Cooperative Groups and Student Engagement: Exploring Cooperative Learning Groups in Mathematics

This action research project explores using cooperative learning strategies, specifically five of the structures designed by Dr. Spencer Kagan within a third grade mathematics classroom for six weeks. There were twenty-three participants in the third grade classroom, ages 8 to 9 years old. Students were given a survey of their opinion of math before the unit started, as well as after for comparison. During the unit, students participated in five different structures (or strategies based on KAGAN’s research) multiple times within each mathematics lesson. To determine if the action research was successful or not, unit scores from the current unit of instruction (implementation unit), as well as the previous unit were compared. Both units taught multiplication and division, so comparable in nature. The increase in scores, as well as the improved opinions and confidence in math showed that the use of these cooperative learning structures were successful for the students

The early pottery Yelshanian complex of the Volga-Ural interfluve. The chronological aspect

As a result of the last decade comprehensive studies on the chronology of the Yelshanian Culture, some spectacular results of radiocarbon dates were achieved. According to these data, the beginnings of ceramic cultures („Neolithic”1) of the Mid-Volga Region have been dated back to the second half of the 8th millennium BC.As a result of the last decade comprehensive studies on the chronology of the Yelshanian Culture, some spectacular results of radiocarbon dates were achieved. According to these data, the beginnings of ceramic cultures („Neolithic”1) of the Mid-Volga Region have been dated back to the second half of the 8th millennium BC

Beyond solicitousness: a comprehensive review on informal pain-related social support

Adults with chronic pain cite social support (SS) as an important resource. Research has mostly focused on general SS or pain-specific solicitousness, resulting in a limited understanding of the role of SS in pain experiences. Drawing on SS theoretical models, this review aimed to understand how pain-related SS has been conceptualized and measured and how its relationship with pain experiences has been investigated. Arksey and O´Malley’s scoping review framework guided the study. A database search (2000-2015) was conducted in PsycINFO, CINAHL, MEDLINE, EMBASE using a combination of subject headings/keywords on pain and SS; 3864 citations were screened; 101 full texts were assessed for eligibility; references of 52 papers were hand searched. Fifty-three studies were included. Most studies were either a-theoretical or drew upon the operant conditioning model. There are several self-report measures and observational systems to operationalize pain-related SS. However, the Multidimensional Pain Inventory remains the most often used, accounting for the centrality of the concept of solicitousness in the literature. Most studies focused on individuals with chronic pain (ICPs) self-report of spousal pain-related SS and investigated its main effects on pain outcomes. Only a minority investigated the role of pain SS within the stress and coping process (as a buffer or mediator). Little is known about mediating pathways, contextual modulation of the effectiveness of SS exchanges and there are practically no SS-based intervention studies. Drawing on general SS models, the main gaps in pain-related SS research are discussed and research directions for moving this literature beyond solicitousness are proposed.info:eu-repo/semantics/acceptedVersio

Épître dédicatoire à l’édition des comédies de Térence par Willich (1550)

  Une invitation à la lecture de Térence : l’épître dédicatoire de Gregor Wagner à l’édition des Comédies par Josse Willich Gregor Wagner de Reszel (Gregorius Wagnerus Resellianus), né en 1512 et mort en 1559, fut cordonnier, maître d’école, auteur dramatique et théologien, selon la Deutsche Biographie. Il est surtout connu comme le demi-frère du médecin et humaniste prussien Josse Willich (Jodocus Willichius, 1501-1552) qui veilla sur ses études à l’Université de Francfort-sur-l’Oder où il e..

Late widespread skeletal metastases from myxoid liposarcoma detected by MRI only

Background Myxoid liposarcoma is the second most commonly occurring sub-type of liposarcomas. In contrast to other soft tissue sarcomas, it is known to have a tendency to spread toward extrapulmonary sites, such as soft tissues, retroperitoneum, and the peritoneal surface. Bony spread, however, is not as common. Case presentation We report an unusual case of diffuse skeletal metastases from myxoid liposarcoma occurring 13 years after treatment of the primary tumour in the left lower limb. The skeletal spread of the disease was demonstrated on MRI only after other imaging modalities (plain radiography, CT and TC99 bone scans) had failed to detect these metastases. Conclusion MRI is an extremely sensitive and specific screening tool in the detection of skeletal involvement in these types of sarcomas, and therefore, should be a part of the staging proces

Effect of implementation of the MORE ^OB program on adverse maternal and neonatal birth outcomes in Ontario, Canada: A retrospective cohort study

In 2002, the MORE OB (Managing Obstetrical Risk Efficiently) obstetrical patient safety program was phased-in across hospitals in Ontario, Canada. The purpose of our study was to evaluate the effect of the MORE OB program on rates of adverse maternal and neonatal outcomes. Methods: A retrospective cohort study, using province-wide administrative hospitalization data. We included maternal and neonatal records between fiscal years 2002-2003 and 2013-2014, for deliveries taking place at the 67 Ontario hospitals where the MORE OB program was implemented between 2002 and 2012. After accounting for institutional mergers and excluding very small hospitals, 55 hospitals (1,447,073 deliveries) were included. Multivariable logistic and linear mixed effects regression analysis were used, accounting for secular trends, within hospital correlation and over time correlation, and adjusting for a maternal comorbidity index, hospital annual birth volume, and level of care. The main outcome measure was a composite individual-level indicator of incidence of any adverse events, and a hospital-level score, called the Weighted Adverse Outcome Score (WAOS) capturing both maternal and neonatal adverse outcomes. Results: Across the 12 years of follow up, there were 98,789 adverse maternal and neonatal outcomes, a rate of 6.83 per 100 deliveries (6.66 per 100 occurring before, 6.91 per 100 during, and 6.84 per 100 after program implementation). The multivariable analysis found no statistically significant decrease in adverse events associated with program implementation (OR for adverse events after versus before =1.11 (95% CI: 1.06 to 1.17, change in mean WAOS score after minus before =0.15 (- 0.36 to 0.67)). Conclusions: We did not find a reduction in the incidence of maternal and neonatal adverse outcomes associated with the MORE OB program, and small yet statistically significant increases in some adverse events were observed

Essential Content for Teaching Implementation Practice in Healthcare: A Mixed-Methods Study of Teams Offering Capacity-Building Initiatives

Background Applying the knowledge gained through implementation science can support the uptake of research evidence into practice; however, those doing and supporting implementation (implementation practitioners) may face barriers to applying implementation science in their work. One strategy to enhance individuals’ and teams’ ability to apply implementation science in practice is through training and professional development opportunities (capacity-building initiatives). Although there is an increasing demand for and offerings of implementation practice capacity-building initiatives, there is no universal agreement on what content should be included. In this study we aimed to explore what capacity-building developers and deliverers identify as essential training content for teaching implementation practice. Methods We conducted a convergent mixed-methods study with participants who had developed and/or delivered a capacity-building initiative focused on teaching implementation practice. Participants completed an online questionnaire to provide details on their capacity-building initiatives; took part in an interview or focus group to explore their questionnaire responses in depth; and offered course materials for review. We analyzed a subset of data that focused on the capacity-building initiatives’ content and curriculum. We used descriptive statistics for quantitative data and conventional content analysis for qualitative data, with the data sets merged during the analytic phase. We presented frequency counts for each category to highlight commonalities and differences across capacity-building initiatives. Results Thirty-three individuals representing 20 capacity-building initiatives participated. Study participants identified several core content areas included in their capacity-building initiatives: (1) taking a process approach to implementation; (2) identifying and applying implementation theories, models, frameworks, and approaches; (3) learning implementation steps and skills; (4) developing relational skills. In addition, study participants described offering applied and pragmatic content (e.g., tools and resources), and tailoring and evolving the capacity-building initiative content to address emerging trends in implementation science. Study participants highlighted some challenges learners face when acquiring and applying implementation practice knowledge and skills. Conclusions This study synthesized what experienced capacity-building initiative developers and deliverers identify as essential content for teaching implementation practice. These findings can inform the development, refinement, and delivery of capacity-building initiatives, as well as future research directions, to enhance the translation of implementation science into practice

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