Violence against teachers: prevalence and consequences

Data collected from 731 teachers were used to examine the consequences of violence directed toward teachers while in the workplace. Analyses showed that the majority of respondents (n = 585, 80.0%) had experienced school-related violence—broadly defined—at one point in their careers. Serious violence (actual, attempted, or threatened physical violence) was less common, but still common enough to be of concern (n = 202, 27.6%). Violence predicted physical and emotional effects, as well as teaching-related functioning. In addition, a model with fear as a potential mediator revealed that both fear and violence were independently predictive of these negative outcomes. Finally, analyses showed that, in general, women reported higher levels of physical symptoms compared to men. We discuss the implications of violence against teachers in terms of personal consequences and the implications for mental health professionals working in an educational setting.     

Assessing children's competency to take the oath in court: The influence of question type on children's accuracy

This study examined children's accuracy in response to truth-lie competency questions asked in court. The participants included 164 child witnesses in criminal child sexual abuse cases tried in Los Angeles County over a 5-year period (1997-2001) and 154 child witnesses quoted in the U.S. state and federal appellate cases over a 35-year period (1974-2008). The results revealed that judges virtually never found children incompetent to testify, but children exhibited substantial variability in their performance based on question-type. Definition questions, about the meaning of the truth and lies, were the most difficult largely due to errors in response to "Do you know" questions. Questions about the consequences of lying were more difficult than questions evaluating the morality of lying. Children exhibited high rates of error in response to questions about whether they had ever told a lie. Attorneys rarely asked children hypothetical questions in a form that has been found to facilitate performance. Defense attorneys asked a higher proportion of the more difficult question types than prosecutors. The findings suggest that children's truth-lie competency is underestimated by courtroom questioning and support growing doubts about the utility of the competency requirements.     

Budget Reform in Malaysia and Australia Compared

The study, using the recent contrasting experience of budget reform in Malaysia and Australia, inquires why quite similar changes were attempted in different socio-economic and fiscal settings. It explains why their implementation differed and identifies the factors that shaped, sustained, or impeded the respective efforts.
Three basic themes emerge. First, political and administrative will are necessary requirements for the success of any budget reform effort. Second, the more correspondent the bureaucratic culture is with the culture upon which the new budget system is premised, the more easily change occurs. Third, a model of reform predicated upon the assumption of fiscal restraint cannot effectively function in a climate of fiscal relaxation. Malaysia adapted its budget model from the Australian system. As the Australian model suited the paradigm of expenditure restraint, the adapted model proved less workable against the Malaysian climate of fiscal relaxation.     

Lord Cunliffe, Lloyd George, reparations and reputations at the Paris peace conference, 1919

This paper reexamines the role of Lord Cunliffe, traditionally cast (by Lloyd George, among others) as one of the villains of the Paris Peace Conference for his extremism on reparations. It argues that Lloyd George used Cunliffe as a stalking-horse to conceal his own intention of exacting maximum reparations in the face of American opposition. Lloyd George's refusal to agree a final sum, despite the pleas of almost all his senior colleagues, reflected both Cunliffe's advice and his own fears of underestimating Germany's capacity by setting too low a figure, which would be largely consumed by French claims.     

A Reaction to Popular Hysteria: The Titles Deprivation Act 1917

The Titles Deprivation Act represents the `other side of the coin' of King George V's decision in 1917 to divest the Royal Family of its appearance of German-ness and adopt an outwardEnglishness by renouncing the German titles of its members and adopting the surname of Windsor. The Act created a mechanism by which German holders of British royal titles and peerages could be deprived of those honours on grounds which had no precedent in earlier law and practice, this mechanism being used for the first and only time in an Order in Council of 28th March 1919 to deprive three German princes and one Austrian, two of them first cousins of George V and a third an uncle by marriage, of the British titles which they held. This paper considers, first, the background to the Act and, in particular, the reason why legislation on this highly controversial issue was introduced in Parliament only after theFirst World War had been going on for two-and-a-half years. It identifies the reason for this delay as the reluctance of the Asquith Government to involve the King as the `fountain of honour' with a course of action which he personally considered to be petty and undignified and of no importance to the war effort, and hypothesises that the Government's change of heart resulted from the trial and execution of Roger Casement for treason, with which there is an exact coincidence in time. Second, the paper considers the manner in which the Bill was drafted, identifies its distinctive features and follows its passage through Parliament. Third, it considers the manner in which the provisions of the Act were put into effect, in particular the manner in which evidence was gathered to create a case against the persons affected by it. This revised version was published online in August 2006 with corrections to the Cover Date.     

The 'New Terrorism': Revolution or Evolution?

It is essential to understand the concept of the 'new terrorism', since it has fostered a paradigm shift in the way that academics, policy makers and counter-terrorism professionals conceive of the contemporary threat. Capturing the notion that there has been a revolutionary change in the nature of terrorism, it now plays a pre-eminent role in shaping counter-terrorism policy. However, despite the attractive simplicity of the concept, there are good reasons to question the assumption that the actual behaviour of terrorist groups has fundamentally altered. Indeed, an analysis of the history of terrorism shows that many of the supposed hallmarks of the 'new terrorism' have been seen in the past. As a consequence, the concept of the 'new terrorism' should be viewed with some scepticism, as it unduly exaggerates the unprecedented nature of the contemporary terrorist threat and needlessly leads policy makers to reject the relevance of historical counter-terrorism lessons.