The RIX Wiki: the use of multimedia advocacy to support person-centred planning in a special needs secondary school – implications for current policy and practice

The article documents findings from a pilot study undertaken in 2012–2013 in a special needs secondary school in the England, that trialled the use of a multimedia advocacy tool, “The RIX Wiki”. The trial was part of the pathfinder programme, which aimed to reform existing Special Education Needs provision, from the system of statementing to one of developing education health care plans. The reforms became enshrined in the Children and Families Act (2014). The findings were overall positive and helped with person-centred planning processes. The discussion is framed within current and future policy directives. We argue that multimedia advocacy approaches and software tools, like the “RIX Wiki” will have a continued role to play in ensuring the needs, aspirations and choices of children and young people with learning disabilities remain central.     

Examining the “Blanket of Protection” Conferred by Inoculation: The Effects of Inoculation Messages on the Cross-protection of Related Attitudes

Although the effectiveness of inoculation as a strategy for promoting resistance to attitude change is fairly well established, the potential of inoculation messages to offer cross-protection for related, but untreated, attitudes warrants additional attention from scholars. The reported study tested the “blanket of protection” conferred by inoculation. Participants (N = 118) were randomly assigned to read an inoculation message addressing a target topic and subsequently had their attitudes toward three related, but untreated, topics attacked. The results offer some evidence that inoculation messages can confer cross-protection for related attitudes. Participants in the inoculation condition reported greater perceptions of threat, greater counterarguing, and less attitude change in response to attacks than participants in the control condition for two of the three untreated topics. Counterarguing in response to attacks on untreated attitudes appears to be primarily responsible for cross-protection.     

Establishing a Center to Support Faculty Research

This article describes the establishment in fall 2002 of a School of Education Research Center designed to support faculty in increasing productivity and quality in research. Details are provided about center goals, services, staffing, space, resources, and logistics during the first year of operation. In addition, data are shared about faculty usage of the Center, the level of faculty satisfaction with center services in the first year, and initial increases in faculty productivity. The article concludes with plans for continued data collection to monitor the impact of the Center, a discussion of lessons learned at this point in the Center's development, and possibilities for the evolution of the Center. All authors are at the University of Colorado, Denver. Laura Goodwin, Ph.D., University of Colorado at Boulder, is Interim Associate Vice Chancellor for Faculty Affairs and continues to serve as a Faculty Research Associate. Elizabeth Kozleski, Ed.D., University of Northern Colorado, is the Associate Dean for Research in the School of Education. Lynn Rhodes, Ed.D., Indiana University, is the Dean of the School of Education. Rodney Muth, Ph.D., Claremont Graduate School, is a professor of Administrative Leadership and Policy Studies in the school and chaired the Research Center Advisory Board. Kim Kennedy White, M.A., University of Oregon, was the original School of Education Research Center Coordinator and was responsible for collecting most of the data included in this study.     

Progress monitoring with objective measures of writing performance for students with mild disabilities

To adequately monitor progress in writing, a test must show stability and demonstrate a performance profile over time that parallels those of accepted criterion measures. This study investigated the technical adequacy of seven objective indexes of writing quality in monitoring the progress of 36 middle school (Grades 6-8) students with mild disabilities over a 6-month period. The stability of each index was assessed. Holistic ratings of the same writing samples and the Test of Written Language served as validation criteria. Three indexes were moderately correlated with holistic ratings, but were not sufficiently stable over time. Direct, objective writing assessment must be used with caution for progress monitoring, given our present lack of precision in measuring the complex task of writing.