Revisiting the K-W-L: What we Knew; What we Wanted to Know; What we Learned

Good teachers are always searching for ways to enhance learning in their classrooms. Researchers and practitioners alike continue to develop and refine strategies which improve comprehension and increase retention while nourishing students\u27 ability to learn independently. The K-W-L strategy (What-we know; what we want to know; what we learned), first described by Ogle (1986), is such a strategy. Though there is research to support the effectiveness of the KW-L, any strategy may need to be modified and refined to improve its effectiveness in promoting learning. We five teachers collaborated to study how the implementation of the KW-L can be varied in different classroom settings in order to ensure that it has the desired effect on the reading comprehension and learning of elementary and middle school students

MIDAS-FAST: Design and Validation of a Model-Based Tool to Predict Operator Performance with Robotic Arm Automation

The Coalition for Aerospace and Science (CAS) is hosting an exhibition on Capitol Hill on June 14, 2017, to highlight the contributions of CAS members to NASAs portfolio of activities. This exhibition represents an opportunity for an HFES members ground breaking work to be displayed and to build on support within Congress for NASAs human research program including in those areas that are of specific interest to the HFE community. The intent of this poster presentation is to demonstrate the positive outcome that comes from funding HFE related research on a project like the one exemplified by MIDAS-FAST

Does Job Testing Harm Minority Workers? Evidence from Retail Establishments

Because minorities typically fare poorly on standardized tests, job testing is thought to pose an equality-efficiency trade-off: testing improves selection but reduces minority hiring. We develop a conceptual framework to assess when this trade-off is likely to apply and evaluate the evidence for such a trade-off using hiring and productivity data from a national retail firm whose 1,363 stores switched from informal to test-based worker screening over the course of one year. We document that testing yielded more productive hires at this firm-raising mean and median tenure by 10% or more. Consistent with prior research, minorities performed worse on the test. Yet, testing had no measurable impact on minority hiring, and productivity gains were uniformly large among minority and nonminority hires. These results suggest that job testing raised the precision of screening without introducing additional negative information about minority applicants, most plausibly because both the job test and the informal screen that preceded it were unbiased. (c) 2008 by the President and Fellows of Harvard College and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology..