No abstract

No abstract

The research supervisory role is becoming increasingly complex due to issues such as diversity of students; mismatched expectations between the student, supervisor and higher education institution and shorter and specific time-bound research outcomes. The current postgraduate research supervision culture and supervision practices should change. Moving towards person-centered research supervision practices may enhance the research environment, as healthful relationships between supervisors and postgraduate students may lead to increased postgraduate research outcomes. Using a World Café, we critically reflected on our existing research supervision practices. All healthcare educators involved in postgraduate research supervision were purposively selected to participate. During the café, we explored and shared ideas in a safe space. Twelve tips emerged, which can be implemented to move existing supervision practices towards person-centered research supervision practices. We present these twelve tips from the perspective of the four constructs of person-centeredness as outlined by McCormack and McCance -pre-requisites, environment, process, and outcomes. The use of these tips may enable both supervisors and students to flourish. Avoiding routine, ritual supervision practices and embracing personcentredness, will enable supervisors to form healthful relationships and put the postgraduate student at the heart of our supervision practices.

No abstract

Key Words:Gas chromatography Capillary Theory Linearity between peak width and retention data Evaluation of GC equipment SummaryThe linearity of the relationship between OT,t2 and (1 + k)2 is studied with the view of using it for the evaluation of GC equipment. Based on appropriate analytical expressions it is concluded that in general this relationship is not linear and that practical proceduresfor column evaluation should be developed that take this non-linearity into account.Previous papers [1,2] show that since OT,t2 varies linearly with (1 + k)2, provided that 0~,~2 is independent of k. [OT,t2 is the variance, in (time)> units, of the peak as it appears on the chromatogram; Oe,t2 is the extracolumn contribution and aC,t2 = (1+k)2 0~,~2 , the column contribution to OT,t2].The aim of the present study is to establish the conditions under which 0~,~2 is sufficiently indipendent of k to warrant an analysis based on equation 1. Although completely new diagnostic tools are suggested by this analysis, practical procedures are not proposed; its exclusive aim is to provide explicit information on the behaviour of the equation 1. It is limited to gas chromatography in open tubes. TheoryDeparting from the almost axiomatic relationship [2,3] and the definitions A comparison of equations 1 and 6 indicates that the linearity of equation 6 is determined by the k-dependence H of the group (t)tm2 , and, since 1 and tm are not affected by k, only the k-dependence of H. This dependence is introduced explicity by substituting the Golay-equation (4) for H into equation 6. r-where Dm and Ds are the diffusion coefficient of the solute in, respectively, the mobile and the stationary phase, rt is the column radius, u the linear velocity of the mobile phase and df the thickness of the stationary phase liquid layer.The first is the relative size of ___ lg6 andf(k); obviouslyat large values of ~ lg6 (i.e. small values of (ScRe)2) it will (ScRep (ScRe)2 be relatively insensitive to changes in (l+k). The second is the extent of (l+k)2-dependence of f(k). This in turn is determined by the functional behaviour of f[(I+k)2] as well as the magnitude of X. The behaviour of these functions will now be investigated. The functions fl(k), f2(k) and f(k)The behaviour of fl(k) and f2(k) has previously been reported as functions of k [41. The present study concerns itself with the change of these functions with (l+k)2.