Latest news with #BathSpaUniversity
BBC News
10-07-2025
- Health
- BBC News
Music meets nature in Surrey care home study
A care home has appointed a 'Musician-in-Residence' in a pioneering study exploring how outdoor music-making can benefit older people and those with at the Huntington & Langham Estate in Hindhead, Surrey, enjoy outdoor activities from music scholar Stuart Wood as part of the project examines how music and nature together can boost wellbeing, social connection, and emotional expression in care Wood said he hoped to understand how playing music outdoors "can foster social connection, emotional expression, and overall health in later life." The NHS says music in a care setting can help "reduce anxiety and depression, help maintain speech and language, is helpful at the end of life, enhances quality of life and has a positive impact on carers".It is also acknowledged that spending time outdoors can have a positive impact on the cognitive, emotional, and physical wellbeing of older people. Mr Wood's project explores how outdoors music can further enhance social connection, uplift mood, and support mental and physical health within care home communities. The study will form part of his Visiting Research Fellowship at Bath Spa University's School of Music and Performing will also share insights from this project with music students and post-graduate Wood said: "What we don't know is what happens when you bring together playing percussion and doing that outdoors, so this project is asking that question."Sarah Chapman, the director of Huntington & Langham Estate, said she was "curious about the possibilities and the benefits of combining music and nature".Findings from this week-long pilot study may inform a larger, international research project planned for later this year, with results expected to be published in 2026.
The Guardian
15-06-2025
- Business
- The Guardian
‘Modest fashion' headed for mainstream despite political hostility, say experts
Fashion influenced by Islam and other religions is expected to become 'mainstream' globally, in spite of politicians singling out the burqa and the hijab, as the rise of 'modest fashion' is powered by influencers, luxury brands and big tech. The Conservative leader, Kemi Badenoch, has said employers should be able to ban staff from wearing face coverings, before adding that she was not in favour of a government ban. Her remarks came days after the Reform MP Sarah Pochin asked the prime minister, Keir Starmer, if he would ban the burqa, a veil which covers the face and body, following France's lead. Clothing worn by some Muslim women has become a lightning rod for arguments about integration, personal liberty, women's rights and Islamophobia on both sides of the Channel. A French ban on children under 15 wearing the hijab was proposed last month, and in 2023, France banned girls in state schools from wearing the abaya, the loose-fitting robe worn by some Muslim women. Nonetheless, recent research by Bath Spa University found that 'persistent and growing demand' for modest fashion internationally – typified by looser styles which cover the limbs with a high neckline – was driven by Muslim consumers and Instagram users, with Amazon and Farfetch emerging as market leaders at the affordable and luxury ends of the market respectively. Bournemouth University's Dr Samreen Ashraf, who has pioneered UK research into modest fashion, said its growth was also driven by women's desire to avoid objectification. She said the market remained underserved, with issues around clear labelling from big brands and affordability with smaller suppliers. 'It's not just women with strong religious beliefs,' she added. Women who have faced body shaming or body dysmorphia, who don't have any belief, turn towards modest fashion's more flowing designs. 'Reports have suggested growth of the European modest clothing market from €56.8bn to €72.5bn between 2021 and 2025 – 17.2% of that is UK, of which 6.5% identify themselves as Muslim. That has been one of the reasons why there's been an upward turn. 'Also, with social media, people are feeling: 'I can fully express my religious or cultural identity.'. Especially when the likes of M&S and Asos and Uniqlo and H&M are also offering modest clothing. 'It's not just one religion however, but all faiths, and also empowerment: that if I don't want to reveal my body to others, why should I? Blunt statements from people in power don't serve any good purpose to women. Individual liberty, respect and tolerance are British values.' Bath Spa University's 2025 research found that leading brands' production of hijab and Ramadan lines showed 'the evolution of modest fashion into a mainstream fashion subculture'. Significantly, Muslim influencers on TikTok, many of whom focus on modest fashion, exceeded 125m views in 2023, says the growth strategy research firm DinarStandard, which projects that 30% of the world's 15- to 29-year-olds will be Muslim by 2030. The purchasing power of Muslim shoppers – including from wealthy Gulf states – is credited with leading luxury brands to enter the space, joining independent Muslim retailers and female entrepreneurs worldwide. The aesthetic overlaps with 'quiet luxury' and 'old money' styles, with 'longer hemlines' in common, according to Vogue Arabia. A 2023, Bournemouth University study, led by Ashraf, found 'increasing stigma … associated with Islam post 9/11' had led Muslims to adopt a stronger sense of identity including through 'choosing modest clothing items'. After Pochin's comments, Muslim Women's Network said women who wore the burqa, or other religious dress, were 'simply exercising their fundamental rights to freedom of expression and belief', while the Muslim Council of Britain said 'lazy tropes' were being used to malign a 'proudly British' community.
Daily Mail
13-06-2025
- Business
- Daily Mail
University WFH employee sacked for claiming she had worked five hours when she had in fact logged on for 11 minutes loses unfair dismissal case
A senior university employee, who worked from home, was sacked after claiming to have worked for five hours, despite having logged in for only 11 minutes. Sharon Wiltshire was sacked from her senior finance co-ordinator role at Bath Spa University after bosses found 'major discrepancies' in 53 of the hours she had logged on her timesheets. It was heard during a tribunal, held in Bristol, that these inconsistencies only appeared when the senior finance staff member worked remotely. The Bath Spa University employee offered various explanations, many of which were disproved by bosses, before claiming her data had been 'altered'. She was sacked after management found that she was guilty of falsifying her timesheets but Ms Wiltshire took the institution to a tribunal, alleging unfair dismissal. But, her claims have since been dismissed in their entirety by an employment judge who found that her bosses had a 'genuine reason' to fire the senior employee. Employment Judge Manjit Hallen said it was 'more likely' Ms Wiltshire, who had been working for the university since April 2017, hadn't been 'working at all times' when at home. It was heard that as a part of her role, Ms Wiltshire was in charge of the day-to-day finance tasks of the institution, which is mostly known for its focus on the creative arts and humanities. In the summer of 2023, the software used by the finance department was changed, which Ms Wiltshire found 'very difficult'. Later that year, concerns were raised over Ms Wiltshire's 'performance and wellbeing'. It was later heard the co-ordinator had refused to undertake tasks normally and there were 'incidents of rudeness' from her. In light of this, Ms Wiltshire took some time off work but upon her return, her performance 'did not improve' as she continued refusing to undertake tasks allocated to her. In December, Head of Finance Gail Boulton conducted a review into the finance team as the service provided by them was 'below the standard expected' and 'needed to be improved'. As part of this, Ms Wiltshire was asked to log the tasks she was undertaking and how long these took to complete. But, it was heard that after a few days, Ms Wiltshire refused to complete the form. The tribunal heard that during the investigations, Ms Boulton had grown concerned that the time logged did not correlate with her timesheets. It was said that the 'most major discrepancies' appeared when Ms Wiltshire had been working from home. Ms Boulton found that in an 11-week period, the co-ordinator had on 10 occasions recorded that she had started work earlier than she had logged on. On six occasions she had recorded finishing later than she had logged off. On four dates, she indicated she that she worked remotely outside of normal working hours - when there was 'no evidence' of this. The tribunal heard that when Ms Wiltshire was working from the office, the IT Logs and timesheets matched 'almost perfectly'. After discovering these discrepancies, Ms Boulton took advice on what to do, and it was decided that an investigatory meeting would take place. Ms Wiltshire was suspended on full pay and was invited to a full disciplinary hearing to consider the allegation that she had 'falsified' her flexi time records. During the meeting, the co-ordinator alleged that her timesheets had been 'altered' after she provided various different explanations as to why there were discrepancies. She told the disciplinary panel that to the best of her knowledge, the hours declared on her time sheet over the 11-week period were 'true and accurate'. But it was ultimately found that Ms Wiltshire had falsified her timesheets, and she was dismissed on February 29 last year for gross misconduct. She was sacked and later took the university to tribunal on the basis of an unfair dismissal, which ahas since been quashed by an employment judge. Judge Hallen concluded the institution had a 'genuine reason' to dismiss Ms Wiltshire, saying: ' I find that the [university] believed that [Ms Wiltshire] to be guilty of falsification of timesheets. 'In cross examination, [Ms Wiltshire] accepted that falsification of timesheets would amount to serious misconduct if the [university] concluded that the Claimant was guilty of falsifying her timesheets. '[Bath Spa University's] disciplinary procedure, among other things, made clear that 'Theft, fraud or deliberate falsification of records' if proven amounted to gross misconduct. 'Therefore, I find that the reason for dismissal was conduct in this case.' The judge said said explanations offered by Ms Wiltshire has to the discrepancies were 'insufficient'. 'It was more likely that [Ms Wiltshire] was not working at all times when at home especially in the morning when she said she was working,' she said. 'I find that dismissal for gross misconduct in this case was within the band of penalties.' 'It is clear to me that the decision to dismiss was reasonable for the following reasons... [Ms Wiltshire] was guilty of falsifying work time for which she was paid. 'Falsification is dishonest in nature and strikes at the heart of the relationship of trust and confidence.'
Daily Mail
09-06-2025
- Health
- Daily Mail
Social media curfews for children WON'T work - and could even create divides in friendships and lead to isolation, experts warn
The government's proposed social media curfew won't make children any safer online, experts have warned. Ministers are considering implementing an 'app cap', to reduce teenagers' exposure to harmful online content. However, scientists have told MailOnline that there is no evidence to suggest these restrictions will have any positive effects. In fact, such restrictions could actually harm children by increasing isolation and facing more social problems during the day, the experts say. Technology Secretary Peter Kyle suggested children's social media time could be cut down by law to two hours per day outside of school time and before 10 pm. Studies have shown that using social media shortly before going to bed can lead to poor sleep patterns, falling academic achievement, and poor mental health. While that might make a curfew appealing, the scientific evidence suggests that curfews don't actually help children reduce their screen time or get more sleep. Professor Peter Etchells, an expert on the effects of digital technology from Bath Spa University, told MailOnline: 'If we're worried that social media is harmful, bans don't fix those problems - they just delay access.' The idea of a social media curfew has been raised as a possible solution to the serious harms that can be caused by excessive social media use. A study of nearly 10,000 teenagers aged between 13 and 16 found that excessive social media use disrupts positive activities like sleep while increasing exposure to harmful content, especially in the form of cyberbullying. This can lead to teenagers experiencing increased anxiety, depression, falling grades and even physical health issues. A recent survey conducted by BSI found that 50 per cent of British young people felt that a social media curfew would improve their lives. Likewise, there is very strong evidence that taking breaks from social media can have pronounced positive impacts. Dr Rachel Kent, a leading digital health expert from King's College London and host of the podcast Digital Health Diagnosed, told MailOnline: 'There is a wealth of evidence that suggests restrictions and boundaries can be incredibly beneficial. 'Short periods of time away from our devices can drastically reduce the stress and anxiety that comes from increased screen time.' Dr Kent says that the curfew would be a 'good thing' because it signals to children that they need to have boundaries in their relationship with technology. However, as Dr Kent acknowledges, a curfew would be extremely difficult and highly impractical to implement at a national level. It isn't clear how the Government intends to enforce any proposed curfew, but it is likely that many 'digitally native' children would find a way around any restriction. In 2011, South Korea implemented the 'shutdown law' which prevented under-16s from playing online video games between midnight and 6am. Years later, research showed that children were only getting 1.5 minutes of extra sleep per night and had simply shifted their online activity to other points in the day, leading to the ban being repealed in 2021. Professor Etchells says: 'It's not clear that it had any positive effect, even though at face value it feels like it should work. 'I think curfews feel like they are a good solution, but we don't have good evidence to suggest that they would work in the way that we want them to.' Recently, a Youth Select Committee report on the effects of social media found that social media bans were 'neither practical nor effective'. Experts have also raised concerns that a ban might create inadvertent consequences that cause more harm than good. WHAT ARE THE GUIDELINES FOR CHILD SCREEN TIME? There are no official guidelines for screen time limits. But there are calls for interventions to be put in place due to growing concern about the impact of screen time, and social media use, on the mental health and well-being of young people. The Royal College of Pediatrics and Child Health and American Association of Pediatrics give guidance for parents: For children younger than 18 months, avoid use of screen media. Parents of children 18 to 24 months of age who want to introduce digital media should choose high-quality programming, and watch it with their children. For children ages 2 to 5 years, limit screen use to 1 hour per day of high-quality programs. Parents should view media with children to help them understand what they are seeing. Designate media-free times. Social media expert Rhea Freeman told MailOnline: 'For everything that's bad about social media, there are many good things too- finding like-minded people, chatting to friends, connection to family. 'Restrictions could potentially create divides in friendships and lead to isolation if people's allocated usage doesn't line up, I could see this being an issue.' Likewise, studies conducted among university students found that interventions designed to limit social media use led to negative effects like fear of missing out (FOMO). However, experts' biggest concern with the potential curfew is that this restriction doesn't solve the underlying problem of harmful content on social media As Professor Etchells points out, bans and curfews only delay access to social media rather than making the internet any safer for children. The Online Safety Act has passed into law, and from this year will require tech platforms to follow new Ofcom-issued codes of practice to keep users safe online, particularly children. However, experts say that adding a curfew won't solve the gaps and weaknesses of this regulation. Dr Kent says: 'I would argue that the curfew misses the point. The point is about making sure that the tech companies are taking accountability for the circulation of harmful content, moderating it, censoring it. What is the Online Safety Act? The Online Safety Act is a set of laws intended to protect children online. The act places a duty of care on online platforms, making them responsible for protecting users from harmful content. Sites must take measures to remove harmful or misleading content and change their algorithms to avoid sharing pornography and material promoting suicide or eating disorders They will also be required to introduce 'highly effective' checks to block under-18s accessing age-restricted sites. Ofcom has the power to fine technology firms up to £18 million or 10 per cent of their global revenue if they breach their duties under the landmark Online Safety Act. However, the act has been criticised for not doing enough to keep children safe from addictively designed apps. 'Tech companies need to be held to account and the government needs to be enforcing this.' Mr Kyle was asked on Sunday morning whether he would look at limiting the time children spend on social media to two hours per app after the Sunday People and Mirror reported the measure was being considered by ministers. 'I'm trying to think how we can break some of the addictive behaviour and incentivise more of the healthy developmental… and also the good communicative side of online life,' Mr Kyle told the BBC's Sunday With Laura Kuenssberg show. This came after the government was criticised by the father of a teen who took her own life after viewing harmful content. Mr Ian Russell, whose 14-year-old daughter Molly died in 2017, said that 'sticking plasters' would not solve the problem of harmful content online. Andrew Burrows, CEO of the Molly Rose Foundation, told MailOnline: 'It's welcome to hear Peter Kyle look to strengthen online safety protections, but these measures would not change the dial on the harmful content that continues to be bombarded at children. 'Unless Ministers fix the structural issues that have hamstrung the Online Safety Act, even if it is effective at reducing time spent on platforms, a code of practice on addictive design will be just another sticking plaster.' What experts would like to see instead is more focus on educating children and carers on how to stay safe online and manage their own social media usage. Children should be taught how to recognise harmful content online and know what to do when they encounter it, the experts argue. Professor Etchells says: 'What we need to be talking more about is how we better prepare children and young people for a world saturated with technology. 'Hard-and-fast bans don't have much weight of evidence behind them to support them. But we do know that talking to kids, developing their digital literacy and resiliency skills, developing their communication skills and support networks - these are things which will lead to more sustainable long-term outcomes.' The Department for Science Innovation and Technology has been contacted for comment. Children as young as two are using social media, research from charity Barnardo's has suggested. Internet companies are being pushed to do more to combat harmful content online but parents can also take steps to alter how their children use the web. Here are some suggestions of how parents can help their children. Both iOS and Google offer features that enable parents to filter content and set time limits on apps. For iOS devices, such as an iPhone or iPad, you can make use of the Screen Time feature to block certain apps, content types or functions. On iOS, this can be done by going to settings and selecting Screen Time. For Android, you can install the Family Link app from the Google Play Store. Talk to your children Many charities, including the NSPCC, say talking to children about their online activity is vital to keep them safe. Its website features a number of tips on how to start a conversation with children about using social media and the wider internet, including having parents visit sites with their children to learn about them together and discussing how to stay safe online and act responsibly. There are tools available for parents to learn more about how social media platforms operate. Net Aware, a website run in partnership by the NSPCC and O2, offers information about social media sites, including age requirement guidance. The World Health Organisation recommends parents should limit young children to 60 minutes of screen time every day. The guidelines, published in April, suggest children aged between two and five are restricted to an hour of daily sedentary screen time.
Daily Mail
30-05-2025
- Business
- Daily Mail
Criminology lecturer who boasts she is 'UK's poshest thief' avoids jail despite stealing Le Creuset cookware, premium steaks, wine, and boutique gin in M&S and garden centre sprees
An ex-criminology lecturer who styles herself as the 'UK's poshest thief' has avoided prison after four-figure theft sprees which included stealing Le Creuset cookware. Upmarket thieves Pauline Al Said and her husband Mark Wheatcroft also seized premium steaks, wine and boutique gin. They have now been fined £2,500 between them for the daylight raids on a garden centre and a branch of Marks and Spencer. Prosecutors did not appear in court ahead of the punishments being handed down. The judge ruling on their fate described how shoplifters walking out of supermarkets with 'full trolley loads' was becoming 'more and more common' with the public calling for 'appropriate sentences'. However, he decided against a custodial sentence and decided to impose a financial penalty after concluding Al Said, 35, would not comply with community service. Since being convicted of the crimes last year, the former senior criminology lecturer at Bath Spa University has nicknamed herself the 'UK's poshest thief' on her biography on X, previously Twitter. A court heard how the pair had visited a garden centre, armed with a de-tagging device, before trying to steal high-value spirits and cast iron utensils. The couple, seen here outside Winchester Crown Court, have now been fined £2,500 between them for daylight raids on a garden centre and a branch of Marks and Spencer When they were asked to come back into the store by a shop detective, who had seen them leave without paying on CCTV, Wheatcroft, 56, 'struck' the employee. Almost a year later Al Said was again caught shoplifting, this time from a branch of Marks and Spencer where she had piled 33 thick-cut sirloin, rib eye and fillet steaks into her trolley. She also had several bottles of red and white wine when she was spotted by undercover security guards. The two thefts were valued at £581.48 and £570.42, respectively. The pair have now been sentenced at Portsmouth Crown Court after Al Said was found guilty of two counts of theft and Wheatcroft was convicted of one count of theft and one count of assault following last year's trial. Representing themselves, the couple from Southsea in Hampshire claimed their actions were on the 'lower end' when it came to harm. Sentencing, Judge Keith Cutler said: 'There has been some planning and a threat of use of force. 'I am satisfied this is not a case for a community order for Wheatcroft. I am satisfied it is not a case for Al Said to have a community order - I would not see her complying with unpaid work. 'The best way of dealing with it is by a financial penalty.' He described the garden centre raid as a 'serious theft', adding: 'Wholesale walking out from a shop with a trolley load of items is becoming more and more common. 'The public have called for courts to impose appropriate sentences.' Prosecution lawyers did not attend the sentencing hearing, and it emerged the couple will not have to pay towards the costs of their three-week trial at Salisbury Crown Court in Wiltshire last July. Criticising the prosecution, Judge Cutler has now said: 'Wheatcroft and Al Said have turned up but no one from the prosecution has attended. 'There is no summary from the prosecution - the prosecution have simply washed their hands of this case for reasons I do not understand or accept.' A jury heard last year that the first theft took place at Old Barn Nurseries in Horsham, West Sussex, on December 14 2021. Laura Duff, prosecuting, said loss prevention officer John Dunkling 'became aware' of a female shopper pushing a trolley around. Mr Dunkling looked at the store's CCTV and saw Al Said walking toward the shop's exit with the two bags, without paying. On her way out of the store, Al Said was stopped by another member of staff who found the shopping bags contained £400-worth of high-value spirits including Mermaid brand gin and spiced rum. The second bag contained more bottles of alcohol, Le Creuset cookware and a Le Creuset condiment set. Le Creuset is a popular French-Belgian maker of high-end cast iron cookware. The couple were asked to go back into the store and it was at this point that Wheatcroft became 'verbally aggressive' and threatened to punch Mr Dunkling, it was heard - before Wheatcroft then 'made contact with his back'. It was heard that Al Said was armed with a security tag remover which she had used to snip off and discard tags around the store. The second incident took place on September 30 2022, with Ms Duff telling how Al Said was seen walking around a Marks and Spencer store in Winchester, Hampshire. An undercover security detective spotted her loading 'packets of meat' into a trolley. Al Said tried to run away outside the outlet after security followed her but another guard 'prevented further escape', before the freezer bags in her trolley were shown to contain 33 steaks. Also in her possession were six bottles of red wine and three bottles of white wine, with investigators finding she stole M&S products worth a total ££570.42. Al Said was fined £750 for each theft offence and Wheatcroft was ordered to pay £750 for the charge of shoplifting and £250 for the assault. The couple were told they could each be sentenced to 45 days in prison if they fail to pay the penalties by December 1 this year.
