Policy-making in science systemic reform

This interpretative research portrays the turbulent conditions that are typical of my experiences as a science supervisor in the central office of a large urban school district in southeastern United States implementing science systemic reform. The research documents a dependence on an authoritarian view of policy-making that combined with procedures for making assignments allows stakeholders to undervalue the decisions that they make and increases the possibility for blaming others for their decisions. The impact of traditional and reform attitudes about curriculum and schools is described as well as efforts to resolve these conflicting views in the process of developing a middle school curriculum guide. The frustrating effect of the interactions of changing curriculum guides, changing instructional materials, and insufficient resources are described in a visit to a middle school science department meeting. The roles of time, understanding of systemic assumptions, and appropriate inquiry and communication skills are critical to the decision making process and little attention is given to address these issues. The result is that decisions end up being made without resolution of the differences among stakeholders leading to negative feelings and creating currents of frustration and distrust that undermine reform efforts.     

A Model for Thinking About the Evaluation of Training

A model for thinking about training evaluation is proposed. The model consists of context and process factors on the one hand, and outcome factors on the other. Among context and process factors are basis of training, purpose of training, unit of productivity, data sources, kind of training, who is trained, and costs of training. Outcome factors include employee, customer, and corporate aspects. Assumptions of the model include a) that both corporatist and humanistic conceptions of training are to be viewed as valid, and b) that the term training is constrictive and probably should be replaced by the term education, which is more elastic. An impetus for the model is that work and workplaces are changing. How knowledge, skills, and orientations toward evaluation are utilized must be viewed somewhat more expansively than might have been appropriate under work conditions in “Tayloristic” times.     

A semi-determinate CAM problem requiring unusual mathematical treatment

A method of producing a cam which will always be in two-point contact with an oscillating follower is developed in comparatively general terms in connection with the design of a pump. The contacting portions of the follower are, however, limited to circular arcs of equal radius. A method of computing ideal rates of flow is discussed.     

Comparing learning styles for students with conduct and emotional problems

In Phase 1 of the study (1991–1992 school year), 43 elementary school students in five special education classes for behaviorally disordered children were classified using the Differential Test of Conduct and Emotional Problems. Subjects were classified as primarily emotional (ED) or conduct problems (CP). Results were as follows: 11 ED (26%), 15 CP (35%), 13 both ED and CP (31%), and 4 (9%) falling into neither grouping. During Phase 2 (1996–1997 school year), a different cohort of students (n = 68), from the same five elementary special education classes plus one junior high school class, was also classified on the Learning Style Identification Scale. Phase 2 results were 12 students ED (18%), 16 CP (24%), 14 both ED and CP (21%), and 26 neither (38%). Eighty‐eight percent of conduct problem students were classified as Style 1 learners. Findings are examined in light of federal special education eligibility criteria, specifically the exclusion of “socially maladjusted” students. Implications for the multidisciplinary team placement process and educational programming are discussed. © 1999 John Wiley & Sons, Inc.     

Needs Assessment-A Critical Reappraisal

We argue in this article that the discrepancy model of needs assessment is lacking in that it does not capture expert behavior, and hence can not lead to problem–solving expertise. With arguments based on a review of the theory and research literature related to problem solving and reflections based on practical experience, we contend that in the first instance, organizational problems are typically too illdefined and shrouded in ambiguity to be meaningfully captured by the model. In the real world, current and desired states cannot always be clearly articulated. We review literature showing that problem–solving expertise, while having a process component, is premised on possession of domain–specific knowledge. Expertise is knowledge based. It comes from wide and varied experience, based on learned principles and rules, which leads to problem categorization, to automacity, and to the deliberate selection or formulation of strategies. The expert draws on schemata stored in long–term memory. Thus we contend that by dwelling almost exclusively on the discrepancy approach to problem solving, the field of Human Resource Development unwittingly forfeits the opportunity to engage in a discourse which would be premised on expert practice.     

The relationship among attributions,divergent thinking,and retention of nonsense syllables and nonrelated words

Students' employment of meaning through cognitive strategies in a retention task was explored in terms of attributional assignment and/or divergent thinking. Students were randomly assigned to either a list of nonsense syllables or nonrelated words. Attributional assignment was measured by Lefcourt's Multidimensional-Multiattributional Causality Scales (MMCS – IV); divergent thinking was measured by Guilford's tests of Fluency, Flexibility, and Originality. A questionnaire assessing students' beliefs regarding success and failure was also administered. No relationship was found among attributional assignment as measured by the MMCS-IV, divergent thinking, and retention. Strategy use was not related to retention. Students' attributional beliefs regarding failure were predictive of retention for the nonsense syllables. Discussion suggests the need to distinguish between tactic and strategy through analysis of metacognitive processes. Interpretation of the results may indicate that the divergent-thinking measures were not sensitive enough and/or the retention task did not require these divergent-thinking skills.