Rites of passage： A comparison of US,Malaysian and Brazilian adolescents

This study compares the life events perceived as ＂rites of passage＂ from adolescence to adulthood by respondents between the ages of 14 and 23 in 3 countries and discusses the possible influences of culture and globalization on these perceptions. Participants include： （1） 250 adolescents from the US （125 males and 125 females）; （2） 191 adolescents from southeastern Brazil （70 males and 121 females）; and （3） 163 adolescents from Malaysia （76 males and 87 females）. These adolescents ranked a variety of life events which may be perceived as indicative of adult status by completing a questionnaire about perceived rites of passage. Although there were similarities among the 3 groups, several differences also emerged. The most commonly noted indicator of adult status for Malaysian youth was physical maturity, followed by completing one＇s education. Participants from the US cited financial independence as the major indicator of adult status, while those from Brazil cited the ability to make important decisions independently from family and to take responsibility for others, such as children, aging parents or a spouse. Brazilian youth were significantly more likely to cite a love affair and voting in major elections as rites of passage than were participants from the other 2 countries. Participants from the US were significantly more likely to cite military service, and Malaysian youth were significantly more likely to consider completion of education and achieving physical maturity as rites of passage. Gender and age differences within groups were evident on some items, but these were not consistent across groups. Possible explanations for the differences between countries and implications for educators working with adolescents in rapidly changing societies are discussed.     

Uniform teacher certification in the South

Evaluation and Improvement of Teaching. By Charles W. Knudsen. Doubleday Doran &; Co.

Arithmetic for Everyday Life. By Robert Anderson, Teachers College, West Chester, Pa., and Shelton Phelps, George Peabody College for Teachers. Silver, Burdett &;Co.

Problems of the Teaching Personnel. By Dennis H. Cooke. Longmans, Green &; Co.

Intelligence—Its Manifestations and Measurement. By Paul L. Boynton, 1933. D. Appleton and Company. Pp. xi + 466.

Significant Contemporary Stories. Edited by Edith R. Mirrielees. Garden City, N. Y.: Doubleday, Doran and Company, 1929. Pp. 376.

Stongs for the School Year for Junior and Senior High Schools. Compiled by George S. Dare. New York: A. S. Barnes and Company, 1931. Pp. xvi + 191.

The Psychology of School Music Teaching. By James L. Mursell and Mabelleb Glenn. New York: Silver, Burdett and Company, 1931. Pp. v + 378.

The Courts and the Public Schools. By Newton Edwards. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1933. Pp. xvi + 591.

A Gestalt Completion Test. By Roy F. Street. New York City: Bureau of Publications, Teachers College, Columbia University, 1931. Pp. in + 65.

College and Reference Library Yearbook. American Library Association, Chicago: American Library Association, 1931.

Public School Finance. By Homer P. Rainey. New York: The Century Co, 1929. Pp. xix + 385. (Century education series.)

Beyond the School. By Frank A. Rexford, Cham.es M. Smith, Sarah Lansuburg Seixin, and Paul F. Frabbito. New York: Henry Holt and Company 1933. Pp. xx + 409.

The Administration of Public High Schools Through Their Personnel. By Georgs A. Rice, Clinton C. Conrad, Paul Fleming. New York: The Macmillan Company, 1933. Pp. x + 723.

Everyday Problems in Classroom Management. By Edwin J. Brown. New York: Houghton Mifflin Company, 1933. Pp. xv + 306.

Modern Solid Geometry. By John R. Clark and Arthur S. Otis. New York: World Book Company, 1932. Pp. xx + 171.

Junior Mathematics for Today—Book One. By William Betz. New York: Ginn and Company, 1933. Pp. x + 406.     

An investigation into students' use of a computer-based social learning space: lessons for facilitating collaborative approaches to learning

Provision of computers in universities for self‐study is taken for granted and is seen as a “must have” educational resource, yet it is very expensive to fund. Students report that they use the Internet as their first stop in approaching research tasks. Learning theorists posit the important role of social interaction in contributing to learning. The use of collaborative methodologies such as group work also illustrate the importance, and perceived beneficial role of, learning with others. However, in general, student access to computers for self‐study in UK Higher Education is provided through large rooms furnished with serried ranks of computers, which do not allow or encourage computer‐based collaborative working. This study addresses this mismatch between approaches to learning and the way universities make computers available to learners. The University of Wolverhampton provides a social learning space with 24 computers on four fishbone‐shaped tables, in a room without any restrictions on talking, eating, or drinking. It was provided so as to encourage learners to work collaboratively and to be able to integrate the use of a computer whilst doing so. This paper reports the initial findings of a study into its use, through questionnaires, observational data, and interviews. Has the provision of a computer‐based collaborative learning space positively affected approaches to computer‐based self‐study? The results of this study inform how best Higher Education institutions might provide computer access to learners so as to encourage collaborative working and positively affect student approaches to their learning.