Item analyses of the concept assessment kit-conservation for educable mentally retarded children

A series of item analyses of the CAK-C was conducted for a sample of 155 educable mentally retarded children. The probability of a correct response was found to differ from task to task, and there was evidence that the order of difficulty of the tasks for this sample resembled that for nonretarded children. The probabilities of the two incorrect responses were generally not equal, and the choice of one or the other incorrect response showed some relation to CA, MA, and IQ, particularly the last two variables.     

Mandated team participation: Implications for psychologists working in the schools

Public Law 94-142, Education for All Handicapped Children Act, has had a dramatic impact on the schooling of exceptional children. Yet, rather limited attention has been directed to the one section of the law that mandates a particular decision-making approach for both the diagnosis and intervention tasks. The implications for the training and practice of applied psychologists who work with school-age children could be significant. This paper examines three areas of concern that impact the psychologist's role in working with exceptional children: (a) conditions that are considered crucial for the development of teams, (b) the literature regarding psychologists' input to school-based teams, and (c) reactions of school-based team members to such an approach. Related issues of importance to both trainers and practitioners in the field of psychology are then presented.     

建构性的后现代主义

柯布(John B.cobb,Jr.)教授是世界著名过程思想家,建构性后现代主义理论代表人物之一,现任美国过程研究中心创会主任,美国中国后现代发展研究院院长,美国克莱蒙研究生院终身教授。他1952年毕业于芝加哥大学,获哲学博士学位。柯布教授多年来一直从事过程哲学、可持续经济的研究与应用,是一位具有世界影响的学者。已发表著作数十部,代表作有《后现代公共政策》、《建构性后现代哲学的奠基者》、《后现代科学》、《后现代精神》、《为了共同的福祉——面向共同体、环境和可持续未来的经济》等。他应邀于2005年10月28至31日到我校讲学,作了题为“Constructive Postmodernism”的精彩学术报告,以西方哲学话语对建构的后现代主义作了一番梳理,其中不乏独到、精辟之论,受到广大师生的热烈欢迎。这次报告的汉语翻译是我校柏敬泽教授。应师生要求柏教授将全文译成中文并注释,以便读者准确、深入地理解柯布教授的学术报告内容。现把两位学者的共同劳动成果刊登出来,以飨读者,一为庆祝“广西师范大学后现代文化研究中心”的成立,二使更多的人了解柯布教授的学术观点,增进国际、校际之间的学术交流。     

Concurrent validity of the Stanford-Binet: Fourth edition and Kaufman assessment battery for children with learning-disabled students

This study examined the concurrent validity of the composite and area scores of the Stanford-Binet Intelligence Scale: Fourth Edition (SBIV) and the Mental Processing Composite and global scale scores of the Kaufman Assessment Battery for Children (K-ABC). The tenability of interpreting the SBIV using the fluid/crystallized model, as suggested by the authors, was also considered. The subjects were 30 Black, learning-disabled elementary school students. Results of a t test indicated that the Mental Processing Composite score of the K-ABC was significantly higher than the SBIV Composite score. Moderate to high correlations were obtained when SBIV composite and area scores were compared to K-ABC composite and scale scores, reflecting a positive relationship between the two tests. The measures of fluid abilities (K-ABC Composite score; SBIV Abstract/Visual Reasoning) were highly correlated. The results of a multiple regression analysis indicated a moderate degree of correlation among the measures of crystallized ability (K-ABC Achievement; SBIV Verbal Reasoning and Quantitative Reasoning). The findings of this study demonstrated adequate concurrent validity for the SBIV. In addition, the results provided limited support for describing test results utilizing the fluid/crystallized interpretation model. Further research is suggested in order to examine other validity issues, such as classification of special education students and the SBIV's relationship to other similar instruments.     

Leveraging microgrants to support capacity-building workshops in low- and middle-income countries for meeting the Sustainable Development Goals

Twenty fifteen marked the year of assessment for the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs). The MDGs that achieved the greatest success were those where evidence-based practice (EBP) interventions were implemented. The ability to practice evidence-based medicine is grounded in the creation of and access to medical literature that synthesizes research findings. The role that global health literature played in the success of the MDGs demonstrates that medical libraries and librarians have a role to play in achieving the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs).Librarians can hold capacity-building workshops that provide instruction on how to access evidence-based literature and also train health professionals to conduct synthesis research. Research findings conducted by in-country health professionals are more likely to address issues being faced by local communities and will afford the possibility of obtaining the necessary evidence-based answers that can then be used to implement policies to resolve public health issues identified in the SDGs.This paper discusses how an international team of librarians leveraged funding from a Medical Library Association/Librarians without Borders/Elsevier Foundation/Research4Life grant to hold a capacity-building workshop in Zimbabwe and follow-up online trainings. The workshop focused on accessing evidence-based resources and conducting synthesis research. Outcomes included the creation and policy implementation of evidence-based knowledge products in alignment with local needs and galvanizing a multisectoral group of key individuals who have gone on to collaborate toward the vision of creating a Zimbabwe innovation hub. Looking ahead, such grants can be leveraged to conduct capacity-building to support knowledge translation and other local training needs.     

Creating a more inclusive journal: the Journal of the Medical Library Association's evolving process for selecting editorial board members

The Journal of the Medical Library Association (JMLA) selects new editorial board members every year. In the spring of 2021, JMLA used a new process for reviewing and selecting applicants for the limited number of open editorial board positions. This reevaluation of the selection process was spurred by a desire to create a more diverse and representative board. Changes to the procedures for selecting new editorial board members included having an open call for editorial board members, creating an application form, creating a selection committee to screen applicants, creating a form for the selection committee to extract data from applications, and creating a two-step process for screening and then selecting board members. As part of construction of this new process, areas for continued improvement were also identified, such as refining the application form to allow more specific answers to areas of interest to the selection committee. The newly created selection process for editorial board members constitutes a significant change in JMLA processes; however, more can be done to build on this work by further refining the selection process and ensuring that new members are selected in a transparent and streamlined manner.