Enhancing Consistency of Maximal Responding in Behavior Description Interviews: An Exploration of Priming and Response Length

In a Behavior Description Interview (BDI), candidates are asked to describe past experiences that demonstrate skills and abilities important for the position (Janz, 1982). A recent study by Huffcutt et al. (2020) found that only around half of participants (48.1 percent) describe an experience reflecting maximal performance capability. Random mixing of maximal capability with day-to-day typical performance tendencies is problematic psychometrically because candidates are not all providing comparable information and top candidates could be overlooked. Given notable methodological concerns with Huffcutt et al.’s approach, our first purpose was to provide empirical confirmation that maximal responding in BDIs is, in fact, inconsistent. Our estimate of the proportion of maximal responding was even lower (41.3 percent), further amplifying concerns when assessment of maximal performance capability is desired (e.g., for many professional positions). The second purpose was to investigate two factors that could increase the consistency of maximal responding: rewording the main BDI question to focus directly on absolute top-end experiences (i.e., priming) and longer response length. Both were found to have significant effects. A number of directions for future research were identified, which, along with these findings, could help researchers move closer to the long-term goal of uniform description of experiences that reflect each candidate’s maximal capability (or typical tendencies if so desired)

Book Review: Place, Pedagogy and Play: Participation, Design and Research with Children

This book review outlines the key features of the book, Place, Pedagogy and Play: Participation, Design and Research with Children, edited by Matluba Kahn, Simon Bell, and Jenny Wood. The book consists of 13 chapters divided into three parts. Part 1 details the importance of outdoor play. Part 2 describes strategies teachers have implemented to connect learners to the outdoors and their impact on student learning. Part 3 highlights opportunities to involve children in the design of spaces they occupy. Strengths and weakness of the book are discussed

All Means All … Maybe: MTSS Policy and Practice Across States in the United States

Across the United States, State Education Agencies (SEAs) are using tiered strategies, such as Multi-Tiered System of Supports (MTSS) frameworks, to ensure that all students, including diverse learners, receive equal, high-quality education. However, little is known about the extent to which SEAs are encouraging use of MTSS to address the needs of students with moderate-to-severe cognitive disabilities. The present study aimed to examine how SEAs conceptualize and support the implementation of MTSS as an approach to inclusionary education. Data were collected through interviews with key informants in SEAs across 19 states. Members of the research team identified and coded portions of interview transcripts that related to legal requirements for MTSS at the state level, local control as an enabler of or impediment to states’ MTSS work, and levels of inclusiveness in MTSS provisions. Three criteria emerged as important to MTSS inclusiveness: (1) inclusiveness in the espoused MTSS scope; (2) extensiveness of inclusive MTSS practices; and (3) specific application of MTSS to students with significant cognitive disabilities. Analyses showed variability across states regarding their commitment to an MTSS approach across the three domains of inclusiveness. Findings showed the value of developing and disseminating MTSS models offering tiered support for all students and the need for SEA offices to engage in collaborative efforts to support the implementation of inclusive MTSS models. The study also raised questions about the role of rhetoric (i.e., All means all ) in promoting or hindering increased inclusiveness in MTSS implementation

Publishing in a Peer-Reviewed Journal

In our first installment of a series of short articles, we focus on demystifying the publishing process. We first review terminology that is important for authors to understand yet is not clearly defined in easily accessible ways. Then, we describe the publishing process, beginning with preparing and submitting a manuscript, and ending with either publication or a recommendation to submit to another outlet. We provide a visual flowchart to illustrate the steps and multiple pathways in this process. Finally, we present the advice we collected from eight individuals involved in the publication process at MWER: the two current editors and one past editor, along with several associate editors and members of the MWER editorial board. We summarize descriptions of the indicators of submission quality they identified, which included cohesion (i.e., the fit between the various sections of the paper); a comprehensive, transparent, and well-developed methods section; and appropriate, recent literature in sync with the field, among others. We also categorize and describe their advice for those new to the publication process, such as ways to usefully process reviewer feedback and strategies to maximize journal fit

Pre-conference Meet and Greet

Located in the Browne Popular Culture Library, Jerome Library, 4th floor. Meet and greet; presentation of “All of This is Temporary Video” by Phil Dickinson, Associate Dean, College of Arts and Sciences, Bowling Green State University

35th Annual Meeting Call For Proposals

Call for Proposal

Katz Media Group

https://scholarworks.bgsu.edu/arfp/1027/thumbnail.jp

The Tactical versus Technical Paradigm: Scholarship on Teaching Games with a ‘Catch-22’

This chapter examines specific game-based and technique approaches that constituted the foci for experimental research attempting to test hypotheses concerning cause-and-effect relationships. Games teaching approaches, e.g., Teaching Games for Understanding (TGfU) and technique instruction, were manipulated and measured on criteria that included skill assessments, declarative and procedural knowledge, and game performance components. Research also contrasted off-the-ball offensive and defensive player movements. This method of experimental inquiry necessitated a meticulous approach; it required investigators to restrict threats to the internal validity of the research while simultaneously trying to protect the ecological validity. This scenario represented a “Catch-22” for sport pedagogy scholars employing the tactical versus technical paradigm to investigate the efficacy of games teaching approaches. Findings from several studies suggested that game-based instruction (e.g., TGfU) resulted in improved decision-making, response selection and skill execution during game play, while others reflected increased game involvement and player enjoyment. However, the equivocal nature of the findings from many comparative studies may be attributed to the multifarious research designs that included varied curricular content and pedagogical approaches, interventions of differing durations and heterogeneous performance measures that were used to assess individual student learning outcomes. Although experimental studies have continued within the fields of sport pedagogy and coaching, research efforts attempting to draw generalizations from empirical scientific testing, employing the tactical versus technical paradigm, have been largely replaced with practice-referenced research in order to account for the “real-world” contextual nature of game-based teaching and learning

The Role of Transparency in Times of Change

Transparency is the extent to which a stakeholder perceives an organization to be free from pretense or deceit, characterized by visibility or accessibility of information about itself, especially concerning business practices (Parris et al., 2016, p. 233; Merriam-Webster, n.d.-a; Merriam-Webster, n.d.-b). What is the role of transparency in times of change? Transparency promotes trust, confidence, employee engagement, and positive relationships. “Contributing to a meaningful purpose compels people into action” (Holman et al., 2007, p. 12). Change is the action of moving from the current state into some future state, and it always involves people and systems. Change does not happen in an isolated environment. Without transparency, change is missing a key motivational ingredient for success. The opposite of Transparency is Opacity, where information is secreted and exclusive. Indicators of opaqueness are maintaining anonymity, maintaining a low public profile, limiting outside influence, maintaining independence, insider control, and protecting autonomy (Reid, 2018, p. 82). Using these foundational indicators of opacity, OD&C practitioners can determine propensity toward opaqueness and transparency. Transparency allows stakeholders, including employees, customers, and shareholders, to believe in and trust the organization, promoting engagement and positive relationships while dispelling rumors. Rumors arise when information is scarce (Kapferer, 1992, p. 54). Rumors are powerful conduits of secretive information that is not easily dispelled. The spread of rumors results from not providing timely authentic, transparent communication. Another concern is change-specific cynicism, which fuels lasting resistance to change, which may not be resolved with mitigation. Therefore, OD&C practitioners need to carefully examine the propensity for opaqueness and arm themselves with the facts and tools to encourage transparency