London in space and time: Peter Ackroyd and Will Self

Copyright @ 2013 the author. This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 Unported License.This paper explores the treatment of London by two authors who are profoundly influenced by the concept of the power of place and the nature of urban space. The works of Peter Ackroyd, whose writings embody, according to Onega (1997, p. 208) “[a] yearning for mythical closure” where London is “a mystic centre of power” – spiritual, transhistorical and cultural – are considered alongside those of Will Self, who explores the city’s psychogeography as primarily a political, economic and cultural artefact. The paper draws on original interviews undertaken by the author with Ackroyd and Self. Both authors’ works are available for literary study during the 16-19 phase in the UK, and this paper explores how personal delineations of the urban environment are shaped by space and language. It goes on to consider how authors’ and students’ personal understandings of space and place can be used as pedagogical and theoretical lenses to “read” the city in the 16-19 literature classroom

Independent studies in higher education: Great expectations or hard times?

This chapter presents a case of quality enhancement (QE) focusing on the issue of the independent work students are expected to undertake during their studies in Higher Education. It draws on quantitative and qualitative data gathered as part of a large-scale research exercise involving 113 undergraduate and 128 sixth form students of English. It goes on to explore the changing nature and role of students‘ subjective expectations by presenting data gathered through individual student interviews in which students reflect upon the factors shaping their independent learning experiences. Following the trajectory of expectations illustrated in Figure 1, it sets out a range of pedagogic interventions in this process, assessing outcomes via individual student interviews

Should There Be a Specialized Ethics Code for Death-Penalty Defense Lawyers

State ethics codes based on the ABA Model Rules of Professional Conduct address lawyers\u27 work in advocacy but do not target lawyers\u27 work in particular areas of advocacy or in other specialized practice areas. For more than forty years, critics have asserted that existing ethics rules are too superficial and should be supplemented by specialized rules. This article examines the utility of specialized ethics rules for one particular sub-specialty-death-penalty defense practice. After identifying arguments for and against a specialized ethics code for death-penalty cases, the article analyzes the arguments in the context of a particular ethics dilemma that some death-penalty defense lawyers have encountered-namely, whether to pursue post-conviction relief on behalf of an ambivalent or unexpressive mentally-ill death-row inmate. The article finds persuasive reasons for courts to develop specialized rules that would provide death-penalty defense lawyers more clarity in how to address this and other ethics dilemmas. Recognizing that courts will likely remain indifferent to the idea of developing specialized ethics rules, however, the article concludes by identifying other ways for courts to mitigate the uncertainties that specialized rules would address