Reclaiming Kindergarten: Part I. Questions about Theory and Practice

The purpose of this article is to describe the crisis that exists in kindergarten today related to maintaining developmentally and culturally appropriate practice while at the same time addressing the academic standards set forth by most states. In Part I, three questions are posed, the answers to which seek to elucidate possible solutions to this dilemma. The questions center on issues related to developmentally appropriate practice, intentional teaching, and assessment. Research and expert opinion associated to each of these areas are discussed, and examples of classroom practice are used to illustrate the effective implementation of these principles in a kindergarten classroom.     

In Defense of the Argumentativeness and Verbal Aggressiveness Scales

The Argumentativeness (ARG) Scale and Verbal Aggressiveness Scale have been used in hundreds of studies over the past quarter century. As expected, psychometric research has examined their validity. Although this article focuses on recent criticisms by Kotowski, Levine, Baker, and Bolt, some major points refute earlier criticisms. This article argues that (a) a large body of research demonstrates validity of the scales, (b) dimensionality of the scales is quite unequivocal, (c) argumentative presumption favors using the original scales (unless and until newer scales demonstrate statistically significant greater criterion variance), (d) critics of the ARG Scale's predictive validity have failed to include 4 situational components of argumentativeness theory in their testing, (e) both scales are designed and supposed to measure extensive sets of relevant behaviors over time, not individual behaviors observed once, and (f) statistical inference cannot confirm nulls, so critics' claims of "no correlation" between scale scores and observable behaviors are not scientific.     

Television director communication as perceived by production personnel

This study explored perceptions of television production crew members regarding production situations and communication behavior of a television director. Results suggest that calm communication behavior is related positively to perceived appropriateness of the director's communication, to social and task attractiveness, and to production crew outcome satisfaction. In support of attribution theory, agitated communication behavior produced more favorable evaluations in a threatening as compared to routine situation. These evaluations, however, were less favorable than the effects of a calm manner, regardless of the production situation.     

An Initiative to Broaden Diversity in Undergraduate Biomathematics Training

At North Carolina A&T State University (NCATSU), there was a critical need to better coordinate genuine research and classroom experiences for undergraduates early in their academic career. We describe the development and implementation of a faculty alliance across academic departments to increase biomathematics research opportunities for underrepresented minorities. Our faculty alliance is called the Integrative Biomathematical Learning and Empowerment Network for Diversity (iBLEND). The fundamental purpose of the iBLEND alliance was to inspire underrepresented minorities to pursue research careers by increasing the visibility of research conducted at the interface of mathematics and biology at NCATSU. Because of the many positive impacts, iBLEND gained significant buy-in from administration, faculty, and students by 1) working from the ground up with administration to promote campus-wide biomathematics research and training, 2) fostering associations between research and regular undergraduate academic courses, 3) creating and disseminating biomathematics teaching and learning modules, and 4) enhancing learning community support at the interface of mathematics and biology. Currently, iBLEND is viewed as a productive site for graduate schools to recruit underrepresented minority students having specific competencies related to mathematical biology.     

Decision‐making collaboration scale: Tests of validity

A trait Decision‐Making Collaboration Scale was discussed and examined for reliability and validity. The scale represents on‐going scale development to measure decision‐making tendencies. The premise is that individuals are generally willing or not willing to participate collaboratively in decision‐making communication interpersonally. The 13‐item measure is described. Support for validity was addressed by investigating the relationships between the decision‐making construct with argumentativeness, verbal aggression, interpersonal communication competence, and willingness to communicate. Willingness to participate in collaborative decision making was moderately related to argumentativeness, competence, and willingness to communicate in a positive manner, while slightly related to verbal aggression in a negative manner. Some construct validity was offered by asking participants to report their decision‐making tendencies and comparing these reports to their friends’ ratings of them. No significant differences were found. Implications for future research are discussed.