title: Comments on GWRC Draft Climate Change Strategy

authors: de Lange, Willem P.

abstract: Considering the sea level projections adopted by the DCCS, the key points are: a) Due to vertical land movements, the magnitude of relative sea level changes around the coast of the Wellington region varies significantly, and at centennial scales the effects of a major earthquake and the cumulative effect of slow-slip events are likely to dominate over the effects of global absolute sea level changes. b) It is evident that historic absolute sea level changes observed at Wellington do not agree with estimated historic global absolute sea level changes, or with CMIP5 projections for the available period of overlap this Century. Therefore, it is unlikely that projections of future global absolute sea levels provide a useful estimate of future sea levels in Wellington. c) Relative sea level changes at Wellington are not tracking either the CMIP5 projections for absolute sea level rise, or the MfE guidelines for planning purposes. 1. This is predominantly due to the lack of any statistically significant acceleration, which is an underlying assumption in both the projections and the guidelines. 2. Further, the CMIP5 models do not account for regional-scale variability in the processes driving sea level changes. It is clear that major ocean sub-basins experience different sea level changes at different times, which do not accord with the global average modelled by the sea level projections. Within the sub-basins there are also significant variations. This variability indicates that an anthropic sea level signal is unlike to be detectable at Wellington this Century. 3. Finally, it is clear that the relative contributions of the different components of sea level rise have been changing over the last few decades, which means the processes driving sea level changes are different to those assumed by the projections. d) As identified by the NIWA report on sea level trends and variability for the Wellington, it is unlikely that sea level rise will abruptly accelerate to the rates required to achieve the MfE guidelines. Therefore, the MfE guidelines are an over-estimate of potential sea level rise over the next century, and the values specified should be considered very unlikely. Considering the climate extreme projections adopted by the DCCS, the key points are: a) The projected changes in the frequency and magnitude of extreme wind and precipitation events are smaller than the natural variability of these events at any specific location or between locations within the Wellington region. This is due to the effects of local topography and the scale of the systems associated with extreme events. The projected changes are very unlikely to be detectable during this Century. b) The climate for the Wellington Region is strongly influenced by sea surface temperatures, the local topography, and a range of climate oscillations including ENSO, SAM and PDO. None of these is adequately incorporated into CMIP5 projections (and even less so in earlier projections). It is very unlikely that projections of global mean surface air temperature will provide any useful estimates of future climate for specific locations in the Wellington Region. c) The MfE guidelines utilise downscaled climate projections produced for the IPCC TAR. Apart from being more than a decade out of date, the methodology used was identified by the IPCC TAR as being flawed. The downscaled projections are also provided as a regional “average”, which is very unlikely to provide any useful estimate of future climate for any specific location. d) There appears to be fundamental disagreement over the relative influence of key climate oscillations on the climate of the Wellington Region, particularly the relative affects of ENSO, SAM and PDO on extreme events. Without a better understanding of the influence of these on the present climate of the Wellington Region, it is difficult to accept any projections based on assumed changes to their behaviour in the future. e) There is strong evidence that the CMIP5 models have over-projected future temperature changes, although there is on-going disagreement as to why this has occurred. The same problems are also evident to the earlier models used to produce the MfE guidelines. Until the discrepancies between the out-of-sample observations and model projections are resolved it would be imprudent to rely on model projections for planning purposes.

text: Comments on GWRC Draft Climate Change Strategy Considering the sea level projections adopted by the DCCS, the key points are: a) Due to vertical land movements, the magnitude of relative sea level changes around the coast of the Wellington region varies significantly, and at centennial scales the effects of a major earthquake and the cumulative effect of slow-slip events are likely to dominate over the effects of global absolute sea level changes. b) It is evident that historic absolute sea level changes observed at Wellington do not agree with estimated historic global absolute sea level changes, or with CMIP5 projections for the available period of overlap this Century. Therefore, it is unlikely that projections of future global absolute sea levels provide a useful estimate of future sea levels in Wellington. c) Relative sea level changes at Wellington are not tracking either the CMIP5 projections for absolute sea level rise, or the MfE guidelines for planning purposes. 1. This is predominantly due to the lack of any statistically significant acceleration, which is an underlying assumption in both the projections and the guidelines. 2. Further, the CMIP5 models do not account for regional-scale variability in the processes driving sea level changes. It is clear that major ocean sub-basins experience different sea level changes at different times, which do not accord with the global average modelled by the sea level projections. Within the sub-basins there are also significant variations. This variability indicates that an anthropic sea level signal is unlike to be detectable at Wellington this Century. 3. Finally, it is clear that the relative contributions of the different components of sea level rise have been changing over the last few decades, which means the processes driving sea level changes are different to those assumed by the projections. d) As identified by the NIWA report on sea level trends and variability for the Wellington, it is unlikely that sea level rise will abruptly accelerate to the rates required to achieve the MfE guidelines. Therefore, the MfE guidelines are an over-estimate of potential sea level rise over the next century, and the values specified should be considered very unlikely. Considering the climate extreme projections adopted by the DCCS, the key points are: a) The projected changes in the frequency and magnitude of extreme wind and precipitation events are smaller than the natural variability of these events at any specific location or between locations within the Wellington region. This is due to the effects of local topography and the scale of the systems associated with extreme events. The projected changes are very unlikely to be detectable during this Century. b) The climate for the Wellington Region is strongly influenced by sea surface temperatures, the local topography, and a range of climate oscillations including ENSO, SAM and PDO. None of these is adequately incorporated into CMIP5 projections (and even less so in earlier projections). It is very unlikely that projections of global mean surface air temperature will provide any useful estimates of future climate for specific locations in the Wellington Region. c) The MfE guidelines utilise downscaled climate projections produced for the IPCC TAR. Apart from being more than a decade out of date, the methodology used was identified by the IPCC TAR as being flawed. The downscaled projections are also provided as a regional “average”, which is very unlikely to provide any useful estimate of future climate for any specific location. d) There appears to be fundamental disagreement over the relative influence of key climate oscillations on the climate of the Wellington Region, particularly the relative affects of ENSO, SAM and PDO on extreme events. Without a better understanding of the influence of these on the present climate of the Wellington Region, it is difficult to accept any projections based on assumed changes to their behaviour in the future. e) There is strong evidence that the CMIP5 models have over-projected future temperature changes, although there is on-going disagreement as to why this has occurred. The same problems are also evident to the earlier models used to produce the MfE guidelines. Until the discrepancies between the out-of-sample observations and model projections are resolved it would be imprudent to rely on model projections for planning purposes.

year: 2015-06-19

title: Reflections on remixing open access content into open educational resources: A new paradigm for sustainable data-driven language learning systems design in higher education

authors: Fitzgerald, Alannah

subjects: computer science

abstract: This chapter presents a new paradigm for sustainable data – driven language learning systems design in higher education that draws on qualitative reflections spanning a decade (2012–2022) with stakeholders from an ongoing global research study with the FLAX (Flexible Language Acquisition) and F-Lingo projects at the University of Waikato in Aotearoa New Zealand (Fitzgerald (2019) A new paradigm for open data-driven language learning systems design in higher education; König et al. (2022)SmartCALL). Design considerations are presented for remixing domain specific open access content into Open Educational Resources (OER) for academic English language provision across formal and non-formal higher education contexts. Primary stake holders in the research collaboration include the following three groups: (1) Knowledge organisations that provide open access to academic content—libraries and archives, including the British Library and the Oxford Text Archive, universities in collaboration with MOOC providers and the CORE (COnnecting REpositories) open access aggregation service at the UK Open University; (2) Researchers who mine and remix academic content into corpora and open data-driven language learning systems—converging from the fields of open education, computer science and applied corpus linguistics; (3) Knowledge users who re-use and remix academic content into OER—English for Academic Purposes (EAP) practitioners from university language centres. Automated content analysis was carried out on a corpus of interview and focus discussion data with the three stakeholder groups in this research. We discuss themes arising from the research data that reflect the different stakeholders’ experiences of remixing open access research content that has been produced within the academy for re-use as open educational content for teaching and learning features of academic language within open data-driven language learning systems. These open learning systems have been specifically designed to scale with OER expansion and traction in mind for their sustainable uptake both within and beyond the brick and mortar of the traditional university. The new paradigm presented in this chapter challenges, as the OER movement must, established business models and deeply embedded cultural or institutional norms that present obstacles to OERexpansion and traction and the sustainability of the movement. One persistent challenge concerns the lack of open education policy across the higher education sector for full open access (for use, modification, adaptation) via Creative Commons licensing to content produced within the academy. Thus, while this research has theoretical and practical implications in applied linguistics, computer science, language teaching and learning and open education, more generally, it also has significant cultural, business model and policy implications for higher education.

text: Reflections on remixing open access content into open educational resources: A new paradigm for sustainable data-driven language learning systems design in higher education This chapter presents a new paradigm for sustainable data – driven language learning systems design in higher education that draws on qualitative reflections spanning a decade (2012–2022) with stakeholders from an ongoing global research study with the FLAX (Flexible Language Acquisition) and F-Lingo projects at the University of Waikato in Aotearoa New Zealand (Fitzgerald (2019) A new paradigm for open data-driven language learning systems design in higher education; König et al. (2022)SmartCALL). Design considerations are presented for remixing domain specific open access content into Open Educational Resources (OER) for academic English language provision across formal and non-formal higher education contexts. Primary stake holders in the research collaboration include the following three groups: (1) Knowledge organisations that provide open access to academic content—libraries and archives, including the British Library and the Oxford Text Archive, universities in collaboration with MOOC providers and the CORE (COnnecting REpositories) open access aggregation service at the UK Open University; (2) Researchers who mine and remix academic content into corpora and open data-driven language learning systems—converging from the fields of open education, computer science and applied corpus linguistics; (3) Knowledge users who re-use and remix academic content into OER—English for Academic Purposes (EAP) practitioners from university language centres. Automated content analysis was carried out on a corpus of interview and focus discussion data with the three stakeholder groups in this research. We discuss themes arising from the research data that reflect the different stakeholders’ experiences of remixing open access research content that has been produced within the academy for re-use as open educational content for teaching and learning features of academic language within open data-driven language learning systems. These open learning systems have been specifically designed to scale with OER expansion and traction in mind for their sustainable uptake both within and beyond the brick and mortar of the traditional university. The new paradigm presented in this chapter challenges, as the OER movement must, established business models and deeply embedded cultural or institutional norms that present obstacles to OERexpansion and traction and the sustainability of the movement. One persistent challenge concerns the lack of open education policy across the higher education sector for full open access (for use, modification, adaptation) via Creative Commons licensing to content produced within the academy. Thus, while this research has theoretical and practical implications in applied linguistics, computer science, language teaching and learning and open education, more generally, it also has significant cultural, business model and policy implications for higher education.

year: 2023

title: Supervising research in Māori cultural contexts: a decolonizing, relational response

authors: Berryman, Mere

abstract: We have collaborated for 25 years as indigenous Māori and non- Māori researchers undertaking research with Māori families, their schools and communities. We have endeavored to meet our responsibilities to the Māori people (indigenous inhabitants of New Zealand) and communities with whom we have researched, as well as meet the requirements and responsibilities of our academic institutions. In this paper, we reflect on the implications of these responsibilities for our work as supervisors of master’s and doctoral students (Māori and non-Māori) who seek to draw on decolonizing methodologies as they undertake research in Māori cultural contexts. We draw on the experiences and interactions we have had with four different postgraduate students whose research on improving educational outcomes for Māori students has required them to engage and participate in Māori cultural contexts.

text: Supervising research in Māori cultural contexts: a decolonizing, relational response We have collaborated for 25 years as indigenous Māori and non- Māori researchers undertaking research with Māori families, their schools and communities. We have endeavored to meet our responsibilities to the Māori people (indigenous inhabitants of New Zealand) and communities with whom we have researched, as well as meet the requirements and responsibilities of our academic institutions. In this paper, we reflect on the implications of these responsibilities for our work as supervisors of master’s and doctoral students (Māori and non-Māori) who seek to draw on decolonizing methodologies as they undertake research in Māori cultural contexts. We draw on the experiences and interactions we have had with four different postgraduate students whose research on improving educational outcomes for Māori students has required them to engage and participate in Māori cultural contexts.

year: 2017