Researching Special Needs

In the March 2002 issue of BJSE , Richard Rose argued that the agenda for research in special education should be determined by establishing 'effective partnerships' between teachers and researchers. He suggested that teachers are beginning to be more involved in research but that educational researchers needed to 'take a lead in involving classroom practitioners in the development of school–based projects'. John Wilson, an author of many books on philosophy and education, and currently Senior Research Associate at the Oxford University Department of Educational Studies, agrees that, if educational research is to drive forward improvements in practice, it must engage 'the minds and understandings of practitioners'. This article takes the debate further, however. John Wilson proposes that research into special educational needs has also to engage with an exploration of the meaning of the phrase 'special needs' and a review of the values that underpin the use of this phrase by practitioners, policy makers and researchers. He concludes that this process will entail the development of new forms of enquiry, new ways of working, and new ways of thinking about research and special educational needs.     

Dietary and non-dietary correlates of gastrointestinal distress during the cycle and run of a triathlon

The purpose of this investigation was to assess whether pre-race dietary and non-dietary factors were associated with gastrointestinal (GI) distress during the cycle and run of a 70.3-mile triathlon. Fifty three participants recorded dietary details the day before and morning of the triathlon and retrospectively reported GI symptoms from the cycle and run. Occurrence and severity of nausea, regurgitation and fullness were combined into an upper GI (UGI) category, while lower abdominal cramps, flatulence and urge to defecate were combined into a lower GI (LGI) category. Spearman's rho coefficients were used to examine whether UGI and LGI were associated with: (1) pre-race diet (kilocalories, carbohydrate, fibre, fat, protein, caffeine); and (2) non-dietary factors (age, body mass index, experience, weight change, GI distress history, finishing time). Of non-dietary factors, only a history of GI distress showed significant associations with GI symptoms during the triathlon (ρ = .32–.36; P < .05). Morning kilocalorie (ρ = .28, P = .04) and carbohydrate (ρ = .36, P < .01) intakes were modestly, positively associated with UGI during the cycle, while morning caffeine intake (ρ = .30, P = .03) showed a modest positive association with LGI during the run. The associations between diet and GI distress variables remained significant after adjusting for non-dietary factors. Competitors of 70.3-mile triathlons should carefully weigh the benefits of higher race-morning energy, carbohydrate and caffeine intakes against their potential to increase GI distress.