Undergraduate non-completion rates: Differences between UK universities

The non-completion rate of university students differs substantially between UK universities. This paper provides estimates of non-completion rates for the 1979 and 1980 entry cohorts into each university and suggests a number of reasons which may have contributed to these inter-university differences. Statistical analysis indicates that a large proportion of the inter-university variation in the non-completion rate can be explained by three main factors: the scholastic ability of each university's new entrants (as reflected by A-level score), the subject mix of each university, and the proportion of each university's students accommodated in a hall of residence. The main conclusion is that inter-university comparisons in the non-completion rate are of little value unless account is taken of differences in the scholastic ability of each university's intake of students.The authors are grateful to the Nuffield Foundation for supporting this research project under its Small Grants Scheme and to the Universities Statistical Record for supplying the data. We are also grateful to Richard Cormack, Gareth Williams and several university registrars for their helpful comments on the first draft of this paper. The authors alone are responsible for the contents of this paper.     

Comparative Evaluations of Early Intervention Alternatives: A Response to Commentaries by Guralnick and Telzrow

This article responds to two commentaries by Guralnick (1993) and Telzrow (1993) published in the October 1993 issue of Early Education and Development. The commentaries addressed the six longitudinal, comparative studies from the Early Intervention Research Institute's (EIRI's) investigations of the effects and costs of early intervention for children with disabilities. In this response to their thoughtful critique, we clarify details of our research design and procedures that may have been unclear. We also discuss the specificity and consistency with contemporary developmental/ecological issues raised by Guralnick We contend that the interventions investigated address important questions about age at start, intensity, and parent involvement with which today's service providers contend. We give our opinion on how the results of these studies should be interpreted, and emphasize their implications for other second-generation early intervention research.     

远程教育战略：智力模型和战略选择

远程教育领导们思考着：影响远程教育未来发展的问题究竟是什么?院校的远程教育战略又究竟是什么?本文著作者采用定性研究的方式对比了三所社区学院对远程教育的战略思考与战略选择,比较的命题是：每所学院的远程教育领导们采用的通用战略智力模型(即环境问题和关系的思考方法)和三所学院的远程教育领导们通常所采纳的产业化水平的战略智力模型。比较研究发现：战略信心比期望的有更多的差异；远程教育的战略选择几乎是匹配于当地状况精心考虑的；领导们的信心和学院的战略选择紧密相连。     

Not Mechanics but Meaning: Error in Tertiary Students' Writing

This paper draws upon an extended report to the now‐defunct Commonwealth Tertiary Education Commission which analyses the errors found in over 300,000 words of writing in a British History course, produced by two groups of first year students in 1974 and 1984. There were no statistically significant differences between the two year groups. More interestingly and importantly, the results of the study indicate that the most statistically significant elements in error‐prone writing are those concerned not so much with the formal mechanics of writing but with the constitution of meaning. We interpret these results to suggest strongly that most of the problems of those writers who make many grammatical errors in their writing are problems which do not lend themselves to ‘purely’ grammatical solutions     

Choice of operation in verbal arithmetic problems: the effects of number size,problem structure and context

12-and 13-year-olds were tested with two types of tasks to test their understanding of applications of the multiplication and division of positive numbers: (i) writing down calculations required to solve verbal problems, and (ii) making up stories to fit given calculations. Selected pupils were interviewed to investigate further the thinking processes involved. The results indicate (a) the pervasive nature of certain numerical misconceptions, (b) the effects of structural differences among the items; particularly whether multiplication can be conceived as repeated addition or not, and whether division has the structure of partition, quotition or rate, (c) specific effects of context attributable to such aspects as relative familiarity, and (d) various interactions between these three sets of factors.With the collaboration of Joanna Rigg and Malcolm Swan.     

Impact of a Mentoring Experience on College Students’ Beliefs about Early Childhood Development

With the increasing demands placed on working families and the push downward of academics from the K-12 system, there is a critical need to provide high-quality early childhood programming for our nation’s children, particularly those considered at risk for academic failure. This study attempts to (a) understand the beliefs of college students about early childhood development and developmentally appropriate practices, and (b) determine if these beliefs change after their yearlong involvement in Jumpstart, a national intensive mentoring program for academically at-risk preschoolers. Surveys from this national program investigated college students’ beliefs about early childhood development and developmentally appropriate practices. Results indicate that a yearlong mentoring program positively impacts college students’ beliefs. These beliefs become less skills-based more and child-centered and constructivist.     

On pictures in prose

For some time now, researchers and educators have questioned the value of pictures for prose-learning. However, there is abundant empirical evidence to document the positive value of pictures. Consistent learning gains are associated with the use of pictures when experiments adhere to these five ground rules: (1) prose passages are presented orally; (2) the subjects are children; (3) the passages are fictional narratives; (4) the pictures overlap the story content; and (5) learning is demonstrated by factual recall. Both centers are supported in part by funds from the National Institute of Education. The opinions herein do not necessarily reflect the postion or policy of the National Institute of Education and no official endorsement by the National Institute of Education should be inferred. The authors are grateful to Michael Pressley and Sharon Stevens for their comments on an earlier draft of the paper.