title: Data structures for Z testing tools.

authors: Utting, Mark

abstract: This paper describes some of the difficulties and challenges that arise during the design of tools for validating Z specifications by testing and animation. We address three issues: handling undefined terms, simplification versus enumeration, and the representation of sets, and show how each issue has been handled in the Jaza tool.
Finally, we report on a brief experimental comparison of existing Z animators and conclude that while the state of the art is improving, more work is needed to ensure that the tools are robust and respect the Z semantics.

text: Data structures for Z testing tools. This paper describes some of the difficulties and challenges that arise during the design of tools for validating Z specifications by testing and animation. We address three issues: handling undefined terms, simplification versus enumeration, and the representation of sets, and show how each issue has been handled in the Jaza tool.
Finally, we report on a brief experimental comparison of existing Z animators and conclude that while the state of the art is improving, more work is needed to ensure that the tools are robust and respect the Z semantics.

year: 2001-06-01

title: An autopoietic approach to custody and contact decisions and the welfare and best interests of the child

authors: Schrenk, Amelda

abstract: All over the common law world complaints are heard about the manner in which the courts decide the living arrangements for children when their parents separate. A large body of contributions from scholars and commentators from various disciplines exist, and are still being contributed, that highlights problems, critique outcomes, and make recommendations relating to these types of legal decisions. Will their work make a difference to legal outcomes and, if so, why? 
This thesis uses the socio-legal theory of Niklas Luhmann to show that it is because of how the legal system operates that the expectations of parents, scholars and interest groups, will invariably be disappointment and that ultimately what is required for these types of decisions, cannot be achieved by the legal system. Luhmann argued that the legal system operates in a closed, self-referential manner to produce its own messages as regards the values of legal and illegal. This manner of functioning is called autopoiesis. By its operations the system self-selects and simplifies information generated outside of the system in a manner that will stabilise normative expectations, which is all that the law does. Normative expectations are created with society in mind and not individuals. This challenges the individualistic approach that is required in custody and contact decisions after parental separation. The research starts at the historical point when the common law legal system gained jurisdiction over children. The research follows the development of the ‘welfare principle’ upon which custody decisions are based and illustrates the relevance and application of Luhmann’s theory. This study investigates the limitations of the legal system to make decisions about children’s welfare and best interests in the context of custody and contact decisions.

text: An autopoietic approach to custody and contact decisions and the welfare and best interests of the child All over the common law world complaints are heard about the manner in which the courts decide the living arrangements for children when their parents separate. A large body of contributions from scholars and commentators from various disciplines exist, and are still being contributed, that highlights problems, critique outcomes, and make recommendations relating to these types of legal decisions. Will their work make a difference to legal outcomes and, if so, why? 
This thesis uses the socio-legal theory of Niklas Luhmann to show that it is because of how the legal system operates that the expectations of parents, scholars and interest groups, will invariably be disappointment and that ultimately what is required for these types of decisions, cannot be achieved by the legal system. Luhmann argued that the legal system operates in a closed, self-referential manner to produce its own messages as regards the values of legal and illegal. This manner of functioning is called autopoiesis. By its operations the system self-selects and simplifies information generated outside of the system in a manner that will stabilise normative expectations, which is all that the law does. Normative expectations are created with society in mind and not individuals. This challenges the individualistic approach that is required in custody and contact decisions after parental separation. The research starts at the historical point when the common law legal system gained jurisdiction over children. The research follows the development of the ‘welfare principle’ upon which custody decisions are based and illustrates the relevance and application of Luhmann’s theory. This study investigates the limitations of the legal system to make decisions about children’s welfare and best interests in the context of custody and contact decisions.

year: 2012

title: Rangatiratanga - Kawanatanga: Dealing with rhetoric

authors: Nikora, Linda Waimarie

abstract: Numbered among the few Maori appointed to an academic position during the late 1980s, I have seen our discipline and profession, in all its awkward self-consciousness, make genuine attempts to grapple the respond to questions and challenges delivered by Maori and Pakeha alike.  For example, Where is the Maori content in courses?  Why aren’t Maori graduating from professional training programmes?  Why are there not more Maori academics? Where is the place/space for Maori as practitioners, academics, researchers and decision-makers?  Why does it seem that Maori are always on the ‘client’ side of the professional/client equation?  Where are the Maori men?  In responding to these persistent challenges the professional and discipline in Aotearoa/New Zealand has been irreversibly changed, in my opinion.  The change has not been dramatic (psychology is somewhat averse to self-promotion) but, of those changes that have occurred, a definite contribution has been made to advancing Maori development, to building a more bicultural discipline and practice, and to supporting the strength of the Kawanatanga and Rangatiratanga dynamic whose importance I emphasize here.

text: Rangatiratanga - Kawanatanga: Dealing with rhetoric Numbered among the few Maori appointed to an academic position during the late 1980s, I have seen our discipline and profession, in all its awkward self-consciousness, make genuine attempts to grapple the respond to questions and challenges delivered by Maori and Pakeha alike.  For example, Where is the Maori content in courses?  Why aren’t Maori graduating from professional training programmes?  Why are there not more Maori academics? Where is the place/space for Maori as practitioners, academics, researchers and decision-makers?  Why does it seem that Maori are always on the ‘client’ side of the professional/client equation?  Where are the Maori men?  In responding to these persistent challenges the professional and discipline in Aotearoa/New Zealand has been irreversibly changed, in my opinion.  The change has not been dramatic (psychology is somewhat averse to self-promotion) but, of those changes that have occurred, a definite contribution has been made to advancing Maori development, to building a more bicultural discipline and practice, and to supporting the strength of the Kawanatanga and Rangatiratanga dynamic whose importance I emphasize here.

year: 2001