Film and Society

Bill Nichols IDEOLOGY AND THE IMAGE: SOCIAL REPRESENTATION IN THE CINEMA AND OTHER MEDIA (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1981 —$29.95/$9.95)

David Pirie ANATOMY OF THE MOVIES (New York: Macmillan, 1981—$15.95)

Nancy Lynn Schwartz THE HOLLYWOOD WRITER'S WARS (New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1982—$17.95)

Gilbert Ad air VIETNAM ON FILM: FROM THE GREEN BERETS TO APOCALYPSE NOW (New York: Proteus, 1981— $13.95). Adair begins with John Wayne's The Green Berets (1968)

Edward D. C. Campbell, Jr. THE CELLULOID SOUTH (Knoxville: The University of Tennessee Press, 1981—$17.50)

Elizabeth Weatherford NATIVE AMERICANS ON FILM AND VIDEO (Available from Museum of the American Indian, Broadway at 155th Street, New York, NY 10032— $4.95, paper)     

The effect of curricular reform on gross anatomy laboratory examination performance: An institutional analysis

Many medical schools have undergone curricular reform recently. With these reforms, time spent teaching anatomy has been reduced, and there has been a general shift to a pass/fail grading system. At Indiana University School of Medicine (IUSM), a new curriculum was implemented in fall 2016. The year-long human gross anatomy course taught in 2015 was condensed into an integrated, semester-long course starting in 2016. Additionally, the grading scale shifted to pass/fail. This study examined first-year medical student performance on anatomy practical laboratory examinations—specifically, among lower-order (pure identification) questions and higher-order (function, innervation) questions. Participants included medical students from a pre-curricular reform cohort (year 2015, 34 students) and two post-curricular reform cohorts (years 2016, 30 students and 2017, 33 students). A Kruskal–Wallis ANOVA test was used to determine differences of these questions among the three cohorts. Additionally, 40 of the same lower-order questions that were asked on gross anatomy laboratory examinations from medical student cohort year 2015 and year 2016 were further analyzed using an independent samples t-test. Results demonstrated that the pre-curricular reform cohort scored significantly higher on both lower-order (median = 81, p < 0.001) and higher-order questions (median = 82.5, p < 0.05) than both post-curricular reform cohorts. Additionally, when reviewing the selected 40 similar questions, it was found that the pre-curricular reform cohort averaged significantly higher (82.1 ± 16.1) than the post-curricular reform cohort from 2016 (69.3 ± 21.8, p = 0.004). This study provides evidence about the impact of curricular reform on medical student anatomical knowledge.     

A Validity Argument in Support of the Use of College Admissions Test Scores for Federal Accountability

In 2018, 26 states administered a college admissions test to all public school juniors. Nearly half of those states proposed to use those scores as their academic achievement indicators for federal accountability under the Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA); many others are planning to use those scores for other accountability purposes. Accountability encompasses a number of different uses and subsumes a variety of claims. For states proposing to use summative tests for accountability, a validity argument needs to be developed, which entails delineating each specific use of test scores associated with accountability, identifying appropriate evidence, and offering a rebuttal to counterclaims. The aim of this article is to support states in developing a validity argument for use of college admission test scores for accountability by identifying claims that are applicable across states, along with summarizing existing evidence as it relates to each of these claims. As outlined by The Standards for Educational and Psychological Testing, multiple sources of evidence are used to address each claim. A series of threats to the validity argument, including weaker alignment with content standards and potential influences in narrowing teaching, are reviewed. Finally, the article contrasts validity evidence, primarily from research on the ACT, with regulatory requirements from ESSA. The Standards and guidance addressing the use of a “nationally recognized high school academic assessment” (Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA), Negotiated Rulemaking Committee; Department of Education) are the primary sources for the organization of validity evidence.     

Reading a note, reading a mind: children’s notating skills and understanding of mind

Are children’s understanding of mental states (understanding of mind) related to their notating skills, that is, their ability to produce and read written marks to convey information about objects and number? Fifty-three preschoolers and kindergarteners were presented with a dictation task where they produced some written marks and were later asked to read them back. Understanding of mind was assessed using two tasks. Children’s name-writing and language skills were assessed as covariates. Children’s understanding of their own and other’s mental states was associated with their notating skills. Findings are discussed in light of the reciprocal writer-reader relation: keeping an audience in mind when writing and a writer in mind when reading. This reciprocal relation is central to writing and reading development.     

International Communications

THE SOVIET PROPAGANDA MACHINE by Martin Ebon (New York: McGraw-Hill, 1987—$22.95)

CLANDESTINE RADIO BROADCASTING: A STUDY OF REVOLUTIONARY AND COUNTERREVOLUTIONARY ELECTRONIC COMMUNICATION by Lawrence C. Soley and John S. Nichols (New York: Praeger, 1987—$47.95)

ASSIGNED TO LISTEN: THE EVESHAM EXPERIENCE, 1939–43 by Olive Renier and Vladimir Rubinstein (London: BBC External Services, 1986—L3.95, paper, plus 25% more to cover postage and packing outside of the U.K.)

INDEPENDENCE, LIBERATION, REVOLUTION: AN APPROACH TO THE UNDERSTANDING OF THE THIRD WORLD by Tran Van Dinh (Norwood, NJ: Ablex, 1987—$37.50)

FOLLOWING THE FOOTPRINTS: PROTECTING FILM AND TV RIGHTS IN THE WORLD SATELLITE MARKETPLACE edited by Charles Firestone and Daniel Brenner (Communications Law Program, UCLA School of Law, University of California, Los Angeles 90024—price not given, paper)