Building Women’s Innovation Capacities Through Undergraduate Experiences

Research in Higher Education - This study examines how collegiate climates and practices can promote innovation capacities among an international longitudinal sample of undergraduate women. Using a...     

Do more hours in center-based care cause more externalizing problems? A cross-national replication study

Whether high quantities of center-based care cause behavior problems is a controversial question. Studies using covariate adjustment for selection factors have detected relations between center care and behavior problems, but studies with stronger internal validity less often find such evidence. We examined whether within-child changes in hours in center-based care predicted changes in externalizing problems in toddlers and preschoolers (N = 10,105; 49% female; data collection 1993–2012) in seven studies, including from Germany, Netherlands, Norway, two from Canada and two from the U.S. Race/ethnicity data were only collected in the United States (57% and 80% White; 42% and 13% African-American; 1.2% and 5% Latinx). Meta-analyses showed no association (r = .00, p = .88) between hours in center-based care and externalizing problems.     

User community vs. producer innovation development efficiency: A first empirical study

In this paper we report upon a first empirical exploration of the relative efficiency of innovation development by product users vs. product producers. In a study of over 50 years of product innovation in the whitewater kayaking field, we find users in aggregate were approximately 3× more efficient at developing important kayaking product innovations than were producers in aggregate. We speculate that this result is driven by what we term “efficiencies of scope” in problem-solving. These can favor an aggregation of many user innovators, each spending a little, over fewer producer innovators benefitting from higher economies of scale in product development. We also note that the present study explores only one initial point on what is likely to be a complex efficiency landscape.     

Evaluation of a specific test in cross-country skiing

Six Danish male cross-country skiers were studied during the end-of-summer and winter seasons. Their maximal oxygen uptake was measured while running on a treadmill and using a ski ergometer incorporating the double-poling technique. Maximal oxygen uptake during treadmill running and double-poling was correlated with performance, expressed as a ranking score during 10 ski races. The tests were undertaken in September, December and April. Upper body maximal oxygen uptake increased 5.8% from September to December, decreasing to 2.3% above the September level in April. Upper body work output (2 min at maximal intensity) increased 11.8% from September to December (P less than 0.05). The relationship between upper body and leg maximal oxygen uptake--the upper body/leg ratio--was 89.4% in September. In four skiers, both treadmill and upper body tests were undertaken on each test occasion. The upper body/leg ratio changed from 87.7% in September to 95.7% in December. In April, the ratio was 91.0%. The maximal oxygen uptake measured using the ski ergometer during double-poling was significantly correlated with performance (P less than 0.05). It is concluded that the upper body ski ergometer can be used in the evaluation of elite cross-country skiers.     

A method for personalising the blade size for competitors in flatwater kayaking

The intent of this project was to explore the feasibility of personalising the paddle blade size for individual flatwater kayakers based on their power output profiles. Twelve elite male kayakers performed on a kayak ergometer at the same intensity and resistance that they would normally experience while paddling at race pace for 500 m on the water. The kayak ergometer was instrumented so that power profiles could be determined from the instantaneous force and velocity of the representative centre point of the paddle blade. From the power profile information, the researchers calculated a personalised blade size that was expected to improve performance for those kayakers differing more than 5% from the calculated ‘ideal’ size. For the elite kayakers studied, it was recommended that seven of the paddlers should increase their blade size by approximately 5–10%. For the remaining five paddlers, the results indicated that their current blade sizes were within the expected measurement error of their predicted ideal value and should be retained. It is anticipated that this research will provide the theoretical rationale for elite kayakers to see the need to personalise their blade size based on their own muscle power profiles.     

Changing classroom culture,curricula, and instruction for proof and proving: how amenable to scaling up,practicable for curricular integration,and capable of producing long-lasting effects are current interventions?

This paper is a commentary on the classroom interventions on the teaching and learning of proof reported in the seven empirical papers in this special issue. The seven papers show potential to enhance student learning in an area of mathematics that is not only notoriously difficult for students to learn and for teachers to teach, but also critically important to knowing and doing mathematics. Although the seven papers, and the intervention studies they report, vary in many ways—student population, content domain, goals and duration of the intervention, and theoretical perspectives, to name a few—they all provide valuable insight into ways in which classroom experiences might be designed to positively influence students’ learning to prove. In our commentary, we highlight the contributions and promise of the interventions in terms of whether and how they present capacity to change the classroom culture, the curriculum, or instruction. In doing so, we distinguish between works that aim to enhance students’ preparedness for, and competence in, proof and proving and works that explicitly foster appreciation for the need and importance of proof and proving. Finally, we also discuss briefly the interventions along three dimensions: how amenable to scaling up, how practicable for curricular integration, and how capable of producing long-lasting effects these interventions are.