Towards a Cultural Understanding of the Disability and Deaf Experience: A Content Analysis of Introductory Multicultural Education Textbooks

This paper reports the findings of a simple normative content analysis of 11 multicultural education textbooks to determine the extent to which disability and deaf culture are represented. In addition, this study examines multicultural education textbooks to assess the extent to which perspectives of members of the disability and deaf communities are represented in the discourse about disabled and deaf persons. Results indicate that on average less than 1% of the total pages of text reviewed addressed or mentioned disability or deaf culture. Of these, it was found that on average about 6% of the pages addressed disability or deaf culture. In addition, inaccurate information was presented and perspectives were often not informed by a substantial body of literature that has emerged in the field of disability studies. It was found that multicultural education textbooks rely heavily on information about persons with disabilities from Special Education that may not be widely accepted by disabled or deaf persons. A follow-up paper examines the implications of the exclusion of disabled and deaf persons and their perspectives from the discourse about the shared and collective disability and deaf experience in favor of a dominant perspective widely held by the nondisabled professional community. Questions are raised about whether this is consistent with the values and goals of multicultural education and teaching. A rationale and recommendations are proposed for engaging disabled and deaf persons about their shared and collective experience and for promoting cultural competence and proficiency with respect to the disability and Deaf experience in multicultural education.     

Digital Module 16: Longitudinal Data Analysis

In this digital ITEMS module, Dr. Jeffrey Harring and Ms. Tessa Johnson introduce the linear mixed effects (LME) model as a flexible general framework for simultaneously modeling continuous repeated measures data with a scientifically defensible function that adequately summarizes both individual change as well as the average response. The module begins with a nontechnical overview of longitudinal data analyses drawing distinctions with cross-sectional analyses in terms of research questions to be addressed. Nuances of longitudinal designs, timing of measurements, and the real possibility of missing data are then discussed. The three interconnected components of the LME model—(1) a model for individual and mean response profiles, (2) a model to characterize the covariation among the time-specific residuals, and (3) a set of models that summarize the extent that individual coefficients vary—are discussed in the context of the set of activities comprising an analysis. Finally, they demonstrate how to estimate the linear mixed effects model within an open-source environment (R). The digital module contains sample R code, diagnostic quiz questions, hands-on activities in R, curated resources, and a glossary.     

Gender differences among sagittal plane knee kinematic and ground reaction force characteristics during a rapid sprint and cut maneuver

Women are more prone to anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injury during cutting sports than men. The purpose of this study was to examine knee kinematic and ground reaction forces (GRF) differences between genders during cutting. Male and female athletes performed cutting trials while force platform and video data were recorded (180 Hz). Differences (p < . 05) were observed between groups for knee flexion at contact and GRF at maximum knee flexion. Women averaged 5.8 degrees less flexion at contact and 1.0 N. (kg x m x s(-1))(-1) greater GRF at maximum flexion. Knee range of motion and peak GRF variables were not significantly different, but women had greater values. Women exhibited technique characteristics believed to increase ACL injury risk, but men exhibiting similar characteristics were also observed and could also be at risk.