NHS parking sign

University Hospitals Bristol-NHS foundation trust

Terms and Conditions

The 'University Hospitals Bristol' parking sign is to inform patients,visitors of patients and workers that there is a parking fine of '£60 (£30 if payed within 14 days)' if they do not follow the permitted terms and conditions.A secondary purpose may be to persuade people to park their car correctly to avoid a fine.Someone will come across this sign if they are parking in the car park or driving past it as they would have to make it noticeable for drivers who may want to/thinking of parking there.Due to the Terms and Conditions being in bold, white writing over a strip of a darker colour at the top of the sign,immediatley draws your attention to it as it is different; therefore stands out from the rest of the text.This allows people to acknowledge the fact that this is important and a sign on terms and conditions of that certain car park.Although the location of the sign will be a clue as to what it is about, the public will want to read on and find out what the terms and conditions are precisely as it could effect them. As it is a sign on parking fines, people would want to engage in it due to them feeling 'pressured' into doing so and ' forced' into avoiding a fine as it is on a big notice.The photos could also suggest this as it is engaging different kinds of people; people attracted to pictures (which also summerises the text down as drivers probably wont have time to read it) and text ( people who are not driving eg. a passenger who has time to read it and are intrigued).The Target audience will be drivers finding somewhere to park however, due to some of the rules being the same in nearly every car park e.i. vehicles must be parked between the marked bay lines and if you are disabled your badge must be showing at all times, it could suggests that it is mainly aimed at new drivers or people who have not come to this car park before.The reciever (in this case people going to park in this car park) would expect the content of the sign to be clear as well as informing as people have to know exactly what the rules are.I dont think the reciever will be surprised with the content as it includes all the terms and conditions expected within a car park.By each term being in a different paragraph with a distinctive picture allows people to know what exactly each term is and that the conditions apply to all of the above, as the last paragraph is on the conditions.With the conditions being at the bottom implies that the NHS see this as the least important aspect and the terms being more.Even though your instinct will suggest that it is an important sign, underneath 'Terms and Conditions' is where they include the notice as being an 'IMPORTANT NOTICE' .This is 'shadowing' the header and will not draw as much attention because as soon as someone reads 'terms and conditions', it will makes you want to know what these are straight away as in a hospital car park especially, people will not have much time to spare.

Right at the bottom of the notice board is a small print on that if their car gets damaged in this car park, it is not the 'Total parking solutions Ltd's' fault ( unless caused by the direct negligence of them).Someone who has had their car damaged within this car park will come across this small print as they will be interested in where to get help and any way out of paying.Due to this, they will want to engage in it.Because it is more likely to be someone who has had their car damaged to engage with it, they will not need to be 'hooked' or 'persuaded' into reading it as all they care about is that their car will get sorted (mostly either free or as cheap as possible).However, they may be 'forced' into reading it as they will want to know where they lie in the terms and conditions of the incident.The primary purpose of this small print is to inform people on the terms and conditions involving a damged car and wherever or not they are in fault or the Total parking solutions are.The reciever will expect the content to be useful and helpful to them into finding help and support into sorting out their 'damaged' car.They may be surprised as it does not give much information on what they must do if there car gets 'damaged' but where to get more detail on it.This implies that the NHS and 'Total parking soloution Ltd' do not care as much on the publics property as they are in getting a fine out of them.

Class Survey: Accents and Dialects

RP	Very	Fairly	Neither…nor…	Not very	Not at all
Friendly		3	3	6	1
Intelligent	10	4
Trustworthy	1		6	1

Brummie	Very	Fairly	Neither…nor…	Not very	Not at all
Friendly		8	4	2
Intelligent			2	9	3
Trustworthy		4	7	2	1

 

Scouse	Very	Fairly	Neither…nor…	Not very	Not at all
Friendly		7	4	1(from Liverpool)
Intelligent	1 (from Liverpool)	4	5	4
Trustworthy	1	6	4	2	1

In This class survey, Recieved Pronounciation (RP) came across as being the most intelligent accent, compared to Brummie and Scouse.This is because 10 people thought RP was very intelligent, no one thinking Brummie was intelligent and only one peron believing Scouse was intelligent (with this person coming from Liverpool and therefore being biased towards her accent).This suggests that people stereotype a well-spoken accent with the person being well-educated and intelligent.

Although RP scored high on intelligence, it did not score as high on friendliness with only 3 out of 16 thinking the accent sounded freindly.This could be down to the content of which the woman was saying.However, woman are seen to have softer voices and speak in polite forms compared to men,  making this evidence not link with Lakoff's theory.Brummie was seen to be the most friendly with 8 people voting it as being fairly friendly, which is only one person more than scouse as being the most friendly. This also does not support Lakoff's theory due to the dialogue in both the Scouse and Brummie clip coming from a man.On the other hand, thier accents may seem more approachable to people due to RP being referred to the Queen and higher class people, suggesting that they may look down on 'lower classes' coming across as less friendly.

Unlike when the person from Liverpool voted her accent of Scouse being the most intelligent, when it came down to friendlyness she voted her accent as being not very friendly.This could be the case as people tend to look down on their owen accent because they believe it is not as nice as others (in this case Brummie).

None of the accent came across to people as being extremely trustworthy because only one person thought the Scouse accent and RP was very trustoworthy with the rest of the group thinking RP was niether trustworthy nor untrustworthy and 4 thinking the same with Scouse.This may be down to RP coming across as snotty and vein due to the stereotypes and people wuth the accent pronounces their words perfectly, and the scouseman being hard to understand but at the same time is a nice accent to listen to as its so unique.

Brummie scored the lowest overall on trustworthy with 7 suggesting it is neither trustworthy nor untrustworthy and one thinking it is not at all trustworthy.This could be because it is a harsh accent and due to it being a mans accent, being very mascaline and dominate down to the dominence model,Therefore attimidating.

Lave and Wenger-community of practice

Communities of practice are groups of people who share a concern or a passion for something they do and learn how to do it better as they interact regularly.

•  Communities of practice are formed by people who engage in a process of collective learning in a shared domain of human endeavour(try hard to achieve something): a tribe learning to survive, a band of artists seeking new forms of expression, a group of engineers working on similar problems, a clique of pupils defining their identity in the school.
•  Lave and Wenger made a basic arguement that communities of practice are everywhere and that we are generally involved in a number of them in everyday life at school, work and may more.
• This learning is not always intentional like the dominance model and how men dominate conversations due to their (precieved) superior status.

In 1991 Jean Lave and Etienne Wenger first used the term community in practice when discussing the notion of legitamate peripheral participation ,which describes how newcomers become experienced members and eventually old timers of a community of practice.In 1998 Wenger extended to concept and applied it to other domains, such as organisations.

There are three required components of community of practice which changed from Mutural Engagement,Joint Enterprose and Shared Repertoire in 1998 to the Domain,Community and Practice in 2002:

1.Mutual Engagement: Firstly, through participation in the community, members establish norms and build collaborative relationships; this is termed mutual engagement. These relationships are the ties that bind the members of the community together as a social entity.

2.Joint Enterprise: Secondly, through their interactions, they create a shared understanding of what binds them together; this is termed the joint enterprise. The joint enterprise is (re)negotiated by its members and is sometimes referred to as the 'domain' of the community.
3.Shared Repertoire: Finally, as part of its practice, the community produces a set of communal resources, which is termed their shared repertoire; this is used in the pursuit of their joint enterprise and can include both literal and symbolic meanings.

Cycle of Becoming a CoP

1.The domain: A CoP has an identity defined by a shared domain of interest ( star trek fans, Manchester United supporters, middle school history teachers and more).It is not jsut a network of people or a club of friends.Membership requires commitment to the domain.
2.The community: In pursuing their interest in their domain, members engage in joint activities and discussions, help each other, and share information. They build relationships that enable them to learn from each other.
3. The practice: A community of practice is not merely a community
 of interest—people who like certain kinds of movies, for instance.
 Members of a community of practice are practitioners. They develop
 a shared repertoire of resources: experiences, stories, tools, ways of
addressing recurring problems—in short, a shared practice.
 This takes time and sustained interaction.


- Communities of practice are formed by people who engage in a process of collective learning in a shared domain of human endeavour(try hard to achieve something): a tribe learning to survive, a band of artists seeking new forms of expression, a group of engineers working on similar problems, a clique of pupils defining their identity in the school.
- Lave and Wenger made a basic arguement that communities of practice are everywhere and that we are generally involved in a number of them in everyday life at school, work and may more.
- This learning is not always intentional like the dominance model and how men dominate conversations due to their (precieved) superior status as men my not now the do that.It also links to peoples accents and how every accent is different to the other, allowing people to make stereotypical judgements on that group,like CoP and how people identify themsleves with that community.



In 1991 Jean Lave and Etienne Wenger first used the term community in practice when discussing the notion of legitamate peripheral participation ,which describes how newcomers become experienced members and eventually old timers of a community of practice.They wanted to understand how learning occurs outside the classroom In 1998 Wenger extended to concept and applied it to other domains, such as organisations.It first was a theory of learning and later as part of the field of knowledge management.
They found that when newcomers join an established group or community, they spend some time initially observing and perhaps performing simple tasks in basic roles as they learn how the group works and how they can participate.This links to how people change their socialect  to fit into a new group and their ideolect so people do not see them as an outsider and part of their group.

http://infed.org/mobi/jean-lave-etienne-wenger-and-communities-of-practice/

http://www.learning-theories.com/communities-of-practice-lave-and-wenger.html