Reading Drafts Research Articles

The ILC’s First Reading Draft Articles on ‘Immunity of State Officials from Foreign Criminal Jurisdiction’ (2022)

Abstract In August 2022, the International Law Commission adopted, on first reading, a full set of 18 draft articles (with commentaries) on Immunity of State Officials from Foreign Criminal Jurisdiction. The Commission now awaits the written comments of States, and will then have to decide how to proceed with the topic. In detailing the present situation and the work leading up to it, the present article takes the story forward from a contribution to this Yearbook in 2018. After recalling briefly the controversies surrounding the immunities in question, the article begins by describing the working methods of the Commission and the status of its documentation, emphasizing the importance of having a clear understanding of such matters when invoking the Commission’s work. The further work of the Commission on the topic in the years 2019–2022, much of it quite technical, is described, in order to give a full picture. It is then shown that the draft articles on the category of high officials enjoying immunity ratione personae and on possible exceptions to the immunity of State officials ratione materiae remain hotly disputed, both as assertions of existing law or as ‘trends’ or proposals for new law. The article ends by charting a possible course for the Commission’s future work on the topic, suggesting that a radical reappraisal is required if an outcome generally acceptable to States is to be achieved.

Smiting Statist Philosophical Philistinism: a Reply to the T. Brooks Review of Escape from Leviathan

It is possible to pose many difficult and fascinating problems and criticisms for the various theses and arguments in Escape from Leviathan (EFL). This occurred while writing it, and various sharp minds did it on reading drafts or the final product. However, some reviews misunderstand, or ignore, what is written and reassert conventional views. But it is best to answer all published criticisms if only to show how they fail, lest anyone thinks they are sound, and even poor criticisms can sometimes elicit elucidation. Thus, we now turn to the review.

Introduction: This Is America

Introduction: This Is America

Mistaken Murals: The Neglected Story of the Nutmeg State’s New Deal Post Office Art

Research Article| April 01 2020 Mistaken Murals: The Neglected Story of the Nutmeg State’s New Deal Post Office Art Todd Jones Todd Jones Todd Jones is a research associate at a public policy firm in Washington, DC. His previous publications relate to public art and war commemoration. Originally from Connecticut, Mr. Jones received his B.A. in history and M.A. in public history from Central Connecticut State University. He wishes to thank his soon-to-be wife, Suzanne Klinefelter, for her help reading drafts and for her patience visiting far too many post offices on vacations. Search for other works by this author on: This Site Google Connecticut History Review (2020) 59 (1): 40–79. https://doi.org/10.5406/connhistrevi.59.1.0040 Cite Icon Cite Share Icon Share Facebook Twitter LinkedIn MailTo Permissions Search Site Citation Todd Jones; Mistaken Murals: The Neglected Story of the Nutmeg State’s New Deal Post Office Art. Connecticut History Review 1 January 2020; 59 (1): 40–79. doi: https://doi.org/10.5406/connhistrevi.59.1.0040 Download citation file: Zotero Reference Manager EasyBib Bookends Mendeley Papers EndNote RefWorks BibTex toolbar search Search Dropdown Menu toolbar search search input Search input auto suggest filter your search All Scholarly Publishing CollectiveUniversity of Illinois PressConnecticut History Review Search Advanced Search The text of this article is only available as a PDF. Copyright 2020 by the Board of Trustees of the University of Illinois2020 Article PDF first page preview Close Modal You do not currently have access to this content.

Profiling writers: analysis of writing dynamics among college students

We studied the processes involved in synthesis writing, focusing on planning, editing and self-regulation strategies. The aims of the study were a) to analyse the temporal distribution of cognitive strategies and self-regulation across the different phases of writing, b) to identify different writing approaches (i.e., profiles), and c) to establish the relationship between writing behavior and writing performance. Twenty-seven humanities students, who were 23 years of age on average, were asked to produce a synthesis. The methodology combined videotaped observations, a think aloud protocol, and an assessment of writing performance, and specific instruments were constructed to collect the data. Algorithms were also calculated to determine the transitions between different types of writing behavior. Results showed that the nature, frequency, and duration of planning, editing, and self-regulation strategies varied according to the phase (prewriting or writing), and the most remarkable changes occurred in the final period of writing. Moreover, although the college students’ functioning generally reflected a novice approach, there were significant differences between the three writer profiles we found, namely precise transcriber, active reviser, and spontaneous writer. Finally, writing performance was positively and significantly correlated with writing strategies such as taking notes and reading drafts.

Being read: How writers of fiction manuscripts experience and respond to criticism

This paper brings into dialogue contemporary discourse in creative writing studies about approaches to reading draft fiction with a subjective account of the experience of being read. Through drawing on two key essays on reading strategies in the discipline of creative writing, statements by published authors and my own process, this paper looks at how writers respond to feedback on their writing. Reading of draft creative work occurs in overlapping contexts – in universities, by informal networks of writers and by editors – and social structures such as reading and writing groups support a writer in his or her response to criticism. The changes made to manuscripts as a result of feedback can be significant; this paper looks at the contexts in which such changes are executed. Ultimately, this paper argues that ‘communities of practice’ composed of writers who attended a university creative writing program together and who continued to read each other’s work after graduation utilised and developed strategies initiated in such programs. Such communities have benefits for their members in terms of social support and publication.

Keeping the psyche in psychology.

Editor's Note: We are presenting here for the first time the full and unedited transcript of the reading draft of Professor Ernest Keen's paper, which was presented as an Invited Address at the 109th Annual Convention of the American Psychological Association, which was held in San Francisco. Keen was being honored by the Division of Humanistic Psychology as recipient of the 2001 Rollo May Award, which is given to an individual who has made independent and outstanding pursuit of new frontiers in humanistic psychology.

Supervision: Assessing Diagnostic Report Writing

One of the most time-consuming tasks for clinical educators is reading and editing first drafts of clinical reports prepared by students. Clinical educators at Appalachian State University (ASU) devised a tool that would make this task more efficient for clinical educators without sacrificing student learning. In the fall of 2008, the authors participated in a workshop series about using rubrics for student assessment. Participants from across the university were asked to bring existing rubrics to revise or be prepared to develop new rubrics. We modified an existing general tool into a five-level rubric specific to diagnostic reports, with detailed examples and explanations for each level, a qualitative rating scale, and a quantitative rating scale. After using the rubric for two semesters, we determined that the rubric feedback was of benefit to the students, who were consequently better able to discuss their individual writing strengths and weaknesses. The question remains whether the benefit to the students outweighs the amount of time required for the clinical educators to complete the rubric.

Emotional narratives: Depression as sadness—Anxiety as fear.

Editor's Note: This paper was presented by one of America's foremost existential psychologists, Ernest Keen, at the 2000 APA Convention in Washington DC. It was presented in a two-man symposium (chaired by Louise Sundararajan) that also featured the late Theodore Sarbin, one of the great narrative psychologists of our time. The simplicity with which Keen reframes both depression and anxiety, utilizing a Heideggerian (and Husserlian) appreciation of temporality within which to situate experiences of sadness and fear, is truly illuminating. We are presenting here for the first time the full and unedited transcript of the reading draft of Ernie's final paper presentation at APA. He would make one more appearance at APA, a year later in San Francisco, to accept the Rollo May Award “given to an individual for independent and outstanding pursuit of new frontiers in humanistic psychology.” Those of us who knew Ernie can almost hear him speaking to us in the simple rhetoric of his address in this symposium.

An Empirical Analysis of Using Text-to-Speech Software to Revise First-Year College Students’ Essays

Abstract Traditionally, composition experts have suggested reading drafts aloud as a means of revising essays; however, the method of reading drafts aloud is severely limited by a single factor: student writers do not always read what is on the page (Hartwell, 1985). Text-to-speech (TTS) software allows students to have their essays read to them so that the limiting factor of reading their own drafts aloud becomes minimized. TTS programs read what is written on the computer screen, and the result is that the students can “hear” the problems of their essays as opposed to simply “seeing” them. Nevertheless, composition researchers have not conducted any empirical studies to determine whether or not TTS is beneficial for “local” and “global” revision, nor have any studies been conducted to determine if TTS is beneficial for students above the fifth grade. This article documents an experimental study conducted at a southwestern university in the United States with fifty-one students to determine whether or not TTS software is useful in the revision process. The results show that users of TTS were as likely as users in the control group to make proofreading changes but less inclined to make local or global changes in the revision process, indicating that TTS possibly works well for proofreading but not necessarily as well for higher-order revision. Further research is recommended to determine TTS's effectiveness during a longitudinal study as well as for auditory learners and ESL students.

An Enduring Commitment: The British Military's Role in Sierra Leone

The 2007 presidential elections in Sierra Leone passed largely unnoticed by the British media. What reports there were in the months before the polls spoke of angry and disillusioned people and the...

‘WE WILL INVENT OURSELVES, THE AGE OF THE NEW IMAGE IS AT HAND’

We became very evangelistic trying to tell as many women as possible about this thing that we had discovered, and in those circumstances we began making a film to use for propaganda purposes. (Anon...

Points of View: A Survey of Survey Courses: Are They Effective?

Note from the Editors Points of View (POV) addresses issues faced by many people within the life science education community. Cell Biology Education (CBE) publishes the POV Feature to present two or more opinions published in tandem on a common topic. We consider POVs to be “Op-Ed” pieces designed to stimulate thought and dialogue on significant educational issues. Each author had the opportunity to revise or add to his/her POV after reading drafts of the other's POV. In this issue, we ask the question, “Are survey courses still viable for introductory biology?” The POV question is related to the ones asked by the National Research Council in the recent feature by Jay Labov (www.cellbioed.org/articles/vol3no4/article.cfm?articleID=132) and continues to be a subject of debate by many science departments, not just biology. Often the discussion is split not only by perceived value of the survey course, but also by the size of the institution. Therefore, we present four POVs, plus a framing POV to set the tone. The overview was written by Arri Eisen, who is a senior lecturer in Emory University's Biology Department and the director of the Program in Science & Society. Representing the Anti-Survey, Large University is Janet M. Batzli, Associate Director of the nontraditional Biology Core Curriculum at the University of Wisconsin at Madison. The Anti-Survey, Small College perspective is presented by David Becker, who is an Associate Professor and Magdalena R. and John P. Dexter Professor of Botany in the Department of Biology at Pomona College. Presenting the Pro-Survey, Large University perspective is Douglas M. Fambrough, Professor of Biology at The Johns Hopkins Department of Biology and Scientific Director of the Searle Scholars Program. Finally, the Pro-Survey, Small College POV was coauthored by Mary Lee Ledbetter and A. Malcolm Campbell. Ledbetter is a Professor of Biology at College of the Holy Cross and a 2003 NSF Director's Award recipient. Campbell is an Associate Professor of Biology at Davidson College and a co-Editor-in-Chief of CBE. Readers are encouraged to compare the authors' perspectives and share their thoughts and reactions using the online discussion forum hosted by CBE at http://www.cellbioed.org/discussion/public/main.cfm.

Points of View: Lectures: Can't Learn with Them, Can't Learn without Them

Note from the EditorsPoints of View (POV) addresses issues faced by many people within the life science education community.Cell Biology Education (CBE) has launched the POV Feature to present two or more opinions published in tandem on a common topic. We consider POVs to be “Op-Ed” pieces designed to stimulate thought and dialog on significant educational issues. Each author had the opportunity to revise or add to his/her POV after reading drafts of the other's POV.In this issue, we ask the question, “What is the appropriate role of the lecture format for teaching?” Many teaching methods are used around the world, but the “tried and true” lecture format is surely the best known and probably the most common. To what extent should lectures be used and how would we know if they are effective or merely convenient? The POVs in this issue are grounded in different class settings and teaching philosophies, and yet they share a subset of common principles that are evident on careful reading. Harvey Lodish, Professor of Biology at Massachusetts Institute of Technology, is well known for coauthoring a cell biology textbook and is the current President of the American Society for Cell Biology. Dan Klionsky is Professor of Life Sciences at the University of Michigan; in 2003 he received the National Science Foundation Director's Award for Distinguished Teaching Scholars in recognition for his high-quality research and teaching. Both authors are deeply concerned about the quality of instruction in their own classrooms as well as nationally, but they differ in many of their teaching methods. Readers are encouraged to compare the authors' perspectives and share their thoughts and reactions using the online discussion forum hosted by CBE at http://www.cellbioed.org/discussion/public/main.cfm .

Points of View: PowerPoint in the Classroom

Points of View (POV) addresses issues faced within life science education. Cell Biology Education has launched the POV feature to present two or more opinions published in tandem on a common topic. We consider POVs to be "Op-Ed" pieces designed to stimulate thought and dialog on significant educational issues. Each author has the opportunity to revise a POV after reading drafts of the other POVs. In this issue, we ask the question, "Is PowerPoint the best instructional medium to use in your class?" Everyone seems to have an opinion on Microsoft, but the intellectual merits of using PowerPoint (or similar software) is a growing question as states and institutions put more and more money into information technology and distance learning. Four POVs are presented: 1) David Keefe and James Willett provide their case why PowerPoint is an ideal teaching software. Keefe is an educational researcher at the Center for Technology in Learning at SRI International. Willett is a professor at George Mason University in the Departments of Microbial and Molecular Bioscience; as well as Bioinformatics and Computational Biology. 2) Kim McDonald highlights the causes of PowerPointlessness, a term which indicates the frequent use of PowerPoint as a crutch rather than a tool. She is a Bioscience Educator at the Shodor Education Foundation, Inc. 3) Diana Voss asks readers if PowerPoint is really necessary to present the material effectively or not. Voss is a Instructional Computing Support Specialist at SUNY Stony Brook. 4) Cynthia Lanius takes a light-hearted approach to ask whether PowerPoint is a technological improvement or just a change of pace for teacher and student presentations. Lanius is a Technology Integration Specialist in the Sinton (Texas) Independent School District. The authors span the range of teaching experiences and settings from which they bring different points of view to the debate. Readers are encouraged to participate in the online discussion forum hosted by CBE at www.cellbioed.org/discussion/public/main.cfm and/or contact the authors directly.

‘No Woman's Law Will Rot this State’: The Israeli Racial State and Feminist Resistance

This paper employs social theory and empirical observation, juxtaposing Israel as a ‘racial state’ (Goldberg, 2002) and the concept of femina sacra, a female version of Agamben's homo sacer or ‘bare life’ (Agamben, 1998), to think about some aspects of Israeli feminist peace activism since the onset of the second Intifada. Although Israeli feminist peace activism seems to discursively vacillate between essentialist motherhood narratives and subversive draft resistance practices, reading draft resistance narratives of young Israeli women conscripts, the paper tentatively suggests that where the state positions itself above morality, while evoking morality in its defence, feminist ‘peace activism’ in Israel/Palestine, though providing a potent counter-narrative to the Zionist narration of nation, does not destabilise the racial state, which is apparently gradually destroying itself while wilfully destroying its Others. I conclude by asking whether morally positioning itself in contrast to the racial state, such resistance can be theorised as gendered.

Points of View: Should Students Be Encouraged To Publish Their Research in Student-Run Publications?

Note from the Editors Points of View (POV) addresses issues faced within life science education. Cell Biology Education has launched the POV feature to present two or more opinions published in tandem on a common topic. We consider POVs to be “Op-Ed” pieces designed to stimulate thought and dialog on significant educational issues. Each author has the opportunity to revise a POV after reading drafts of the other POVs. In this issue, we ask the question, “Should students be encouraged to publish their research in student-run publications?” This question has been debated at institutions and has presented a renewed challenge with the advent of open access publishing as exhibited by the Journal for Young Investigators (http://www.jyi.org). Three POVs are presented. Scott Gilbert, Professor of Biology at Swarthmore College, is well-known for his developmental biology textbook. John Jungck, a CBE editorial board member and Professor of Biology at Beloit College, is founding director of BioQUEST. Margaret Harris (Physics, Duke University), Renee Mercuri (Science Journalism, University of Waterloo, and Joshua Tusin (Biology, Beloit College) are staff members of the Journal of Young Investigators. Vivian Seigel is the Executive Director of Public Library of Science (http://www.plos.org) and former Editor of the journal Cell. The authors bring a wealth of publishing experience and different points of view to the debate. Readers are encouraged to participate in the online discussion forum hosted by CBE at http://www.cellbioed.org/discussion/public/main.cfm.

’MOST HIGHLY TO BE REGARDED’: The Privy Chamber of Henry VIII and Anglo-French Relations, 1515–1520. I wish to thank Professor Robert Knecht, Dr Sue Doran, Dr Chris Durston, Dr Maria Dowling, Dr David Starkey and Ms Andrea Heatley for reading drafts of this article at various stages and offering helpful advice.

’MOST HIGHLY TO BE REGARDED’: The Privy Chamber of Henry VIII and Anglo-French Relations, 1515–1520. I wish to thank Professor Robert Knecht, Dr Sue Doran, Dr Chris Durston, Dr Maria Dowling, Dr David Starkey and Ms Andrea Heatley for reading drafts of this article at various stages and offering helpful advice.

Did New England Go Downhill?

Did New England Go Downhill?

On Ojibwa Question Constructions

Fieldwork supported by Supplemental Research Grant from National Institute of Mental Health. Charles E. Fiero and Jean Rogers helped by reading draft of this paper from linguist's point of view. The analysis and manipulation of Ojibwa are solely the author's responsibility. 2 'Chippewa' is the Stateside version of 'Ojibwa' and is used by Minnesota Indians to refer both to the Tribe and to the language. Informants at Ponemah numbered six, ranging in age from 58 to 85. All had Chippewa as their first language, having learned English (if at all) later in life. Phonemes of Minnesota-Chippewa were supplied by C. E. Fiero, linguist with the Christian and Missionary Alliance, Cass Lake, Minnesota, and are given in M. Black, An ethnoscience investigation of Ojibwa ontology and world view (unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Stanford, 1967), Appendix A.1. Phonemic orthography in this paper may contain inaccuracies, particularly with regard to vowel length which is sometimes difficult to hear. Length is indicated by /./, nasalization by /,/, fortes consonants by the usual symbols for unvoiced, lenis with voiced. tions in 1965, using a native-language Question/Response field technique.3 It was done with a minimum of grammatical or syntactic analysis. Whole questions, and question-plus-response, were considered as units, and examined for semantic stability. The process was essentially one of disambiguating questions so as to render them stable queries for eliciting specific types of information.