Arts Design & Architecture
Arts Design & Architecture
Publication Search Results
Results per page
Now showing 1 - 3 of 3
Circumcision and risk of sexually transmissible infections in a community-based cohort of HIV-negative homosexual men in Sydney, Australia(2009) Grulich, Andrew; Templeton, David; Jin, Feng Yi; Prestage, Garrett; Donovan, Basil; Imrie, John; Kippax, Susan; Cunningham, Philip; Kaldor, John; Mindel, Adrian; Cunningham, AnthonyJournal ArticleBACKGROUND: Circumcision status was examined as an independent risk factor for sexually transmissible infections (STIs) in the Health in Men cohort of homosexual men in Sydney. METHODS: From 2001 through 2004, 1427 initially human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)-negative men were enrolled and followed up until mid-2007. All participants were offered annual STI testing. The history of STIs was collected at baseline, and information on sexual risk behaviors was collected every 6 months. At annual face-to-face visits, participants reported STI diagnoses received during the previous year. RESULTS: Circumcision was not associated with prevalent or incident herpes simplex virus 1, herpes simplex virus 2, or self-reported genital warts. There was also no independent association of circumcision with incident urethral gonorrhea or chlamydia. Being circumcised was associated with a significantly reduced risk of incident (hazard ratio, 0.35 [95% confidence interval, 0.15-0.84]) but not prevalent (odds ratio, 0.71 [95% confidence interval, 0.35-1.44]) syphilis. The association was somewhat stronger among men who reported predominantly insertive unprotected anal intercourse (hazard ratio, 0.10 [95% confidence interval, 0.01-0.82]). CONCLUSIONS: These are the first prospective data obtained from homosexual men to assess circumcision status as a risk factor for STIs. Circumcised men were at reduced risk of incident syphilis but no other prevalent or incident STIs. Circumcision is unlikely to have a substantial public health impact in reducing acquisition of most STIs in homosexual men.
(2009) Kofod, Michelle; Brawley, Sean; Rifkin, Will; Quinnell, Rosanne; Whitaker, NoelConference PaperIn generalist degrees such as the Bachelor of Science and Bachelor of Arts, students can take any number of combinations of subjects according their own learning goals. Tracking their progress in regard to graduate attributes development is therefore particularly difficult. Over half of our undergraduate science and arts students are enrolled in the flagship generalist degree programs (BSc and BA), and most of our staff teach into these degrees, which provides a powerful incentive to examine where and how students are being offered opportunities to develop graduate attributes (GA) within their program. This work builds on our previous initiatives to demonstrate how we mapped GA development across programs for both commonly chosen pathways (goat tracks) within the generalist BSc and BA and professionally-defined pathways or specialist degrees. Engineering space for critical conversations, with staff and students, to explore student learning requires a catalyst. In the case of the BA at UNSW, the catalyst was provided by a complete BA program renewal, a management-driven process. The catalyst for staff to engage in GA mapping in BSc at UNSW was provided by scholarly leadership from within the discipline. From these critical conversations, regardless of the type of catalyst, staff were able to become more explicit in identifying where and how the GA were linked to the students' learning activities and assessment tasks.
Evidence-based narratives to reconcile academic disciplines with the scholarship of teaching and learning(2009) Quinnell, Rosanne; Russell, Carol; Thompson, Rachel; Nancy, Marshall; Cowley, JillConference PaperA raft of models and definitions of SoTL exist and the best appear to transcend disciplinary contexts, and are sufficiently robust for academics to measure scholarly practices. Critical engagement with the scholarly literature is necessary for academics to gain a realistic view of where their work practices are situated within the scholarly domain. Because academic staff are disciplinary experts they are best placed to comment on whether the models of scholarship describe the scholarship of learning and teaching within the context of their own disciplines as well as within the confines of the Australian higher education sector. This paper pushes the existing debates on reconciling what evidence of scholarship in the disciplines actually is and what is considered valid, and in doing so uncovers why the process of reconciliation, between current practice and supporting evidence, remains elusive. Higher education academics need to identify and reconcile tacit disciplinary knowledge with their SoTL approach in order to unpack the complexity and value of their practices. Enabling academic staff to annotate their activities, roles and accomplishments and then map these items onto the various models of scholarship will enrich the status of scholarship of teaching and learning within the higher education sector.