International Collaboration
Recently Published Documents





2021 ◽  
pp. 105345122110475
Regina R. Brandon ◽  
Robbie J. Marsh ◽  
Therese M. Cumming

There is a call for today’s teachers to be globally literate, as their student populations become more diverse. Immersive experiences in other countries with international colleagues and students can support the development of global literacy and culturally responsive practice. Preservice special education teachers do not often have opportunities to have these experiences. The authors use examples of existing international collaborations in special education to illustrate a variety of ways that preservice and in-service teachers can experience international collaboration.

2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (18) ◽  
pp. 10326
David Christian Finger ◽  
Camelia Draghici ◽  
Dana Perniu ◽  
Marija Smederevac-Lalic ◽  
Rares Halbac-Cotoara-Zamfir ◽  

Environmental Education is essential to promote awareness and facilitate the development of environmental citizens. To contribute to the enhancement of environmental awareness, Iceland, Serbia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, and Romania have collaborated in joint educational projects which aim at building capacities on sustainable development, delivering environmental teaching lectures, and developing open educational resources. This article presents past and ongoing collaborations between the mentioned countries, assesses the status of environmental education, and highlights the benefits of international collaboration. For this purpose, information on environmental courses in representative universities from each country was collected, SWOT analyses were performed in each country, and a survey among potential students was carried out. The presented analysis reveals that international collaboration raises environmental awareness and increases the likelihood of becoming environmental citizens.

2021 ◽  
pp. 026921552110432
Stefano Negrini ◽  
William Mark Magnus Levack ◽  
Thorsten Meyer ◽  
Carlotte Kiekens

Purpose: Responding to a recent editorial arguing against defining rehabilitation, we discuss the reasons for developing a classification of rehabilitation for research purposes, its philosophical background and some of the possible risks. Why define: Science requires the definition and classification of phenomena to allow replication of experiments and studies, and to allow interpretation and use of the findings. As understanding increases, the definitions can be refined. Defining rehabilitation does run the risk of excluding some interventions or practices that are either considered rehabilitation (perhaps wrongly) or are rehabilitation interventions; when identified, these errors in definition can be remedied. Defining rehabilitation for research purposes should not inhibit but could (possibly) orient research. Risk of not: Without a definition, rehabilitation will remain in a permanent limbo. Experts will (apparently) know what it is, while others are left guessing or failing to comprehend or recognise it. This uncertainty may reassure some people, because all possible interventions are included; we argue that it downgrades the understanding of our field because interventions that are not rehabilitation are, nonetheless, called rehabilitation. In an era of international collaboration, and of undertaking systematic reviews with metanalysis, we need a shared definition. Conclusion: Terminology is often controversial, but definition enables progress in understanding such that terms themselves can evolve over time.

F1000Research ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 10 ◽  
pp. 827
Ewert Aukes ◽  
James Wilsdon ◽  
Gonzalo Ordóñez-Matamoros ◽  
Stefan Kuhlmann

The world is currently dealing with one of the most severe health, economic and social crises in recent memory, through coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Scholars are converging on the perspective that traditional means of addressing these crises have served their time. On the additional backdrop of a global political landscape in transition, realising a post-pandemic recovery will require new modes of international collaboration with scientific knowledge and expertise figuring more prominently. A smart approach to science diplomacy—to global resilience through knowledge-based cooperation—does not prescribe the content, but rather focuses on the process of science-based international exchange. The new Protocol for Science Diplomacy presented in this policy brief inspires the alignment of shared, cosmopolitan interests and their application to cross-border societal challenges. It comprises a set of 12 procedural and infrastructural principles with which actors can create a space for constructive and productive science diplomacy interactions. These principles are: sensitivity; inclusiveness; transparency; deliberation; reciprocity; complementarity & manoeuvrability; legitimacy; alignment; evaluation; capacities; capabilities; trust. Our Protocol for Science Diplomacy identifies ground rules for international scientific and policy collaboration that enable us, inter alia, to make meaningful steps towards tackling the United Nations’ (UN) Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) by their 2030 deadline. As such, it offers a roadmap for science diplomacy in the next decade and beyond.

2021 ◽  
Vol 2021 ◽  
pp. 1-7
Mona Rajeh ◽  
Waad Khayat

Objectives. The level of evidence (LOE) of Saudi dental research from 2000 to 2020 was evaluated, and factors associated with the LOE were determined. Methods. This study was a systematic review. PubMed, Web of Science, and Medline databases were utilized to retrieve available dental articles published in English between January 2000 and May 2020. The inclusion criteria consisted of clinical studies conducted in Saudi Arabia with at least one Saudi dental affiliation. The retrieved eligible articles were evaluated independently by two reviewers using a modified Oxford LOE scale. The LOE of the studies was compared between the last two decades. Results. Of the 7237 articles identified, 1557 articles met the inclusion criteria. Approximately 78% of the published articles reported Level IV evidence. A higher trend toward Level I, II, and III publications has occurred in recent years (i.e., 2010–2020). However, no statistically significant difference existed in LOE proportions between the two decades. The presence of international collaboration and high journals’ impact factor was significantly associated with a higher LOE. Conclusion. Most published dental research studies were low LOE studies (i.e., Level IV). National and international collaboration is highly encouraged as this is a factor, according to our findings, that would be a positive addition toward publishing dental research of a higher LOE in Saudi Arabia.

2021 ◽  
Caroline Verbeke ◽  
Fleur Webster ◽  
Lodewijk Brosens ◽  
Fiona Campbell ◽  
Marco Del Chiaro ◽  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document