Two nurses diagnosed with opioid addiction launched legal action after being found guilty of unprofessional conduct due to addiction-related behaviors. When covered by the media, their cases sparked both public and legal controversies. We are curious about the broader discursive framings that led to these strong reactions, and analyze the underlying structures of knowledge and power that shape the issue of opioid addiction in the profession of nursing through a critical discourse analysis of popular media, legal blogs and hearing tribunals. We argue that addiction in nursing is framed as personal choice, as a failure in the moral character of the nurses, as decontextualized from addiction as disease arguments, and as an individualized issue devoid of contextual factors leading to addiction. Our investigation offers a critical case study of a nursing regulatory body that upheld popular assumptions of addiction as an autonomous, rational choice replete with individual-based consequences - a framing that is inconsistent with evidence-based practice in health-care. We put forth this critical interrogation to open up possibilities for counterdiscourses that may promote more nuanced and effective responses to the issue of addiction in nursing.

No abstract

Universal Design for Learning (UDL) strategies aim to reduce learning barriers in the classroom for all students and remove the need for students with disabilities to advocate on their own behalf. Leadership in Scholarship of Teaching and Learning has a role to play in advancing inclusive learning cultures in higher education. At the frontline of higher education delivery, faculty are best positioned to implement UDL practices. Initiatives to encourage broader implementation of UDL require an understanding of the barriers and opportunities in higher education. Published studies that investigate faculty understanding and implementation of UDL have been almost exclusively conducted in US institutions. Our study enriches the existing literature through a mixed methods approach with interviews and a faculty survey in a Canadian context. Themes revealed in our interviews were reinforced by survey findings. Many of the issues raised by faculty, including time and resource constraints, a lack of institutional support, and a lack of understanding are consistent with previous research done in the US, highlighting the systemic challenges for UDL implementation in higher education. To conclude, we explore the limits of a strictly bottom-up approach and contend, in line with recent studies, that top-down initiatives are also vital to encouraging broader implementation of UDL practices.

No abstract

No abstract