Forensic psychiatry, of all the specialties in medicine, needs its own strong academic core. Academic forensic psychiatry is founded in scientific research, with its systematic approach to making and recording observations, formulating hypotheses from them, testing those hypotheses with new observations and accumulating the most comprehensive picture possible in a way that is transparent and replicable. An academic approach supports application of scientific principles as strongly in the individual case as in developing relevant collective knowledge, is able to make links between them and can communicate all this effectively within and outside the specialty. This requires highly developed and defined specialist training. Academic forensic psychiatry in this sense is the business of all forensic psychiatrists. In order for forensic psychiatry to thrive, however, it is vital that some forensic psychiatrists further specialise in academic work in terms of additional training, time and immersion in skills that support accurate scientific questioning and testing and, ultimately, the capacity to innovate and keep this cycle active.

This chapter focuses on one major change in African American poetry of the 1980s: the propping open of doors to predominantly white cultural institutions for (certain) African American poets. The author refers to three overlapping sites of power: (historically white) academic institutions that train critics and poets, which began embracing more Black students and faculty; publishing venues that selectively promoted certain Black poets, which include presses operated by white universities; and white-run awards-granting bodies, which started to honor a few more Black poets. All shifted their approaches to Black poetry throughout the 1980s – both helping and hindering Black poets.

This chapter examines careers in and the structure of, academic archaeology – that based in universities, museums, and related educational organizations. The chapter includes discussion of specialist and technical roles in this area of employment.

The goal of this chapter is to offer a candid snapshot of what it’s like to be a woman in modern academic Psychology and Neuroscience. We also hope to generate conversation around shared experiences and provide a vision into a more equitable path forward for women in our field. By academic Psychology, we mean careers focused on research and teaching in the fields of psychological science or neuroscience. We are most directly speaking to careers that are housed in universities, colleges, or research institutes, but of course the issues we discuss are not unique to those places (or even Psychology or academia, more specifically).

So as not to face potential disruption, universities will need to actively engage in the sector’s evolution as opposed to passively observing its revolution. To stay competitive, they will need to adapt pedagogy and content to ongoing changes lest they risk their irrelevance. They are advised to create occasions for relationship and community building, fostering students’ affection for and attachment to their alma mater, and to avoid the university’s being abstract in students’ minds. Instead of the current standard of one-time, early-life degrees (intermittence), lifelong learning and persistence over alumni’s entire professional careers appear to be academia’s model for the future. Universities must assure higher applicability of taught material to job requirements, as employers are increasingly launching own corporate universities offering nano- and micro-degrees. Finally, affiliation with edtech start-ups and big tech companies might be necessary to ensure the funding needed to navigate academia’s new online reality and thus bypass isolation.

The COVID-19 pandemic resulted in a change in mind-sets in many university leadership teams and faculty members worldwide, previously somewhat vulnerable to the sector's digitalization. Academia proved capable of flexibility, going beyond their reputation of being change-averse, moving entire curricula online within days. Yet, to benefit from higher education's digitalization, propelled by the pandemic, future pedagogical innovation is vital so as not to make other sectors' errors of merely transferring the offline into the online world. Moreover, higher education will need to find responses to several (further) academic, budgetary, legal, and operational issues induced by the sector's digital transformation, potentially leading to its disruption. However, higher education also must evade false ideas such as believing that physical buildings will become redundant due to academia's digitalization: On the contrary, facilities will be more critical than ever.

Adaptive learning is not new. Yet, with the rapid advances in the field of artificial intelligence and the global shift to online education, which occurred almost overnight due to the Covid-19 pandemic, adaptive learning is seen by many as a promising path to a smarter higher education. This chapter aims to shed light on both the opportunities and the challenges of the adoption of adaptive learning in higher education. The cases of universities, business schools and corporate universities adopting this approach are used to illustrate the role and benefits of adaptive learning powered by artificial intelligence at the current stage. The chapter concludes with an open call for academic experts and regulatory agencies to hold adaptive learning up as the defining shift in the future of education. It will likely become the established approach in education, filling the existing gaps in knowledge procurement.

Universities, as with other social institutions, have had to adapt to the pressures of change driven by the digital revolution. Given that education as a discipline is rooted in the very practice of transformation, it is not surprising it could play a core role in promoting and developing this new terrain; at least that was the vision in the 1990’s. Twenty years on, it appears higher education may well have missed some opportunities. The recognition of student-centred learning, while upheld in rhetoric, has failed to be realised in practice. Much of the digital influence in higher education has concentrated on technologies for content delivery to support the principle that learning is the result of teaching. In this chapter, we offer an alternative view of learning as a personal endeavour fuelled by inquiry rather than institutional compliance. We argue that emerging wearable technologies offer a new frontier into the science of learning, in ways that were previously unimaginable. We begin by addressing our rationale and some of the historical tensions in this space. This is followed by two scenarios where wearable devices were deployed by students, eager to gain a deeper understanding of the impact of stress and sleep on their academic endeavours. We believe this work illustrates the importance of physiological markers for a more student-centred approach in the practice of learning.

For many Black and Brown professors their herculean efforts to excel in academia, despite the limitations imposed by chronic interpersonal and institutional racism, can result in their humanity being overlooked. The unrelenting exigencies of teaching, researching, publishing, administrating, and mentoring all the while cultivating vibrant personal lives can amass enormous strain on their health and wellbeing. The price of being one of few professors of color in predominantly White spaces can be arduous, as conditions of isolation, exclusion, and cultural taxation further compound the psychological stress experienced. The immense value educators of color bring to institutions has been well documented, and thus attention must be given to addressing their unique experiences if their presence in the field is to be maintained, and eventually expanded. In this chapter, the author will explore the various mental health challenges faced by professionals of color in academia and propose effective strategies for addressing them.

The penultimate chapter explores the future of academic inquiry on climate and security and how the field of international relations ought to change. I explore several areas where the climate security field will need to develop new approaches and insights, mostly related to the challenges of writing about the future. This includes: how academics can be useful to policy and the need to move beyond the simple phrase of “thread multiplier”; the significance of the end of “stationarity” and what that means for scholarship going forward; the question of what baselines we use for identifying normal climatic conditions and how far back we can go to identify deep structural drivers; that scholars need to explore more fully the links between human security and state security; and that runaway climate change would make all of these security challenges worse and, hence, mitigation needs to be considered a security concern in its own right. Finally, I suggest that the broader field of political science needs to elevate climate change to a systemic structural factor like anarchy and think about what this means for the discipline and for the world.