Comparison of Research Speed and Accuracy Using Westlaw Classic and WestlawNext

In 2010, Thomson Reuters released WestlawNext powered by WestSearch, a novel and proprietary algorithm. WestlawNext represents a new approach to legal research platform design. This article empirically examines the differences in search results using Westlaw Classic and WestlawNext by testing law students and librarians in both systems. Results demonstrate that researchers complete everyday searches faster and more accurately using WestlawNext. However, WestSearch's unique features and Thomson Reuters' failure to explain the function behind the WestlawNext main search bar and the WestSearch algorithm has limited researchers' ability to understand and effectively use WestlawNext. This lack of understanding has significant implications for instruction.     

Parallel Classes: Differences and Similarities. Teacher Effects and School Effects in Secondary Schools

Results from school effectiveness studies that took into account differences among teachers or departments within schools indicate that these teacher or department differences outweigh the differences between schools. The present study shows that differences in student achievement between parallel classes taught by different teachers may be very small. Coordination efforts among teachers relate primarily to the content and goals of instruction. With respect to classroom instruction large differences between teachers may still be detected. School effectiveness differences usually found across grades and subjects may be due only in part to loose internal coordination. The fact that it is extremely difficult for teachers to compare the results of teaching across grades and subjects may be equally important.     

Double standards and first principles: framing teaching assistant support for pupils with special educational needs

Teaching assistants (TAs) are part of a growing international trend toward paraprofessionals working in public services. There has been controversy over TAs’ deployment and appropriate role when supporting the learning of pupils with special educational needs (SEN) in mainstream schools. Such debates have been transformed by findings from a large study of school support staff in the UK (the DISS project). The findings from this study show that TA support has a negative impact on pupils’ academic progress, especially pupils with SEN. The findings render the current system of support for SEN highly questionable: TAs have inadvertently become the primary educators of pupils with SEN. This paper sets out the likely explanations for the negative effects in terms of three ‘frames’ – deployment, practice and preparedness – and then uses these frames to identify specific implications for pupils with SEN. We offer suggestions on how to make the most productive use of TA support.     

The educational experiences of pupils with a Statement for special educational needs in mainstream primary schools: results from a systematic observation study

Findings from the Deployment and Impact of Support Staff project showed that day-to-day support for pupils with special education needs (SEN) in mainstream UK schools is often provided by teaching assistants (TAs), instead of teachers. This arrangement is the main explanation for other results from the project, which found TA support had a more profound, negative impact on the academic progress of pupils with SEN than pupils without SEN. There is, however, surprisingly little systematic information on the overall support and interactions experienced by pupils with the highest levels of SEN attending mainstream schools (e.g. those with Statements). The Making a Statement project was designed to provide such a picture in state-funded primary schools in England (e.g. schools attended by children aged between five and 11). Extensive systematic observations were conducted of 48 pupils with Statements and 151 average-attaining ‘control’ pupils. Data collected over 2011/12 involved researchers shadowing pupils in Year 5 (nine- and 10-year olds) over one week each. The results, reported here, show that the educational experiences of pupils with Statements is strongly characterised by a high degree of separation from the classroom, their teacher and peers. A clear point to emerge was the intimate connection between TAs and the locations, in and away from the classroom, in which pupils with Statements are taught. The currency of Statements – a set number of hours of TA support – is identified as key factor in why provision leads to these arrangements, and appears to get in the way of schools thinking through appropriate pedagogies for pupils with the most pronounced learning difficulties.     

Mrs Miggins in the Classroom

Useful therapeutic material, often found in rational-emotive behaviour therapy (REBT), does not always reach the daily life of classrooms, although there are some exceptions in specific educational programmes. Pupils in schools can benefit daily from therapeutic ideas that prevent disturbed thinking and promote more optimistic views of setbacks. The aim of these ideas is to improve attitudes to schooling, especially in pupils who frequently need special help. In a small-scale project, a therapeutic board game was devised in order to generate discussion and to dispute irrational thinking. Two teachers and the author found that pupils of ten years of age responded positively to REBT, and teachers found that the cards used in the game provided a framework for discussion and self-help strategies.     

Case study: using MOOCs for conventional college coursework

In Spring 2013 San José State University (SJSU) launched SJSU Plus: three college courses required for most students to graduate, which used massive open online course provider Udacity’s platform, attracting over 15,000 students. Retention and success (pass/fail) and online support were tested using an augmented online learning environment (AOLE) on a subset of 213 students; about one-half matriculated. SJSU faculty created the course content, collaborating with Udacity to develop video instruction, quizzes, and interactive elements. Course log-ins and progression data were combined with surveys and focus groups, with students, faculty, support staff, coordinators, and program leaders as subjects. Logit models used contingency table-tested potential success predictors on all students and five subgroups. Student effort was the strongest success indicator, suggesting criticality of early and consistent student engagement. No statistically significant relationships with student characteristics were found. AOLE support effectiveness was compromised with staff time consumed by the least prepared students.