Connecting Diversity Efforts in the Workplace with Business Mission,Goals, and Objectives

As more attention is given to managing and valuing diversity in the United States workforce, the linking of diversity issues and practices to organizational performance needs must be addressed. In addressing the performance question, this article investigates both the difference between a quick fix and systematic action, and the distinction between a program and a process. A systematic and comprehensive process linked to organizational goals and performance is recommended. Gaps in typical programs and responses are pointed out, and some possible areas for measuring results attributable to valuing and managing diversity are suggested.     

The KAIT with developmental students,honor students,and freshmen

The KAIT (Kaufman Adolescent and Adult Intelligence Test) is a relatively new test of intelligence. This paper explores its use in a southwestern university with three different student groups. The results are reported and implications noted.     

Can ability-achievement regression to the mean account for MDT discretionary decisions?

The test scores of 153 referred students who received inconsistent placements according to California's discrepancy criterion, which does not take regression into account (standard score distribution procedure), were reanalyzed using a procedure that accounts for regression. Students involved in these MDT discretionary decisions were placed into one of three groups: ineligible (originally met discrepancy criterion, but not placed), resource class (originally did not meet discrepancy criterion, but placed in a less restrictive pull-out program), and special day class (originally did not meet discrepancy criterion, but placed in a more restrictive, essentially full-time special education class). All of these placements were inconsistent with the nonregressed ability-achievement discrepancy criterion the MDTs used at the time of the IEP meeting. To evaluate how many of these students could be considered to be underachieving when regression is considered, regressed discrepancy scores were computed using the students' scores on the WISC-R and one or more of the following achievement tests: WRAT, PIAT, and W-J. Regression “accounted” for a significant proportion of the inconsistent placements in all three groups: ineligible (25.0%), resource class (31.5%), and special day class (46.9%). Implications for professional practice and public policy are discussed.