Program reevaluation: The gifted controversy

Gifted reevaluations consume an enormous amount of professional time and energy. The purpose of the present study was to survey gifted education teachers' and supervisors' perceptions of current gifted reevaluation practices. Results showed most gifted educators were not in agreement with the practice of using gifted reevaluations to reestablish program eligibility. Instead, they would prefer to get information relevant to program evaluation, program planning, and the need for additional services. Included among the alternatives suggested to replace the present gifted reevaluation practices were consideration of student work products, motivation, and interest; reports by parents and by regular and gifted education teachers; and monitoring the student progress made in achieving the goals of the individual educational program.     

The effect of success or failure on self-efficacy and task persistence of conduct-disordered children

Twenty-four children with conduct disorders were familiarized with a pattern-matching task, and their self-efficacy expectations for this task were assessed. Subjects were then given either “Success” or “Failure” feedback for a series of similar problems, and their self-efficacy was reassessed. Finally, task persistence was evaluated by allowing subjects to attempt as many additional pattern-matching problems as they wished, with all subjects receiving failure feedback. Results indicated that, although the two groups of subjects were initially similar, the success group's self-efficacy was significantly higher following feedback. The success group also attempted significantly more problems while later receiving failure feedback, and there was a significant positive correlation between task persistence and the second self-efficacy rating. These findings were related to Bandura's self-efficacy theory and to educational programming for conduct-disordered children.     

Towards the successful integration of e-learning systems in higher education in Iraq: A student perspective

This study aims to analyse the factors that can explain the adoption and effective use of a new e-learning system in Iraq. To achieve this, it uses a selection of factors that are present in the technology acceptance model (TAM) and the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology (UTAUT) model, and it includes three additional factors. The study hypothesises new relationships between the selected factors. Questionnaires were distributed to 300 university students in Iraq. Partial least squares-structural equation modelling (PLS-SEM) was used to analyse the data received. The findings suggest that perceived usefulness (PU), perceived ease of use (PEOU), subjective norms (SNs), information quality (IQ), system quality (SQ), technical support (TS) and self-efficacy (SE) have significant effects on behavioural intention (BI). In turn, BI and TS have significant direct effects on the actual use (AU) of e-learning systems. The factors age, gender and experience significantly moderated some of the relationships in the model. The research has several implications for policy makers, universities and the management of e-learning systems.     

Associations between individual and collective efficacy beliefs and students' bystander behavior

This study examined whether defending and passive bystanding during peer victimization episodes were associated with individual- and classroom-level efficacy to stop peer victimization. Self-report survey data were analyzed from 1,467 Swedish fourth-grade students (mean age = 10.55) from 100 classrooms in 63 schools. Multilevel analyses revealed that, when witnessing peer victimization, students more often defended victims if they were high in defender self-efficacy and if they belonged to classrooms high in collective efficacy. In contrast, students were more likely to remain passive if they were low in defender self-efficacy and if they belonged to classrooms low in collective efficacy. Taken together, our findings suggest that efficacy beliefs both at the individual and at the classroom level contribute to explaining variability in students' bystander behaviors, which has potential implications for prevention and intervention work.