The persisting challenge of age-for-grade non-compliance in post-free primary education in Kenya

This article examines the prevalence of non-compliance on the age-for-grade policy in the post-free primary education system in Kenya. We utilised data from the 2009 cohort of enrolled primary schoolchildren. The analysis revealed non-compliance to be a persisting concern in the school system, characterised by both under-age and over-age enrolment at the age-for-grade level of analysis in spite of the introduction of free primary education in 2003. Irrespective of the nature of non-compliance, overcrowding in the lower grades is more prevalent, with potential for adverse compromises in quality of learning and the attendant added dimension of the mismatched grade-for-age curricula.     

A Pre-Trial Domestic Violence Intensive Supervision Unit: Exploring Case Seriousness and Successful Disposition

This study measures the seriousness of domestic violence cases from the population of cases (N = 96) sentenced to a pre-trial domestic violence intensive supervision unit in one county probation office in Florida from April 1, 2006, to April 30, 2007. No significant differences were found in seriousness across sex, self-reported drug use, or attorney type. Furthermore, no relationship was found between the number of special conditions imposed by the court and the seriousness index value for a case. However, non-Whites had a significantly higher mean case seriousness index than Whites. Findings suggest that using the seriousness index presented in this study, some of the cases examined were not serious enough to warrant being sentenced to the pre-trial domestic violence intensive supervision unit. Implications for future research, including the use of lethality assessments, are addressed.     

Etiological Similarities Between Psychological and Physical Aggression in Intimate Relationships: A Behavioral Genetic Exploration

Previous research has consistently shown that there is a strong association between psychological and physical aggression in intimate relationships. Theories as to why this association exists include that they have a single underlying etiology with differing thresholds, or they have separate etiologies and there is a two-step process by which psychological aggression moves to physical. The current study suggests that these two theories are not necessarily competing theories. The genetic and environmental covariance between psychological and physical intimate partner aggression were examined in 134 monozygotic (MZ) and 41 dizygotic (DZ) twin pairs. Results showed that psychological and physical aggression have largely the same genetic etiology, and any differences between the two are a function of differing nonshared environmental influences.     

CONFLICTING ROLES IN CHILD CUSTODY MEDIATION

This article will first discuss the conflict in the mediator's role as a neutral and impartial third party with no interest in the outcome and his or her role as guardian or advocate for the best interests of the child. That discussion will define terms, consider the legal standard for the best interests of the child as it is used by the courts, and lay out how the legal standard is problematic in general but even more so for mediators. Part 3 will discuss options for mediators attempting to resolve this conflict by looking at a continuum of alternatives, using examples of opening statements that illustrate positions ranging from extreme nonintervention to complete inte mention. An assessment follows each example.     

Jurisdiction and Scale: Rent Arrears,Social Housing,and Human Rights

This article draws on the recent work of Mariana Valverde on jurisdiction and scale to frame a study of the interaction between mandatory possession proceedings brought by one particular type of social housing provider – housing associations – and national as well as human rights law. It was the explicit political choice to focus social housing provision on housing associations, as opposed to local authorities, which opened up the mandatory possession jurisdiction. The essence of the argument is that, despite the apparent incommensurability of these different scales and jurisdictions, they are able to accommodate each other quite happily. Two sets of texts are used to develop this argument. First, consideration is given to the legal technicality through which mandatory possession proceedings might be challenged. Second, we draw on data from a study of housing associations practices and policies on the use of one particular mandatory ground of possession for rent arrears, demonstrating the way in which scale and jurisdiction, political rationality and technologies intertwine.     

The Role of Suggestibility in Determinations of Miranda Abilities: A Study of the Gudjonsson Suggestibility Scales

Traditionally, high levels of suggestibility have been widely assumed to be linked with diminished Miranda abilities, especially in relationship to the voluntariness of waivers. The current investigation examined suggestibility on the Gudjonsson Suggestibility Scales in a multisite study of pretrial defendants. One important finding was the inapplicability of British norms to American jurisdictions. Moreover, suggestibility appeared unrelated to Miranda comprehension, reasoning, and detainees’ perceptions of police coercion. In testing rival hypotheses, defendants with high compliance had significantly lower Miranda comprehension and ability to reason about exercising Miranda rights than their counterparts with low compliance. Implications of these findings to forensic practice are examined.     

How to Think (Like a Lawyer) About Rape

From the American Law Institute to college campuses, there is a renewed interest in the law of rape. Law school faculty, however, may be reluctant to teach this deeply debated topic. This article begins from the premise that controversial and contested questions can be best resolved when participants understand the conceptual architecture that surrounds and delineates the normative questions. This allows participants to talk to one another instead of past each other. Accordingly, in this article, we begin by diffusing two non-debates: the apparent conflict created when speakers use “consent” to mean two different things and the question of whether rape law ought to be formulated in terms of consent or force. From here, we turn to the conceptual apparatuses that surround the normative questions of freedom from force, knowledge, and capacity. Here, we suggest how better understanding these concepts can frame the underlying discussions as to what sorts of coercion undermine consent, what kinds of deception invalidate consent, and when the victim is too incapacitated to consent. Finally, we turn to different formulations of consent, demonstrating that one conception better captures the harm of rape but that other formulations may better protect victims. We show how clarifying these questions allows discussants to see why different formulations are valuable and to debate the best all-things-considered formulation. Although this article is framed as a question of how (to teach students) to think like lawyers about rape, its ambition is to set forth a framework that is useful to reformers as well.