The analysis of athletic performance: some practical and philosophical considerations

This article presents a hypothetical dialogue between a notational analyst (NA) recently schooled in the positivistic assessment of athletic performance, an ‘old-school’ traditional coach (TC) who favours subjective analysis, and a pragmatic educator (PE). The conversation opens with NA and TC debating the respective value of quantitative and qualitative methods of performance analysis. Having considered their arguments from a-distance, PE offers a philosophically underpinned point of view that helps to practically reconcile NA's and TC's opposing positions. While primarily focusing on practical issues relating to the analysis of athletic performance, PE contends that ‘quantitative’ and ‘qualitative’ approaches can be legitimately used in combination. Such a stance would appear in-line with a pragmatic philosophical perspective, which by focusing on practical issues embraces pluralistic methods. It is hoped that this dialogue will facilitate further philosophical and practical debate to generate knowledge that could enrich coaches' understanding by presenting an approach to performance analysis that is more realistic for practitioners.     

A Critical Discussion of Deep and Surface Processing: What It Means, How It Is Measured, the Role of Context, and Model Specification

The prevailing assumption by some that deep processing promotes stronger learning outcomes while surface processing promotes weaker learning outcomes has been called into question by the inconsistency and ambiguity of results in investigations of the relation between levels of processing and performance. The purpose of this literature review is to examine four areas that may be contributing to the inconsistency and ambiguity of these research results: conceptualization, operationalization, situational factors, and model specification of deep and surface processing. A PsycINFO database search was conducted, and 221 studies were identified for a comprehensive data table. Analysis of these data revealed trends that suggested conceptualization and operationalization of deep and surface processing differed depending on the theoretical frame utilized in each study. Additionally, the choice of theoretical frame also seemed to impact what situational factors may or may not have been present as well as how the model of levels of processing and performance was specified. Results from studies that met certain criteria demonstrated that levels of processing and performance are related, and further, these relations may be moderated by other factors. Implications for future research are discussed that focus on these four areas.     

Just how much multitasking can students handle during lecture? Effects of question frequency and relevancy,and note taking on retention

Educational technology research and development - Classroom response systems (i.e., clickers) have become increasingly popular to facilitate student learning. Unfortunately, the common practice of...     

How epistemic reflexivity enables teacher educators’ teaching for diversity: Exploring a pedagogical framework for critical thinking

Recent research points to the importance of teacher educators teaching for diversity in initial teacher education programmes. Teaching for diversity is an approach to teacher education in which an understanding of specialist literature and a focus on critical thinking supports a social justice agenda as opposed to merely using different tips and tricks to prepare future teachers for teaching diverse learners in the classroom. In this study, we explored how Australian and New Zealand teacher educators negotiated a social justice agenda in teacher education programmes, using a new transdisciplinary framework of epistemic reflexivity. The Epistemic Reflexivity for Teacher Education (ER-TED) framework draws on epistemic cognition (Clark Chinn’s Aims, Ideals, Reliable epistemic processes – AIR – framework) and Margaret Archer’s reflexivity to explore knowledge claims in teacher educators’ pedagogical decision-making. The findings identified how teacher educators in our study discerned and deliberated with respect to epistemic aims for justification, which involve transformative critical thinking and critical thinking for self. They reported good knowledge (ideals) as being scholarly in nature, and reliable epistemic processes based on higher-order thinking (analysis and evaluating competing ideas) or engaging with multiple perspectives. The teacher educators in our study are clear examples of how strong overall evaluative epistemic stances enable teaching for social justice. We argue that the ER-TED framework can help us as a profession to address teaching for diversity in teacher education programmes based on the belief that the pursuit of social justice requires an evaluativist epistemic stance.     

We Want You Back: Uncovering the Effects on In-Person Instructional Operations in Fall 2020

Research in Higher Education - Postsecondary institutions’ responses to COVID-19 are a topic of immediate relevance. Emergent research suggests that partisanship was more strongly linked to...     

“Please Bear with me a Moment as I Write About Sports”: Addressing the Dearth of Sport Scholarship in General,High-Impact Higher Education Journals

Innovative Higher Education - The presence of research regarding specific student populations demonstrates their importance to the field given the importance of research and knowledge creation in...     

Development and Testing of a Curriculum to Improve Decision-Making Skills in Middle and High School Students

Adolescence is a key developmental period for developing and strengthening brain circuits that underlie effective decision-making skills, which profoundly impact lifelong health and academic, professional, and economic achievement. But decision-making skills are learned rather than inherent. School presents an ideal environment for the direct instruction and frequent practice of decision-making skills, however, finding time in the school day is a challenge for contemporary educators. We have developed a learning curriculum that involves active student participation to strengthen decision-making skills that is sufficiently flexible and adaptable to be utilized in a wide variety of content-specific classwork. Using this curriculum, students show evidence of improved decision-making skills, including increased consideration of the number of factors that are relevant to their decision, the resources needed to make a particular decision, and both the short-term and long-term consequences of decisions.     

Population validity for educational data mining models: A case study in affect detection

Information and communication technology (ICT)‐enhanced research methods such as educational data mining (EDM) have allowed researchers to effectively model a broad range of constructs pertaining to the student, moving from traditional assessments of knowledge to assessment of engagement, meta‐cognition, strategy and affect. The automated detection of these constructs allows EDM researchers to develop intervention strategies that can be implemented either by the software or the teacher. It also allows for secondary analyses of the construct, where the detectors are applied to a data set that is much larger than one that could be analyzed by more traditional methods. However, in many cases, the data used to develop EDM models are collected from students who may not be representative of the broader populations who are likely to use ICT. In order to use EDM models (automated detectors) with new populations, their generalizability must be verified. In this study, we examine whether detectors of affect remain valid when applied to new populations. Models of four educationally relevant affective states were constructed based on data from urban, suburban and rural students using ASSISTments software for middle school mathematics in the Northeastern United States. We found that affect detectors trained on a population drawn primarily from one demographic grouping do not generalize to populations drawn primarily from the other demographic groupings, even though those populations might be considered part of the same national or regional culture. Models constructed using data from all three subpopulations are more applicable to students in those populations than those trained on a single group, but still do not achieve ideal population validity—the ability to generalize across all subgroups. In particular, models generalize better across urban and suburban students than rural students. These findings have important implications for data collection efforts, validation techniques, and the design of interventions that are intended to be applied at scale.     

SUPERVISION IN SCHOOL PSYCHOLOGY: THE DEVELOPMENTAL/ECOLOGICAL/PROBLEM‐SOLVING MODEL

Effective supervision models guide the supervisory relationship and supervisory tasks leading to reflective and purposeful practice. The Developmental/Ecological/Problem‐Solving (DEP) Model provides a contemporary framework for supervision specific to school psychology. Designed for the school psychology internship, the DEP Model is also applicable to all pre‐service and advanced field‐based training, as well as career‐long continuing professional development. The Developmental domain initiates training at the functioning skill level of the supervisee and progresses toward independent competency. The Ecological domain addresses the multiple systemic contexts that influence school psychology practice and prepares the intern to intervene within both individual and systemic contexts. The Problem‐Solving domain focuses on the application of data‐based decision making and evidence‐based interventions to the full range of school psychology activities. It provides a systematic schema to address student, family, and school needs.