Evolution Of New Duplicate Genes In Arabidopsis Thaliana

Abstract Gene duplication is one of the major mechanisms by which organisms expand their genomes. The material added to the genome can then be acted upon by mutation and natural selection to increase the fitness of the species. By studying these duplicate sequences we can understand the process by which species evolve new functional genes. In a previous paper we identified 100 new duplicate genes through a genome wide comparison between A. thaliana and related species. We selected three of these new duplicate genes and investigated more closely their sequence and expression divergence from their parental gene. The three new duplicate genes selected were AT1G19080, AT1G29410 and AT4G13500 and their parents AT3G55490 AT1G07780 and AT2G05310 respectively. These genes were sequenced using A. thaliana accession lines from a multitude of locations, and the sequences were used in population analyses. The genes were also tested for differential expression patterns. The genes all show evidence of negative selection or a recent population bottleneck. Notably we detected a large number of populations carrying deletions for the new genes. The second set (AT1G07780/ AT1G19080) displayed differential expression, while the third set shows no divergence. The AT4G13500/ AT2G05310 gene family has no known function. In an attempt to discern their function we obtained mutant plants and grew them alongside control plants in an attempt to detect a phenotype for the knockout. We noticed divergent growth patterns between the groups under different light cycles, however they require further testing

A new paradigm for improvement: Student-faculty partnership in learning outcomes assessment

In the United States, higher education institutions assess the impact of program-level educational experiences through the process of program-level student learning outcomes assessment. The final step of the assessment cycle is to use assessment interpretations to make changes to educational programming. Nevertheless, few programs can demonstrate the use of assessment results in this way. Perhaps assessment work is missing a key perspective: that of the students it assesses. Cook-Sather, Bovill, and Felton (2014) define student-faculty partnership as “a collaborative, reciprocal process through which all participants have the opportunity to contribute equally, although not necessarily in the same ways, to curricular or pedagogical conceptualization, decision making, implementation, investigation, or analysis” (p. 6-7.). Research and practice into student-faculty partnership work has demonstrated many positive effects on the teaching, learning, and classroom assessment process. Yet, no work has focused on partnership efforts in program-level assessment. The purpose of this study was to explore the potential to partner explicitly with students in the program and institutional level student learning outcomes assessment process. A grounded theory-based qualitative method was used to generate a framework for practitioners who wish to engage in partnership efforts in program-level assessment. Fifteen experienced higher education professionals and experts in student-faculty partnership provided more than 20 hours of interview and field note data. These data resulted in 6,258 lines of open line-by-line coding. These open codes were consolidated using focused coding, into 191 secondary-level themes. These secondary-level themes were consolidated using focused coding, into 11 primary-level themes. The themes are discussed in relation to their applicability to future student partnership work in program-level assessment and a framework for engaging in this work was developed. This framework was used to outline tentative examples of how student-faculty partnership work might be organized within program-level assessment practices. While in the early stages of prototype efforts, student-faculty partnership has the potential to radically alter the way we engage in program-level assessment

The initial development of a measure of cultural competence in school psychology: The Madison Assessment of Cultural Competence in School Psychology (MACCS)

School psychology training programs are under increased pressure to train students in a way that emphasizes cultural competence. However, there is not currently an accepted instrument that can measure the cultural competence of students specific to the discipline of school psychology. The current study proposes and explores several adaptions of a proposed instrument to measure cultural competence in school psychology. Adaptions were selected to address problems observed in collecting similar data in a school psychology program. A first study was unsuccessful due to sampling issues; however, a second study was more successful. A sample was selected to exaggerate training differences that included undergraduate students, school psychology graduate students, and practicing school psychologists. Results suggested that a new set of questions combined with a scenario procedure was very successful at measuring different levels of training in cultural competence. It is recommended that these results be used to develop an instrument that can be used in all school psychology training programs

Elucidating EU Engagement: Rethinking Dimensions of Supranational Participation

Some observers of the EU have expressed concern about the quality of its democratic governance. Such sentiments are reflected in much of the research conducted on attitudes toward the EU and voting in European Parliament elections, both of which seek to assess the vibrancy of public engagement with the European project. Yet few—if any—have considered other types of behavior that may be associated with an active EU citizenry. This paper uses original survey data from the United Kingdom to complement existing research by identifying a fuller picture of the types and frequency of EU participation. We also assess the extent to which predictors from existing public opinion literature (identity threat, economic concerns, political attitudes and sociodemographics) predict these various types of participation. Results suggest that citizens pursue a wide array of participation avenues and that different sets of motivations underpin these different types of EU engagement