Calculation of the free-free transitions in the electron-hydrogen scattering S-wave model

The S-wave model of electron-hydrogen scattering is evaluated using the convergent close-coupling method with an emphasis on scattering from excited states including an initial state from the target continuum. Convergence is found for discrete excitations and the elastic free-free transition. The latter is particularly interesting given the corresponding potential matrix elements are divergent

Evaluation of Year 1 of the Tuition Partners Programme: Impact Evaluation for Primary Schools. Evaluation Report

The National Tutoring Programme (NTP) Tuition Partners (TP) programme was designed to provide additional support to schools and teachers to supplement classroom teaching through subsidised high-quality tutoring for pupils from an approved list of tutoring organisations, the Tuition Partners. This evaluation covers the TP programme as delivered in its first year by the Education Endowment Foundation (EEF), from November 2020 to August 2021. Tuition Partners was one arm of the NTP. The NTP aimed to support teachers and schools in providing a sustained response to the Covid-19 pandemic and to provide a longer term contribution to closing the attainment gap between disadvantaged pupils and their peers. The NTP was part of a wider government response to the pandemic, funded by the Department for Education and originally developed by the EEF, Nesta, Impetus, The Sutton Trust, and Teach First, and with the support of the KPMG Foundation. The EEF appointed 33 approved ‘Tuition Partners’ that schools could select from to deliver tuition. Schools could access 15 hours of tutoring per selected pupil (with a minimum of 12 hours being considered a completed block of tuition). Tuition was provided online and/or face-to-face; and was 1:1, or in small groups (1:2 or 1:3); and available in English, maths, science, humanities and modern foreign languages. Tuition was expected to be delivered in schools (before, during and after school), in addition to usual teaching; and, in certain circumstances, at home. The programme was targeted at disadvantaged pupils attending state-maintained schools in England, including those eligible for Pupil Premium funding (PP-eligible), Free School Meals (FSM), or those identified by schools as having an equivalent need for support. Participating schools had discretion to identify which of their pupils they felt would most benefit from additional tuition support. Pupils in Years 1–11 were eligible (5–16 years old). The programme aimed to reach 215,000 to 265,000 pupils, across 6000 state-maintained schools in England, and it was expected that approximately 20,000 tutors would be recruited by Tuition Partners. The TP programme was set up and delivered during the Covid-19 pandemic, requiring continued responsiveness to the challenges faced by schools including restricted attendance, remote teaching, and ongoing widespread staff and pupil absences. During the school closures to most pupils from January – March 2021, the EEF approved TPs to deliver online tuition at home, however many schools chose to wait to commence tutoring until schools reopened fully, and therefore started tutoring later than planned. This evaluation report covers the analysis on the impact of the TP programme on the maths and English attainment outcomes for primary school pupils (Years 1–6) using standardised classroom assessments. Separate reports relate to analysis on Year 11 pupils and an implementation and process evaluation (IPE). The evaluation findings for the TP programme are brought together in a summary and interpretation report that is available here. This evaluation uses a quasi-experimental design (QED), involving a group of intervention schools that participated in the TP programme, and a group of comparison schools that did not receive the programme. The evaluation relies on a propensity score matching and re-weighting approach to ensure that the intervention and comparison schools are similar to each other in important, observable regards. As pupils who would have received TP in comparison schools were difficult to identify, the evaluation focused on pupils eligible for Pupil Premium and on all pupils, as these groups can be identified in both TP and comparison schools. For English, the analysis is based on 165 primary schools with 7073 pupils eligible for Pupil Premium and for maths, 126 primary schools with 5102 pupils eligible for Pupil Premium3. An additional instrumental variable (IV) analysis, based on the sample of TP schools only, looked at the impact of TP in schools that signed up to the TP programme earlier (and that delivered more tutoring) compared to schools that signed up later. On average, pupils eligible for Pupil Premium in schools that received TP made similar progress in English and maths compared to pupils eligible for Pupil Premium in comparison schools (no evidence of an effect in English or in maths). This result has a low security rating. A particular challenge is that, on average, only approximately 20% of pupils eligible for Pupil Premium were selected for tutoring, meaning a large proportion of pupils eligible for Pupil Premium were included in the analysis who did not receive tutoring. Therefore, this estimated impact of TP is diluted and it is hard to detect any effect that may (or may not) be present. Similar analysis on all pupils found that pupils in schools that received TP made, on average, similar progress in English compared to all pupils in comparison schools (no evidence of an effect), and an additional one month’s progress in maths compared to pupils in comparison schools. However, there is uncertainty around these estimates, with the positive maths result being consistent with a null (0 months) or slightly larger positive effect (2 months) and the English result being consistent with small positive (1 month) or small negative effect (−1 months). Furthermore, this analysis was subject to even further dilution: on average, only 12% (for maths) and 14% (for English) of pupils in the analysed schools were selected for tutoring. Given this context, it is unlikely that any of these differences were due to TP. In the sample of TP schools, completing a 12-hour block of tutoring (compared to zero hours) was related to higher English scores amongst pupils eligible for Pupil Premium that received more tutoring due to the early sign-up of the school. An equivalent analysis for maths was not able to proceed. A different analysis within TP schools showed that pupils who received more hours of tutoring were associated with higher English scores on average than pupils who received fewer hours of tutoring. However, this was not the case for maths, where receiving more hours of tutoring was not associated with higher maths scores. These results are associations and are not necessarily causal estimates of impact; there may be other explanations for the results

Evaluation of Year 1 of the Tuition Partners Programme: Impact Evaluation Report for Year 11. Evaluation Report: An exploration of impact in Year 11

The National Tutoring Programme (NTP) Tuition Partners (TP) programme was designed to provide additional support to schools and teachers to supplement classroom teaching through subsidised, high quality tutoring for pupils from an approved list of tutoring organisations, the Tuition Partners. This evaluation covers the TP programme as delivered in its first year by the Education Endowment Foundation (EEF), from November 2020 to August 2021. Tuition Partners was one arm of the NTP. The NTP aimed to support teachers and schools in providing a sustained response to the Covid-19 pandemic and to provide a longer term contribution to closing the attainment gap between disadvantaged pupils and their peers. The NTP was part of a wider government response to the pandemic, funded by the Department for Education and originally developed by the EEF, Nesta, Impetus, The Sutton Trust, and Teach First, and with the support of the KPMG Foundation. The EEF appointed 33 approved ‘Tuition Partners’ that schools could select from to deliver tuition. Schools could access 15 hours of tutoring per selected pupil (with a minimum of 12 hours being considered a completed block of tuition). Tuition was provided online and/or face-to-face; and was 1:1, or in small groups (1:2 or 1:3); and available in English, maths, science, humanities and modern foreign languages. Tuition was expected to be delivered in schools (before, during and after school), in addition to usual teaching; and in certain circumstances, at home. The programme was targeted at disadvantaged pupils attending state-maintained schools in England, including those eligible for Pupil Premium funding (PP-eligible), Free School Meals (FSM), or those identified by schools as having an equivalent need for support. Participating schools had discretion to identify which of their pupils they felt would most benefit from additional tuition support. Pupils in Years 1–11 were eligible (5–16 years old). The programme aimed to reach 215,000 to 265,000 pupils, across 6,000 state-maintained schools in England, and it was expected that approximately 20,000 tutors would be recruited by Tuition Partners. The TP programme was set up and delivered during the Covid-19 pandemic, requiring continued responsiveness to the challenges faced by schools including restricted attendance, remote teaching, and ongoing widespread staff and pupil absences. During school closures to most pupils from January – March 2021, the EEF approved TPs to deliver online tuition at home, however many schools chose to wait to commence tutoring until schools reopened fully, and therefore started tutoring later than planned. The usual summer exams process for Year 11 pupils could not go ahead as planned in summer 2021, and GCSEs were determined by TAGs instead. This evaluation report covers the analysis on the impact of the TP programme on the maths and English attainment outcomes for Year 11 pupils only. Separate reports relate to analysis on a sample of primary schools and an implementation and process evaluation (IPE). The evaluation findings for the TP programme are brought together in a summary and interpretation report that is available here. This evaluation uses a quasi-experimental design (QED), involving a group of intervention schools that participated in the TP programme, and a group of comparison schools that did not receive the programme. The evaluation relies on a propensity score matching approach to ensure that the intervention and comparison schools are similar to each other in important, observable regards. As pupils who would have received TP in comparison schools were difficult to identify, the evaluation focused on pupils eligible for Pupil Premium and on all pupils, as these groups can be identified in both TP and non-TP schools. The analysis is based on 1,464 secondary schools with a total of 62,024 pupils eligible for Pupil Premium. The evaluation assessed impact in English and maths using Teacher Assessed Grades (TAGs) from 2021. Year 11 pupils eligible for Pupil Premium in schools that received TP made similar progress in English and maths compared to pupils eligible for Pupil Premium in comparison schools (there was no evidence of an effect in English or maths). A particular challenge is that, on average, only 12% of pupils eligible for Pupil Premium were selected for tutoring in maths and 9% were selected for tutoring in English, meaning the vast majority of the pupils included in the analysis did not receive tutoring. Therefore, this estimated impact of TP is diluted and it is hard to detect any effect that may (or may not) be present. When looking at all pupils in Year 11, pupils in schools that received TP made, on average, similar progress in English compared to all Year 11 pupils in comparison schools (there was no evidence of an effect). In maths, Year 11 pupils in schools that received TP made slightly less progress than all Year 11 pupils in comparison schools (though this effect was very small and equivalent to zero months ’ additional progress). However, this analysis was subject to even further dilution than the PPeligible analysis: only 7% of Year 11 pupils were selected for tutoring in maths and 6% in English. Given this context, it is unlikely that any of these differences were due to TP. Additional analysis restricted the sample of schools to those that targeted higher proportions of pupils eligible for Pupil Premium to receive tutoring, to reduce the issue of dilution and bring the group of analysed pupils closer to those that were selected for the intervention. In schools that selected over 50% of pupils eligible for Pupil Premium for tutoring, pupils eligible for Pupil Premium made similar progress in TP and comparison schools in English and maths. However, when the sample was restricted to schools that selected over 70% of pupils eligible for Pupil Premium for tutoring (and reducing dilution further), the impact of TP on pupils eligible for Pupil Premium is positive. In these schools, pupils eligible for Pupil Premium made, on average, the equivalent of two months additional progress in English and two months additional progress in maths, compared to pupils eligible for Pupil Premium in comparison schools. This analysis was based on a smaller sample of schools that were rematched to a comparison sample. However, different characteristics to the rest of the TP population of schools remained (more ‘Outstanding’ schools, lower percentage of FSM students), so this finding may not necessarily be generalisable to all TP schools. Within schools that participated in TP, pupils who received more hours of tutoring in maths obtained higher maths TAGs, and pupils who received more hours of tutoring in English obtained higher English TAGs, than pupils who received fewer hours of tutoring in the respective subjects. These results are associations and are not necessarily causal estimates of impact; there may be other explanations for the higher grades among these pupils

Teaching new dogs old tricks: membrane biophysical properties in drug delivery and resistance

"How do drugs cross the plasma membrane?" this may seem like a trivial question. This question is often over-looked to focus primarily on the different complex macro-molecular aspects involved in drug delivery or drug resistance. However, recent studies have highlighted the theme that to be fully understood, more knowledge of the underlying biology of the most complex biological processes involved in the delivery and resistance to drugs is needed. After all, why would a drug interact with a transporter then subsequently be excluded from P-glycoprotein (P-gp) expressing drug resistant cells? What are the determinants of this transition in behavior? Full consideration of the physical biology of drug delivery has allowed a better understanding of the reasons why specific membrane proteins are upregulated or overexpressed in drug resistant cells. This, in turn, allows us to identify new targets for drug chemicals. Better yet, it increases the significance of recents patents and underlines their importance in multi drug resistance

A study of cross sections for excitation of pseudostates

Using the electron-hydrogen scattering Temkin-Poet model we investigate the behavior of the cross sections for excitation of all of the states used in the convergent close-coupling (CCC) formalism. In the triplet channel, it is found that the cross section for exciting the positive-energy states is approximately zero near-threshold and remains so until a further energy, equal to the energy of the state, is added to the system. This is consistent with the step-function hypothesis [Bray, Phys. Rev. Lett. {\bf 78} 4721 (1997)] and inconsistent with the expectations of Bencze and Chandler [Phys. Rev. A {\bf 59} 3129 (1999)]. Furthermore, we compare the results of the CCC-calculated triplet and singlet single differential cross sections with the recent benchmark results of Baertschy et al. [Phys. Rev. A (to be published)], and find consistent agreement.Comment: Four pages, 5 figure

The histone deacetylase complex MiDAC regulates a neurodevelopmental gene expression program to control neurite outgrowth

The mitotic deacetylase complex (MiDAC) is a recently identified histone deacetylase (HDAC) complex. While other HDAC complexes have been implicated in neurogenesis, the physiological role of MiDAC remains unknown. Here, we show that MiDAC constitutes an important regulator of neural differentiation. We demonstrate that MiDAC functions as a modulator of a neurodevelopmental gene expression program and binds to important regulators of neurite outgrowth. MiDAC upregulates gene expression of pro-neural genes such as those encoding the secreted ligands SLIT3 and NETRIN1 (NTN1) by a mechanism suggestive of H4K20ac removal on promoters and enhancers. Conversely, MiDAC inhibits gene expression by reducing H3K27ac on promoter-proximal and -distal elements of negative regulators of neurogenesis. Furthermore, loss of MiDAC results in neurite outgrowth defects that can be rescued by supplementation with SLIT3 and/or NTN1. These findings indicate a crucial role for MiDAC in regulating the ligands of the SLIT3 and NTN1 signaling axes to ensure the proper integrity of neurite development

Investigation of in vitro effects of ethephon and chlorpyrifos, either alone or in combination, on rat intestinal muscle contraction

A range of pesticides is widely used in pest management and the chances of exposure to multiple organophosphorus (OP) compounds simultaneously are high, especially from dietary and other sources. Although health hazards of individual OP insecticides have been relatively well characterized, there is lesser information on the interactive toxicity of multiple OP insecticides. The aim of this study is to elicit the possible interactions in case combined exposure of an OP pesticide chlorpyrifos (CPF) and a plant growth regulator ethephon (ETF) which are used worldwide. The ileum segments of 3 months old Wistar Albino male rats were used in isolated organ bath containing Tyrode solution. ETF and CPF were incubated (10−7 M concentration) separately or in combination with each other to ileum and their effects on acetylcholine-induced contractions were studied. The data obtained from this study show that, single and combined exposure to the agents caused agonistic interactions with regard to potency of ACh whereas they caused a decrease on Emax value of ACh. These findings suggest that exposure to these agents which have direct and indirect cholinergic effects, may cause developing clinical responses with small doses and earlier but the extent of toxicity will be lower

Genome-Wide Gene Expression Analysis in Response to Organophosphorus Pesticide Chlorpyrifos and Diazinon in C. elegans

Organophosphorus pesticides (OPs) were originally designed to affect the nervous system by inhibiting the enzyme acetylcholinesterase, an important regulator of the neurotransmitter acetylcholine. Over the past years evidence is mounting that these compounds affect many other processes. Little is known, however, about gene expression responses against OPs in the nematode Caenorhabditis elegans. This is surprising because C. elegans is extensively used as a model species in toxicity studies. To address this question we performed a microarray study in C. elegans which was exposed for 72 hrs to two widely used Ops, chlorpyrifos and diazinon, and a low dose mixture of these two compounds. Our analysis revealed transcriptional responses related to detoxification, stress, innate immunity, and transport and metabolism of lipids in all treatments. We found that for both compounds as well as in the mixture, these processes were regulated by different gene transcripts. Our results illustrate intense, and unexpected crosstalk between gene pathways in response to chlorpyrifos and diazinon in C. elegans

Undergraduate research. Genomics Education Partnership

The Genomics Education Partnership offers an inclusive model for undergraduate research experiences incorporated into the academic year science curriculum, with students pooling their work to contribute to international data bases

Inhibition of Iron Uptake Is Responsible for Differential Sensitivity to V-ATPase Inhibitors in Several Cancer Cell Lines

Many cell lines derived from tumors as well as transformed cell lines are far more sensitive to V-ATPase inhibitors than normal counterparts. The molecular mechanisms underlying these differences in sensitivity are not known. Using global gene expression data, we show that the most sensitive responses to HeLa cells to low doses of V-ATPase inhibitors involve genes responsive to decreasing intracellular iron or decreasing cholesterol and that sensitivity to iron uptake is an important determinant of V-ATPase sensitivity in several cancer cell lines. One of the most sensitive cell lines, melanoma derived SK-Mel-5, over-expresses the iron efflux transporter ferroportin and has decreased expression of proteins involved in iron uptake, suggesting that it actively suppresses cytoplasmic iron. SK-Mel-5 cells have increased production of reactive oxygen species and may be seeking to limit additional production of ROS by iron