Showing papers by "All Saints' College published in 1983"
TL;DR: Evidence is presented which suggests that the Student Stress Inventory (Sixth Form Version) is a reliable instrument, and that it exhibits significant concurrent validity with measures of anxiety and locus of control.
Abstract: Summary. Evidence is presented which suggests that the Student Stress Inventory (Sixth Form Version) is a reliable instrument, and that it exhibits significant concurrent validity with measures of anxiety and locus of control.
11 citations
6 citations
TL;DR: In the 1970s, the Arts Council of Great Britain's Literature department distributed grants through its Grants to Writers program to book writers (mainly novelists and poets, but also biographers and critics) selected by a group of unpaid appointees as mentioned in this paper.
Abstract: Since the mid-sixties and until 198 1, the Arts Council of Great Britain's Literature department distributed grants through its Grants to Writers program to book writers (mainly novelists and poets, but also biographers and critics) selected by a group of unpaid appointees, the Literature finance committee. My study of this controversial scheme done for the Council was completed in 1979 and published in 19S1 under the title Writers and the Arts Council. It became a kind of poly se mous vehicle for very divergent perspectives on Arts Council literature policy. The Council used it to justify abandoning the original scheme and reorienting its policy towards distribution and consumption, whereas writers' representative groups pointed to the report's recommendations for expanding financial assistance to primary literary production. In order to clarify these issues it is first necessary to mention the basic thesis of the study, its political context and then to a general consideration of Arts Council intervention in the literary field. The brief for the study presented by the Council was, "to elucidate the results of the Arts Council's financial aid to individual writers, 1964-77, to provide a basis for an overall judgement as to whether directly grant-aiding individual writers is a fruitful form of subsidy of literature." It was suggested that the study address questions such as, "How much time have the grants bought?" and, "To what extent has the literary world and the public valued the work completed or undertaken?" Underlying the brief were certain behaviorist assumptions about cause and effect and perhaps also a view of social research in the field of arts policy as cost-effectiveness analysis. Rather than discuss the general deficiencies of these assumptions, it is sufficient to point out that a writing grant could not be viewed as a straightforward stimulus to literary production. And, as my enquiries revealed, most of the books subsidized by the