Do increased opportunities to respond enhance generalization from multiplication to division

Haring and Eaton (1978) proposed four levels of skill development; acquisition, fluency, generalization, and adaptation. Many researchers and educators have focused on improving skill acquisition and fluency. This study was designed to investigate whether increasing a student\u27s opportunities to respond (practice) would increase generalization of learning from multiplication to division. The participants were 31 students from two third-grade magnet classes in an inner-city school. The research design was a within-participants repeated measures ANOV A. Three levels of the independent variable, practice, were investigated (high, low, no). Outcomes were measured at three different times (Days 1, 8, and 10). Multiplication and division performance were the dependent variables. There were four measures of the dependent variables; number attempted, number correct, percent correct, and digits correct per minute. Three mutually exclusive sets of multiplication problems were generated for this study. Each set consisted of 10 one-digit by one-digit multiplication problems. These problems were used to generate three types of sheets (intervention sheets, multiplication assessment sheets, and division assessment sheets). The difference between the intervention and assessment sheets was that the intervention sheets had the answers with the problems. The study was conducted over a 10-day period. On the first day, the students were given the pretest. On the second day, they were taught how to perform the Cover, Copy, and Compare technique. On the third through seventh days, the students performed the Cover, Copy, and Compare intervention. On the eighth day, the students were given their first posttest. On the ninth day, the students were taught how to generalize their learning from multiplication to division. On the tenth day, the students were administered the second posttest. No significant interaction effects (interaction between time and practice) were found. In addition, the practice level did not increase the level of generalization. The results showed time increased the level of generalization. Time was a significant factor in fourteen of twenty-four comparisons across the three days (Day 1 to Day 8, Day 8 to Day 10, and Day 1 to Day 10). These results failed to support the hypothesis that increasing students\u27 practice would enhance generalization. The discussion focuses on methodological problems of the current study and threats to the internal validity. Testing effects, spillover effects, history effects, and poor treatment integrity may have contaminated results

Estimating species relative abundances from museum records

Funding: C.F., U.B. and D.J.R. acknowledge COST Action ‘European Soil-Biology Data Warehouse for Soil Protection’ (EUdaphobase), CA18237, supported by COST (European Cooperation in Science and Technology). AEM thanks the Leverhulme Trust (RPG-2019-401). D.B.B. was supported by an NSF Postdoc Research Fellowship in Biology (NSF 000733206), S.M.R. was supported by an NSERC Discovery Grant Author Contributions, A.V.S. was supported by NSF 1755336, C.S.M was supported by NSF 1398620 and N.J.G was supported by NSF 2019470.1. Dated, geo-referenced museum specimens are a rich data source for reconstructing species' distribution and abundance patterns. However, museum records are potentially biased towards over-representation of rare species, and it is unclear whether museum records can be used to estimate relative abundance in the field. 2. We assembled 17 coupled field and museum datasets to quantitatively compare relative abundance estimates with the Dirichlet distribution. Collectively, these datasets comprise 73,039 museum records and 1,405,316 field observations of 2,240 species. 3. Although museum records of rare species overestimated relative abundance by 1-fold to over 100-fold (median study = 9.0), the relative abundance of species estimated from museum occurrence records was strongly correlated with relative abundance estimated from standardized field surveys (r2 range of 0.10-0.91, median study = 0.43). 4. These analyses provide a justification for estimating species relative abundance with carefully curated museum occurrence records, which may allow for the detection of temporal or spatial shifts in the rank ordering of common and rare species.Publisher PDFPeer reviewe

Targeted genetic analysis in a large cohort of familial and sporadic cases of aneurysm or dissection of the thoracic aorta

PURPOSE: Thoracic aortic aneurysm/aortic dissection (TAAD) is a disorder with highly variable age of onset and phenotype. We sought to determine the prevalence of pathogenic variants in TAAD-associated genes in a mixed cohort of sporadic and familial TAAD patients and identify relevant genotype–phenotype relationships. METHODS: We used a targeted polymerase chain reaction and next-generation sequencing–based panel for genetic analysis of 15 TAAD-associated genes in 1,025 unrelated TAAD cases. RESULTS: We identified 49 pathogenic or likely pathogenic (P/LP) variants in 47 cases (4.9% of those successfully sequenced). Almost half of the variants were in nonsyndromic cases with no known family history of aortic disease. Twenty-five variants were within FBN1 and two patients were found to harbor two P/LP variants. Presence of a related syndrome, younger age at presentation, family history of aortic disease, and involvement of the ascending aorta increased the risk of carrying a P/LP variant. CONCLUSION: Given the poor prognosis of TAAD that is undiagnosed prior to acute rupture or dissection, genetic analysis of both familial and sporadic cases of TAAD will lead to new diagnoses, more informed management, and possibly reduced mortality through earlier, preclinical diagnosis in genetically determined cases and their family members

brainlife.io: A decentralized and open source cloud platform to support neuroscience research

Neuroscience research has expanded dramatically over the past 30 years by advancing standardization and tool development to support rigor and transparency. Consequently, the complexity of the data pipeline has also increased, hindering access to FAIR data analysis to portions of the worldwide research community. brainlife.io was developed to reduce these burdens and democratize modern neuroscience research across institutions and career levels. Using community software and hardware infrastructure, the platform provides open-source data standardization, management, visualization, and processing and simplifies the data pipeline. brainlife.io automatically tracks the provenance history of thousands of data objects, supporting simplicity, efficiency, and transparency in neuroscience research. Here brainlife.io's technology and data services are described and evaluated for validity, reliability, reproducibility, replicability, and scientific utility. Using data from 4 modalities and 3,200 participants, we demonstrate that brainlife.io's services produce outputs that adhere to best practices in modern neuroscience research

Zds2p Regulates Swe1p-dependent Polarized Cell Growth in Saccharomyces cerevisiae via a Novel Cdc55p Interaction Domain

A C-terminal region in Zds2p (ZH4) is required for regulation of Swe1p-dependent polarized cell growth and this region is necessary and sufficient for interaction with protein phosphatase 2A regulatory subunit, Cdc55p. Our results indicate that the Zds proteins regulate the Swe1p-dependent G2/M checkpoint in a CDC55-dependent manner

brainlife.io: a decentralized and open-source cloud platform to support neuroscience research

Neuroscience is advancing standardization and tool development to support rigor and transparency. Consequently, data pipeline complexity has increased, hindering FAIR (findable, accessible, interoperable and reusable) access. brainlife.io was developed to democratize neuroimaging research. The platform provides data standardization, management, visualization and processing and automatically tracks the provenance history of thousands of data objects. Here, brainlife.io is described and evaluated for validity, reliability, reproducibility, replicability and scientific utility using four data modalities and 3,200 participants