighbourhood change, contemporary gentrification is constituted by profit-driven investment decisions that erase undervalued neighbourhoods and their communities in the name of urban renewal (variously referred to as redevelopment, regeneration, renaissance, or revitalisation).

These processes of gentrification fundamentally contribute to environmental injustice. At the same time as creating ‘zones of abundance’, neighbourhood regeneration projects simultaneously (re-)create ‘zones of neglect and sacrifice’, which are burdened with environmental risks. As low-income and ethnic minority households are more likely to either reside in or to be displaced into these neighbourhoods, they are disproportionately exposed to environmental risk factors.

Moreover, gentrification enables and legitimises the exclusion of marginalised communities in multiple ways: 1) it devalues existing places and their residents in favour of regeneration, 2) it displaces longtime residents from regenerated neighbourhoods because of increasing property values, and/or 3) it alienates longtime residents as neighbourhood aesthetics, amenities and services change and become unaffordable and/or irrelevant.

As gentrification contributes to low-income households’ experiences of precarity and severs community ties and place attachments, it generates significant costs to personal and community health and wellbeing as well as social cohesion. The recommendations articulated in this brief emphasise the importance of transformative policy solutions that actively counter gentrification.
These include:
• Equitable investment in urban infrastructure
• Prioritising affordable housing
• Ensuring accessible transportation
• Empowering local communities
• Implementing a Te Tiriti o Waitangi approach to policy development

text: Countering gentrification in Tāmaki Makarau: Towards a framework for urban environmental justice This policy brief argues for urban policies that actively aim to end gentrification.

Gentrification is intimately tied to state-led processes of urban renewal. Though historically understood as the displacement of low-income households as an unfortunate byproduct of socioeconomic and demographic neighbourhood change, contemporary gentrification is constituted by profit-driven investment decisions that erase undervalued neighbourhoods and their communities in the name of urban renewal (variously referred to as redevelopment, regeneration, renaissance, or revitalisation).

These processes of gentrification fundamentally contribute to environmental injustice. At the same time as creating ‘zones of abundance’, neighbourhood regeneration projects simultaneously (re-)create ‘zones of neglect and sacrifice’, which are burdened with environmental risks. As low-income and ethnic minority households are more likely to either reside in or to be displaced into these neighbourhoods, they are disproportionately exposed to environmental risk factors.

Moreover, gentrification enables and legitimises the exclusion of marginalised communities in multiple ways: 1) it devalues existing places and their residents in favour of regeneration, 2) it displaces longtime residents from regenerated neighbourhoods because of increasing property values, and/or 3) it alienates longtime residents as neighbourhood aesthetics, amenities and services change and become unaffordable and/or irrelevant.

As gentrification contributes to low-income households’ experiences of precarity and severs community ties and place attachments, it generates significant costs to personal and community health and wellbeing as well as social cohesion. The recommendations articulated in this brief emphasise the importance of transformative policy solutions that actively counter gentrification.
These include:
• Equitable investment in urban infrastructure
• Prioritising affordable housing
• Ensuring accessible transportation
• Empowering local communities
• Implementing a Te Tiriti o Waitangi approach to policy development

year: 2025