5 research outputs found

    Coaching Elementary Teachers in Literacy: Does Feedback Type Matter for Low Implementers?

    Get PDF
    For literacy coaches and teachers, feedback is an integral component of effective coaching. Yet, little is understood about the interaction between feedback and high/low implementing teachers within coaching sessions. This multiple case study explored the types of feedback literacy coaches provided both high and low implementing teachers over a two-year period. In the first year, the literacy coaches provided at least twice as much instructional feedback as emotional feedback to low-implementing teachers. Those teachers not only received more feedback in general, but the feedback they received was primarily what they needed to do to improve. In contrast, during the same period literacy coaches provided high-implementing teachers more emotional feedback than instructional feedback. Low implementation, or resistance, observed in this study may have been tied to the overwhelming amount and type of feedback the low implementing teachers received.  Coaches seeking to enhance instructional practices could benefit from attending to the amount and type of feedback they provide their learners.

    Risk of COVID-19 after natural infection or vaccinationResearch in context

    No full text
    Summary: Background: While vaccines have established utility against COVID-19, phase 3 efficacy studies have generally not comprehensively evaluated protection provided by previous infection or hybrid immunity (previous infection plus vaccination). Individual patient data from US government-supported harmonized vaccine trials provide an unprecedented sample population to address this issue. We characterized the protective efficacy of previous SARS-CoV-2 infection and hybrid immunity against COVID-19 early in the pandemic over three-to six-month follow-up and compared with vaccine-associated protection. Methods: In this post-hoc cross-protocol analysis of the Moderna, AstraZeneca, Janssen, and Novavax COVID-19 vaccine clinical trials, we allocated participants into four groups based on previous-infection status at enrolment and treatment: no previous infection/placebo; previous infection/placebo; no previous infection/vaccine; and previous infection/vaccine. The main outcome was RT-PCR-confirmed COVID-19 >7–15 days (per original protocols) after final study injection. We calculated crude and adjusted efficacy measures. Findings: Previous infection/placebo participants had a 92% decreased risk of future COVID-19 compared to no previous infection/placebo participants (overall hazard ratio [HR] ratio: 0.08; 95% CI: 0.05–0.13). Among single-dose Janssen participants, hybrid immunity conferred greater protection than vaccine alone (HR: 0.03; 95% CI: 0.01–0.10). Too few infections were observed to draw statistical inferences comparing hybrid immunity to vaccine alone for other trials. Vaccination, previous infection, and hybrid immunity all provided near-complete protection against severe disease. Interpretation: Previous infection, any hybrid immunity, and two-dose vaccination all provided substantial protection against symptomatic and severe COVID-19 through the early Delta period. Thus, as a surrogate for natural infection, vaccination remains the safest approach to protection. Funding: National Institutes of Health

    Proceedings of the 23rd Paediatric Rheumatology European Society Congress: part one

    No full text
    corecore