ORCID Profile
0000-0002-2887-8910
Current Organisation
Victoria University
Does something not look right? The information on this page has been harvested from data sources that may not be up to date. We continue to work with information providers to improve coverage and quality. To report an issue, use the Feedback Form.
In Research Link Australia (RLA), "Research Topics" refer to ANZSRC FOR and SEO codes. These topics are either sourced from ANZSRC FOR and SEO codes listed in researchers' related grants or generated by a large language model (LLM) based on their publications.
Historical Studies | Australian History (excl. Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander History)
Publisher: Cambridge University Press (CUP)
Date: 05-2015
Publisher: York University Libraries
Date: 31-12-1969
Publisher: Informa UK Limited
Date: 11-2010
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Date: 21-09-2017
Publisher: Cambridge University Press (CUP)
Date: 06-2003
DOI: 10.1017/S0022463403000225
Abstract: Although Cold War propaganda is now the subject of close scholarly scrutiny, the main method by which it was communicated – language – has been overlooked. The Malayan Emergency illustrates how the British government grappled with the issue of political terminology within the broader context of anti-communist propaganda. This article will analyse the use of political language the change from ‘bandit’ to ‘communist terrorist’ and the problems of delineating the Malayan from the international audience.
Publisher: Project MUSE
Date: 2014
Publisher: BRILL
Date: 16-03-2018
Publisher: Informa UK Limited
Date: 2015
Publisher: Informa UK Limited
Date: 12-2011
Publisher: Informa UK Limited
Date: 06-2001
DOI: 10.1080/714002895
Publisher: Informa UK Limited
Date: 07-2003
Publisher: Wiley
Date: 05-2019
DOI: 10.1111/AJPH.12563
Publisher: Informa UK Limited
Date: 08-2011
Publisher: Wiley
Date: 12-2002
Publisher: Liverpool University Press
Date: 2015
Publisher: Informa UK Limited
Date: 04-1997
Publisher: CSIRO Publishing
Date: 2000
DOI: 10.1071/HR0001310001
Publisher: Oxford University Press (OUP)
Date: 02-2015
Publisher: Informa UK Limited
Date: 03-04-2017
Publisher: Wiley
Date: 26-02-2008
Publisher: Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Date: 21-02-2020
DOI: 10.1186/S12960-019-0443-8
Abstract: Competency frameworks are being taken up by a growing number of sectors and for a broad range of applications. However, the topic of competency frameworks is characterised by conceptual ambiguity, misunderstanding and debate. Lack of consistency in the conceptualisation and use of key terminology creates a barrier to research and development, consensus, communication and collaboration, limiting the potential that competency frameworks have to deal with real workforce challenges. This paper aims to advance the field by conducting a detailed review of the literature to understand the underlying causes of conceptual differences and ergent views and proposing a re-conceptualisation of competency framework terminology for use by the health sector. A broad scoping review of literature was conducted to identify publications relating to the conceptualisation of competency frameworks and key terms, examine how they are conceptualised and determine how this evolved. In addition, a purposive s le of health-related competency frameworks was chosen to illustrate how the terms and concepts are currently being applied in the health context. Of the 4 155 records identified, 623 underwent text searches and broad quantitative analysis, and 70 were included for qualitative analysis. Quantitative analysis identified 26 key terms, which were coded under six thematic headings. Qualitative analysis using the thematic areas revealed two distinct conceptualisations of competency frameworks and their terminology emerging concurrently in the education and employment sectors, with different underpinnings and purposes. As competency frameworks have developed, these two conceptualisations intertwined, resulting in the same terms being used to convey different concepts. Examination of health-related frameworks showed that this merging of concepts is prominent, with lack of consistency in definitions and use of key terms even within a single organisation. Building on previous efforts to address the lack of conceptual clarity surrounding competency frameworks, this paper proposes a re-conceptualisation of the terminology that encompasses two distinct competency framework interpretations, using a glossary of mutually exclusive terms to differentiate concepts. The re-conceptualisation holds relevance for multiple competency framework applications within health, enabling harmonisation, clear communication, consensus-building and effective implementation of competency frameworks.
Publisher: Liverpool University Press
Date: 2018
Publisher: Informa UK Limited
Date: 2005
DOI: 10.2104/HA050040
Publisher: Informa UK Limited
Date: 30-10-2014
Publisher: Liverpool University Press
Date: 2018
Publisher: Informa UK Limited
Date: 02-09-2014
Publisher: SAGE Publications
Date: 06-2016
Publisher: Project MUSE
Date: 2017
Publisher: Informa UK Limited
Date: 09-2001
Publisher: Informa UK Limited
Date: 06-2007
Publisher: Informa UK Limited
Date: 05-2006
Publisher: Informa UK Limited
Date: 12-2013
Publisher: Wiley
Date: 06-2013
DOI: 10.1111/AJPH.12010
Publisher: Informa UK Limited
Date: 08-2012
Publisher: Informa UK Limited
Date: 05-1999
Publisher: Liverpool University Press
Date: 2010
Publisher: Liverpool University Press
Date: 2014
Publisher: Informa UK Limited
Date: 1997
Publisher: Informa UK Limited
Date: 10-2003
Publisher: Liverpool University Press
Date: 2011
Publisher: Wiley
Date: 06-2012
Publisher: Wiley
Date: 03-1998
Start Date: 06-2022
End Date: 06-2025
Amount: $215,235.00
Funder: Australian Research Council
View Funded Activity