Reviews

Sam Pickering teaches English at the University of Connecticut     

Managerial behavior of college chairpersons and administrators

To explore Daft's dual-core model of educational organization, this study compares the managerial behavior of academic department chairpersons and nonacademic unit managers across 140 colleges and universities. For the study, 6,357 faculty and administrators completed questionnaires that profiled their formal leader's behavior, their work group characteristics, and their personal satisfaction. Of 54 variables submitted to discriminant analysis, 31 discriminated the bureaucratic units from the academic groups. Managers of the two types of group behave differently in ways consistent with their distinct group tasks. The empirically derived role profiles of the academic and nonacademic managers are discussed, as are the implications of the findings for institutional researchers, change agents, and trainers of college managers.This article is based in part upon a paper presented at the Seventh Annual European AIR Forum, Copenhagen, Denmark, 1985.     

Enhancing self-regulation of practice: the influence of graphing and self-evaluative standards

The purpose of this study was to examine the role of graphing of self-recorded outcomes and self-evaluative standards on the acquisition of a motoric skill with 70 college students. It was postulated that students who were provided with graduated self-evaluative standards would surpass those who were provided with absolute standards or no standards (control) in both motoric skill and in motivational beliefs (i.e., self-efficacy, attributions, and self-satisfaction). Regarding graphing of self-recorded outcomes, it was hypothesized that students who graphed their results visually would show higher dart skill and stronger motivational beliefs than participants who did not graph their results. Support was found for these hypotheses. The implications of findings of this study were discussed for instructors in terms of how the effects of self-directed practice can be enhanced.     

A Methylome‐Wide Association Study of Trajectories of Oppositional Defiant Behaviors and Biological Overlap With Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder

In 671 mother–child (49% male) pairs from an epidemiological birth cohort, we investigated (a) prospective associations between DNA methylation (at birth) and trajectories (ages 7–13) of oppositional defiant disorder (ODD), and the ODD subdimensions of irritable and headstrong; (b) common biological pathways, indexed by DNA methylation, between ODD trajectories and attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD); (c) genetic influence on DNA methylation; and (d) prenatal risk exposure associations. Methylome‐wide significant associations were identified for the ODD and headstrong, but not for irritable. Overlap analysis indicated biological correlates between ODD, headstrong, and ADHD. DNA methylation in ODD and headstrong was (to a degree) genetically influenced. DNA methylation associated with prenatal risk exposures of maternal anxiety (headstrong) and cigarette smoking (ODD and headstrong).     

Student Perceptions of Chemistry Laboratory Learning Environments, Student–Teacher Interactions and Attitudes in Secondary School Gifted Education Classes in Singapore

This study investigated the chemistry laboratory classroom environment, teacher–student interactions and student attitudes towards chemistry among 497 gifted and non-gifted secondary-school students in Singapore. The data were collected using the 35-item Chemistry Laboratory Environment Inventory (CLEI), the 48-item Questionnaire on Teacher Interaction (QTI) and the 30-item Questionnaire on Chemistry-Related Attitudes (QOCRA). Results supported the validity and reliability of the CLEI and QTI for this sample. Stream (gifted versus non-gifted) and gender differences were found in actual and preferred chemistry laboratory classroom environments and teacher–student interactions. Some statistically significant associations of modest magnitude were found between students' attitudes towards chemistry and both the laboratory classroom environment and the interpersonal behaviour of chemistry teachers. Suggestions for improving chemistry laboratory classroom environments and the teacher–student interactions for gifted students are provided.