The impact of a team's aggressive reputation on the decisions of association football referees

It has been suggested that individuals may use heuristic methods of reasoning and rely on schemata when a quick decision is necessary. Accordingly, it is possible that decisions made by sport officials may be influenced by prior knowledge they have about teams they are officiating. The aim of the present study was to determine whether sport officials are more likely to penalize individuals who participate in a team with an aggressive reputation. In a balanced design, 38 football referees were randomly assigned to either an experimental or control group and were presented with the same 50 video clips of incidents from football games, all involving a team in a blue strip ('blue team'). The incidents were categorized before the study by five experienced referees into fouls committed both by, and against, the blue team, where all participants agreed that a foul had been committed (certain incidents), disagreed it was a foul (uncertain incidents) or agreed that there was no foul (innocuous incidents). Both groups received written instructions before the task; in addition, the experimental group was informed that the blue team present in all of the clips had a reputation for foul and aggressive play. For each incident, the participants were required to indicate what action they would engage in if refereeing the game. Although there was no difference in the number of decisions made, the experimental group awarded significantly more red and yellow cards against the blue team both overall and for the 'certain' incidents. It is suggested that prior knowledge may impact referees' behaviour in a laboratory setting, although future research should explore whether a similar effect is observed in the behaviour of referees during football matches.     

Integrative assessment: reframing assessment practice for current and future learning

The requirement to provide timely formative tasks that are designed to facilitate student learning and autonomy has provoked a wider examination of the role of assessment in higher education and encouraged further investigation of the alignment of learning, teaching and assessment in curriculum design frameworks. Many current authors have proposed that the primary purpose of assessment is to enhance current and future learning and that current practice tends to overemphasise the importance of assessment for progression and certification purposes. This paper proposes that a clearer distinction be made between assessment tasks designed to facilitate and test current learning through the use of formative and summative assessments, and those tasks primarily designed to enhance future learning, which could be better termed integrative assessments. This distinction would allow students and teachers to have greater clarity around the proposed outcomes and reward mechanisms associated with assessment tasks and feedback. This paper proposes that teachers should strive to incorporate four different types of assessment tasks throughout a programme of study, namely diagnostic, formative, integrative and summative tasks, and that the outcomes and reward mechanisms for different assessment types be explained more clearly to students.     

Putting Mutual Exclusivity in Context: Speaker Race Influences Monolingual and Bilingual Infants’ Word-Learning Assumptions

Previous work indicates mutual exclusivity in word learning in monolingual, but not bilingual toddlers. We asked whether this difference indicates distinct conceptual biases, or instead reflects best-guess heuristic use in the absence of context. We altered word-learning contexts by manipulating whether a familiar- or unfamiliar-race speaker introduced a novel word for an object with a known category label painted in a new color. Both monolingual and bilingual infants showed mutual exclusivity for a familiar-race speaker, and relaxed mutual exclusivity and treated the novel word as a category label for an unfamiliar-race speaker. Thus, monolingual and bilingual infants have access to similar word-learning heuristics, and both use nonlinguistic social context to guide their use of the most appropriate heuristic.     

Designing Large-Scale Multisite and Cluster-Randomized Studies of Professional Development

We develop a theoretical and empirical basis for the design of teacher professional development studies. We build on previous work by (a) developing estimates of intraclass correlation coefficients for teacher outcomes using two- and three-level data structures, (b) developing estimates of the variance explained by covariates, and (c) modifying the conventional optimal design framework to include differential covariate costs so as to capture the point at which the cost of collecting a covariate overtakes the reduction in variance it supplies. We illustrate the use of these estimates to explore the absolute and relative sensitivity of multilevel designs in teacher professional development studies. The results from these analyses are intended to guide researchers in making more-informed decisions about the tradeoffs and considerations involved in selecting study designs for assessing the impacts of professional development programs.     

Some of the Reasons Why Preparing for Exams Is So Hard: What Can Be Done to Make It Easier?

Why it is so difficult to prepare for academic exams is reviewed with respect to recent research. Textbooks, teaching, and information processing characteristics of students all contribute to undermining effective learning and review. Recommendations are made about how instructors can make it easier for students to review and appraise their test readiness, as well as about how students can make a difference in the quality of their own preparations for tests.     

Environmental inequality and disparities in school readiness: The role of neurotoxic lead

Developmental science has increasingly scrutinized how environmental hazards influence child outcomes, but few studies examine how contaminants affect disparities in early skill formation. Linking research on environmental inequality and early childhood development, this study assessed whether differences in exposure to neurotoxic lead explain sociodemographic gaps in school readiness. Using panel data tracking a representative sample of 1266 Chicago children (50% female, 16% White, 30% Black, 49% Hispanic, μ_age = 5.2 months at baseline, collected 1994–2002), analyses quantified the contribution of lead contamination to class and racial disparities in vocabulary skills and attention problems at ages 4 and 5. Results suggested that lead contamination explains 15%–25% and 33%–66% of the disparities in each outcome, respectively, although imprecise estimates preclude drawing firm inferences about attention problems.