Working to the Contract in Virginia: Legal Consequences of Teachers Attempts to Limit Their Contractual Duties

In 1980, there were 233,000 local government employees in Virginia. Of this number, 60,588 were public school teachers employed by local school boards for the 1980-81 school year. Characterized as both professionals and public employees, public school teachers not only teach the children but perform many other duties crucial to the efficient operation of the schools. These additional responsibilities are generally assigned by the teacher\u27s immediate supervisor, usually the school principal, under authority granted by the local school board. Like other state and local government employees in Virginia, teachers have no power to collectively negotiate their contracutal duties\u27 which they contend are ill-defined and often are performed without compensation

A New Species of Diploid Quillwort (Isoetes, Isoetaceae, Lycophyta) from Lebanon

A new species, Isoetes libanotica Musselman, Bolin & B. D. Bray (Isoetaceae, Lycophyta), is described from Akkar District of northern Lebanon. It is a seasonal terrestrial species of basaltic soils, diploid (2n = 22), with complete velum coverage. Megaspore diameter ranges from 338 to 477 mu m with remote, low tuberculate ornamentation and a low to obsolete equatorial girdle; microspore length ranges from 25 to 30 mu m, with echinate ornamentation. At the type locality of I. libanotica, two other Isoetes L. species occur sympatrically. These superficially similar Isoetes species can be differentiated from I. libanotica using megaspore characters; I. duriei Bory has larger alveolate megaspores and I. olympica A. Braun has a prominent equatorial girdle

Interesting, Provocative, and Enigmatic: Morphological Observations on Southeastern Quillworts (\u3ci\u3eIsoetes\u3c/i\u3e Isoetaceae, Lycopodiophyta

The unique morphology of quillworts has received limited attention, and such studies have been limited to only a few species. Our extensive field work during the past two decades has revealed variation in the structures of the plant, including the rhizomorph, scales, phyllopodia, and abscission caps. Polarity of the axes of southeastern quillwort rhizomorphs varies from discoid (most species), to elongate, to upright with axis branching in several species. In species of intermittent streams, these branched rhizomorphs produce plantlets that break off in running water. Scales are tiny brown or black structures in alternating whorls with sporophylls (leaves). They are often overlooked and easily removed when rinsing specimens. Found in most southeastern terrestrial/amphibious species, scales are absent from aquatic species. Scales are distinct from phyllopodia, the sclerified bases of sporophylls, but intermediates between scales and phyllopodia occur. Not all species with scales have phyllopodia. Although scales cannot be used for determination of species, their presence or absence is of taxonomic value. Research on southeastern Isoetes phylogeny could help determine which of the rhizomorph and scale characters are plesiomorphic

A New Species of Diploid Quillwort (Isoetes, Isoetaceae, Lycophyta) from Lebanon

A new species, Isoetes libanotica Musselman, Bolin & B. D. Bray (Isoetaceae, Lycophyta), is described from Akkar District of northern Lebanon. It is a seasonal terrestrial species of basaltic soils, diploid (2n = 22), with complete velum coverage. Megaspore diameter ranges from 338 to 477 mu m with remote, low tuberculate ornamentation and a low to obsolete equatorial girdle; microspore length ranges from 25 to 30 mu m, with echinate ornamentation. At the type locality of I. libanotica, two other Isoetes L. species occur sympatrically. These superficially similar Isoetes species can be differentiated from I. libanotica using megaspore characters; I. duriei Bory has larger alveolate megaspores and I. olympica A. Braun has a prominent equatorial girdle

Isoetes Mississippiensis: A New Quillwort from Mississippi, USA

Isoetes mississippiensis S.W. Leonard, W.C. Taylor, L.J. Musselman and R.D. Bray (Isoetaceae, Lycopodiophyta) is a new species known from two sites along tributaries of the Pearl River in southern Mississippi. This species is distinguished from other species in the southeastern United States by a combination of character states including a basic diploid (2n=22) chromosome count, laevigate megaspores, and a narrow velum covering less than one-third of the adaxial sporangium wall

Genomics Reveals the Worldwide Distribution of Multidrug-Resistant Serotype 6E Pneumococci.

To access publisher's full text version of this article, please click on the hyperlink in Additional Links field or click on the hyperlink at the top of the page marked Files. This article is open access.The pneumococcus is a leading pathogen infecting children and adults. Safe, effective vaccines exist, and they work by inducing antibodies to the polysaccharide capsule (unique for each serotype) that surrounds the cell; however, current vaccines are limited by the fact that only a few of the nearly 100 antigenically distinct serotypes are included in the formulations. Within the serotypes, serogroup 6 pneumococci are a frequent cause of serious disease and common colonizers of the nasopharynx in children. Serotype 6E was first reported in 2004 but was thought to be rare; however, we and others have detected serotype 6E among recent pneumococcal collections. Therefore, we analyzed a diverse data set of ∼1,000 serogroup 6 genomes, assessed the prevalence and distribution of serotype 6E, analyzed the genetic diversity among serogroup 6 pneumococci, and investigated whether pneumococcal conjugate vaccine-induced serotype 6A and 6B antibodies mediate the killing of serotype 6E pneumococci. We found that 43% of all genomes were of serotype 6E, and they were recovered worldwide from healthy children and patients of all ages with pneumococcal disease. Four genetic lineages, three of which were multidrug resistant, described ∼90% of the serotype 6E pneumococci. Serological assays demonstrated that vaccine-induced serotype 6B antibodies were able to elicit killing of serotype 6E pneumococci. We also revealed three major genetic clusters of serotype 6A capsular sequences, discovered a new hybrid 6C/6E serotype, and identified 44 examples of serotype switching. Therefore, while vaccines appear to offer protection against serotype 6E, genetic variants may reduce vaccine efficacy in the longer term because of the emergence of serotypes that can evade vaccine-induced immunity

Developing a core outcome set for the health outcomes for children and adults with congenital oesophageal atresia and/or tracheo-oesophageal fistula: OCELOT task group study protocol

Introduction: Heterogeneity in reported outcomes of infants with oesophageal atresia (OA) with or without tracheo-oesophageal fistula (TOF) prevents effective data pooling. Core outcome sets (COS) have been developed for many conditions to standardise outcome reporting, facilitate meta-analysis and improve the relevance of research for patients and families. Our aim is to develop an internationally-agreed, comprehensive COS for OA-TOF, relevant from birth through to transition and adulthood. Methods and analysis: A long list of outcomes will be generated using (1) a systematic review of existing studies on OA-TOF and (2) qualitative research with children (patients), adults (patients) and families involving focus groups, semistructured interviews and self-reported outcome activity packs. A two-phase Delphi survey will then be completed by four key stakeholder groups: (1) patients (paediatric and adult); (2) families; (3) healthcare professionals; and (4) researchers. Phase I will include stakeholders individually rating the importance and relevance of each long-listed outcome using a 9-point Likert scale, with the option to suggest additional outcomes not already included. During phase II, stakeholders will review summarised results from phase I relative to their own initial score and then will be asked to rescore the outcome based on this information. Responses from phase II will be summarised using descriptive statistics and a predefined definition of consensus for inclusion or exclusion of outcomes. Following the Delphi process, stakeholder experts will be invited to review data at a consensus meeting and agree on a COS for OA-TOF. Ethics and dissemination: Ethical approval was sought through the Health Research Authority via the Integrated Research Application System, registration no. 297026. However, approval was deemed not to be required, so study sponsorship and oversight were provided by Alder Hey Children’s NHS Foundation Trust. The study has been prospectively registered with the COMET Initiative. The study will be published in an open access forum

Using behavioural theories to optimise shared haemodialysis care: a qualitative intervention development study of patient and professional experience

Background Patients in control of their own haemodialysis report better outcomes than those receiving professional controlled care in a hospital setting, even though home and hospital haemodialysis are largely equivalent from mechanical and physiological perspectives. Shared Haemodialysis Care (SHC) describes an initiative in which hospital haemodialysis patients are supported by dialysis staff to become as involved as they wish in their own care; and can improve patient safety, satisfaction and may reduce costs. We do not understand why interventions to support self-management in other conditions have variable effects or how to optimise the delivery of SHC. The purpose of this study was to identify perceived patient and professional (nurses and healthcare assistants) barriers to the uptake of SHC, and to use these data to identify intervention components to optimise care. Methods Individual semi-structured interviews with patients and professionals were conducted to identify barriers and facilitators. Data were coded to behavioural theory to identify solutions. A national UK learning event with multiple stakeholders (patients, carers, commissioners and professionals) explored the salience of these barriers and the acceptability of solutions. Results A complex intervention strategy was designed to optimise SHC for patients and professionals. Interviews were conducted with patients (n = 15) and professionals (n = 7) in two hospitals and three satellite units piloting SHC. Data from patient and professional interviews could be coded to behavioural theory. Analyses identified key barriers (knowledge, beliefs about capabilities, skills and environmental context and resources). An intervention strategy that focuses on providing, first, patients with information about the shared nature of care, how to read prescriptions and use machines, and second, providing professionals with skills and protected time to teach both professionals/patients, as well as providing continual review, may improve the implementation of SHC and be acceptable to stakeholders. Conclusions We have developed an intervention strategy to improve the implementation of SHC for patients and professionals. While this intervention strategy has been systematically developed using behavioural theory, it should be rigorously tested in a subsequent effectiveness evaluation study prior to implementation to ensure that shared haemodialysis care can be delivered equitably, efficiently and safely for all patients

Evaluating the quality of research co-production: Research Quality Plus for Co-Production (RQ + 4 Co-Pro)

Background Co-production is an umbrella term used to describe the process of generating knowledge through partnerships between researchers and those who will use or benefit from research. Multiple advantages of research co-production have been hypothesized, and in some cases documented, in both the academic and practice record. However, there are significant gaps in understanding how to evaluate the quality of co-production. This gap in rigorous evaluation undermines the potential of both co-production and co-producers. Methods This research tests the relevance and utility of a novel evaluation framework: Research Quality Plus for Co-Production (RQ + 4 Co-Pro). Following a co-production approach ourselves, our team collaborated to develop study objectives, questions, analysis, and results sharing strategies. We used a dyadic field-test design to execute RQ + 4 Co-Pro evaluations amongst 18 independently recruited subject matter experts. We used standardized reporting templates and qualitative interviews to collect data from field-test participants, and thematic assessment and deliberative dialogue for analysis. Main limitations include that field-test participation included only health research projects and health researchers and this will limit perspective included in the study, and, that our own co-production team does not include all potential perspectives that may add value to this work. Results The field test surfaced strong support for the relevance and utility of RQ + 4 Co-Pro as an evaluation approach and framework. Research participants shared opportunities for fine-tuning language and criteria within the prototype version, but also, for alternative uses and users of RQ + 4 Co-Pro. All research participants suggested RQ + 4 Co-Pro offered an opportunity for improving how co-production is evaluated and advanced. This facilitated our revision and publication herein of a field-tested RQ + 4 Co-Pro Framework and Assessment Instrument. Conclusion Evaluation is necessary for understanding and improving co-production, and, for ensuring co-production delivers on its promise of better health.. RQ + 4 Co-Pro provides a practical evaluation approach and framework that we invite co-producers and stewards of co-production—including the funders, publishers, and universities who increasingly encourage socially relevant research—to study, adapt, and apply

Evaluating research co-production: protocol for the Research Quality Plus for Co-Production (RQ+ 4 Co-Pro) framework.

Background Research co-production is an umbrella term used to describe research users and researchers working together to generate knowledge. Research co-production is used to create knowledge that is relevant to current challenges and to increase uptake of that knowledge into practice, programs, products, and/or policy. Yet, rigorous theories and methods to assess the quality of co-production are limited. Here we describe a framework for assessing the quality of research co-production—Research Quality Plus for Co-Production (RQ+ 4 Co-Pro)—and outline our field test of this approach. Methods Using a co-production approach, we aim to field test the relevance and utility of the RQ+ 4 Co-Pro framework. To do so, we will recruit participants who have led research co-production projects from the international Integrated Knowledge Translation Research Network. We aim to sample 16 to 20 co-production project leads, assign these participants to dyadic groups (8 to 10 dyads), train each participant in the RQ+ 4 Co-Pro framework using deliberative workshops and oversee a simulation assessment exercise using RQ+ 4 Co-Pro within dyadic groups. To study this experience, we use a qualitative design to collect participant demographic information and project demographic information and will use in-depth semi-structured interviews to collect data related to the experience each participant has using the RQ+ 4 Co-Pro framework. Discussion This study will yield knowledge about a new way to assess research co-production. Specifically, it will address the relevance and utility of using RQ+ 4 Co-Pro, a framework that includes context as an inseparable component of research, identifies dimensions of quality matched to the aims of co-production, and applies a systematic and transferable evaluative method for reaching conclusions. This is a needed area of innovation for research co-production to reach its full potential. The findings may benefit co-producers interested in understanding the quality of their work, but also other stewards of research co-production. Accordingly, we undertake this study as a co-production team representing multiple perspectives from across the research enterprise, such as funders, journal editors, university administrators, and government and health organization leaders