Artifacts,Identity and Youth: A Cultural Intervention with Pacific Islander Young People Who Offend in Western Sydney,Australia

This article provides information on the evaluation of a project between the Australian Museum and the Juvenile Justice department in New South Wales, Australia, where young people who offend of Pacific Islander heritage were introduced to an extensive range of Pacific Islander cultural materials. The key assumption of the project was that young Pacific Islander people who offend struggled with cultural identity issues, and that a meaningful connection with their heritage would improve cultural knowledge and pride—thereby reducing their involvement in crime. However, this assumption was not borne out by the study's results. Firstly, the twenty‐two Pacific Islander young offender study participants were already proud of their heritage, and comfortable in their cultural identities. Secondly, though they enjoyed their visit to the museum, most did not want to visit again, so there was no sustained engagement. Thirdly, the Museum program was not designed as part of a holistic approach with multiple strategies which addressed the complex reasons for youth offending. Despite eight out of the twenty‐two participants reoffending after the Museum visit, there was enough potential for the rehabilitative intervention that the Museum was granted funding to take its program to the community and make it more user‐centered. This, it is hoped, will set it on a path towards more sustained engagement, and the potential for a greater influence on Pacific Islander youth.     

The Rise of Creative Writing Programmes

Creative writing courses are growing in universities and outside them. Publishers and agents even turn to them now as sources of promise and talent. This article describes a particularly successful MA in creative writing at Goldsmiths College in London and makes a case for the popularity and the usefulness to universities, to aspiring writers and to publishers of such courses.     

Grading ePortfolios: Tracing Two Approaches,Their Advantages,and Their Disadvantages

How does one grade an electronic portfolio? This question is one I have thought about, have enacted, and have written about, primarily in reference to ePortfolios used in writing classrooms (Yancey, McElroy, & Powers, 2013 Yancey, K. B., McElroy, S., & Powers, E. (2013). Composing, networks, and electronic portfolios: Notes toward a theory of assessing ePortfolios. In D. DeVoss & H. McKee (Eds.), Digital writing assessment and evaluation. Computers and composition. Logan, UT: Digital Press/Utah State University Press. [Google Scholar]). But what happens when the content and developmental levels are changed, in this case from an undergraduate first-year writing class to another required class, this one offered at the graduate level, Digital Revolution and Convergence Culture? Is using a scoring guide, the preferred approach in writing classes, the best approach in this new context? Or, following Moss, Girard, and Haniford (2006 Moss, P., Girard, B., & Haniford, L. (2006). Validity in educational assessment. Review of research in education 30, 109–162.[Crossref], [Web of Science ®] , [Google Scholar]), could one use outcomes to “stage a conversation” around a student's ePortfolio; if so, what might a staged conversation look like? Or what might happen if instead of using outcomes as a framework, students themselves set the terms for that conversation? Here, I consider these options, attending especially to the importance of making good judgments and of fostering learning.