Learning about racial equity in teacher practice: A mixed-methods study of white teacher candidate development

Students experience lifelong benefits from having an effective teacher (Chetty et al., 2014), but white teachers are often unprepared to effectively support the learning of students of Color (Ladson-Billings, 2001; Lowenstein, 2009). This well-documented ineffective support for learning, and subsequent racial inequity in academic outcomes, likely originates from white teachers’ perceptual frameworks (i.e., cognitive processes, beliefs) that engender deficit-oriented teacher practices and undermine students of Color’s learning. Existing theory (e.g., Adams et al., 2008; Matias & Mackey, 2016) suggests these patterns of inequity can be disrupted through transformative activities that challenge teacher candidates to re-construct their perspectives on issues of race. In this study, I explored how teacher candidates learned about racial equity in teacher practice through transformative teacher education activities. Using a mixed-methods multiple case study design, I collected quantitative survey and behavioral assessments as well as qualitative records of meaning-making from a sample of five teacher candidates participating in a teacher certification program. Then, I employed qualitative coding of interview transcripts, quantitative descriptive statistics and visualization techniques, and mixed-methods evaluations of confirming, disconfirming, and complementary evidence to understand teacher candidates’ development in transformative activities. The findings offer a novel perspective on the developmental process that underlies how teacher candidates challenge perceptual frameworks and learn about equity in teacher practice during teacher education as well as inform robust targets for future intervention efforts to better prepare white teachers to effectively teach all students

Classroom climate and children's academic and psychological wellbeing : A systematic review and meta-analysis

Although research has documented the link between classroom climate and children’s learning, evidence about whether and how classroom characteristics are linked to academic and psychological outcomes remains equivocal. This study used a meta-analytic approach to synthesize existing research with the goal of determining (a) the extent to which classroom climate as a multidimensional construct was associated with youth’s academic, behavioral, and socioemotional outcomes from kindergarten to high school and (b) whether the relations between classroom climate and youth’s outcomes differed by dimensions of classroom climate, study design, and child characteristics. Analysis included 61 studies (679 effect sizes and 73,824 participants) published between 2000 and 2016. The results showed that overall classroom climate had small-to-medium positive associations with social competence, motivation and engagement, and academic achievement and small negative associations with socioemotional distress and externalizing behaviors. Moderator analyses revealed that the negative association between classroom climate and socioemotional distress varied by classroom climate dimensions, with socioemotional support being the strongest. The strength of the associations between classroom climate and youth’s outcomes also differed by measurement of classroom climate and study design, though the patterns of the associations were mostly consistent

Revised ranges of sea grass species in the Myeik Archipelago, Myanmar

In a survey of the Myeik Archipelago, we documented seven seagrass species in the southern region. Three seagrass species (Cymodocea rotundata, Enhalus acoroides, and Halophila ovalis) have previously been reported in the Myeik Archipelago; three species (Halodule pinifolia, Halodule uninervis, Syringodium isoetifolium) are new reports for the archipelago; and one species (Thalassia hemprichii) is a new report for Myanmar

Efficacy and safety of two neutralising monoclonal antibody therapies, sotrovimab and BRII-196 plus BRII-198, for adults hospitalised with COVID-19 (TICO): a randomised controlled trial

We aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of two neutralising monoclonal antibody therapies (sotrovimab [Vir Biotechnology and GlaxoSmithKline] and BRII-196 plus BRII-198 [Brii Biosciences]) for adults admitted to hospital for COVID-19 (hereafter referred to as hospitalised) with COVID-19. In this multinational, double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled, clinical trial (Therapeutics for Inpatients with COVID-19 [TICO]), adults (aged ≥18 years) hospitalised with COVID-19 at 43 hospitals in the USA, Denmark, Switzerland, and Poland were recruited. Patients were eligible if they had laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection and COVID-19 symptoms for up to 12 days. Using a web-based application, participants were randomly assigned (2:1:2:1), stratified by trial site pharmacy, to sotrovimab 500 mg, matching placebo for sotrovimab, BRII-196 1000 mg plus BRII-198 1000 mg, or matching placebo for BRII-196 plus BRII-198, in addition to standard of care. Each study product was administered as a single dose given intravenously over 60 min. The concurrent placebo groups were pooled for analyses. The primary outcome was time to sustained clinical recovery, defined as discharge from the hospital to home and remaining at home for 14 consecutive days, up to day 90 after randomisation. Interim futility analyses were based on two seven-category ordinal outcome scales on day 5 that measured pulmonary status and extrapulmonary complications of COVID-19. The safety outcome was a composite of death, serious adverse events, incident organ failure, and serious coinfection up to day 90 after randomisation. Efficacy and safety outcomes were assessed in the modified intention-to-treat population, defined as all patients randomly assigned to treatment who started the study infusion. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04501978. Between Dec 16, 2020, and March 1, 2021, 546 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to sotrovimab (n=184), BRII-196 plus BRII-198 (n=183), or placebo (n=179), of whom 536 received part or all of their assigned study drug (sotrovimab n=182, BRII-196 plus BRII-198 n=176, or placebo n=178; median age of 60 years [IQR 50–72], 228 [43%] patients were female and 308 [57%] were male). At this point, enrolment was halted on the basis of the interim futility analysis. At day 5, neither the sotrovimab group nor the BRII-196 plus BRII-198 group had significantly higher odds of more favourable outcomes than the placebo group on either the pulmonary scale (adjusted odds ratio sotrovimab 1·07 [95% CI 0·74–1·56]; BRII-196 plus BRII-198 0·98 [95% CI 0·67–1·43]) or the pulmonary-plus complications scale (sotrovimab 1·08 [0·74–1·58]; BRII-196 plus BRII-198 1·00 [0·68–1·46]). By day 90, sustained clinical recovery was seen in 151 (85%) patients in the placebo group compared with 160 (88%) in the sotrovimab group (adjusted rate ratio 1·12 [95% CI 0·91–1·37]) and 155 (88%) in the BRII-196 plus BRII-198 group (1·08 [0·88–1·32]). The composite safety outcome up to day 90 was met by 48 (27%) patients in the placebo group, 42 (23%) in the sotrovimab group, and 45 (26%) in the BRII-196 plus BRII-198 group. 13 (7%) patients in the placebo group, 14 (8%) in the sotrovimab group, and 15 (9%) in the BRII-196 plus BRII-198 group died up to day 90. Neither sotrovimab nor BRII-196 plus BRII-198 showed efficacy for improving clinical outcomes among adults hospitalised with COVID-19. US National Institutes of Health and Operation Warp Spee