A teacher's journey into problem solving mathematics with deaf learners.

The main objective of this study was to explore how Deaf learners orientate to a problem solving mathematics curriculum. The study took the form of an autoethnography situated in critical pedagogy. Purposeful sampling was used to select Grade 9 learners from a local school for the Deaf as participants. Data was collected from the learners using a structured questionnaire, viz. Students Orientation to Mathematics (SOM), as well as through focus group sessions and personal interviews. In addition, teachers’ and parents were interviewed to ascertain the general orientation of Deaf learners to mathematics and to identify barriers that may prevent these learners from progressing optimally in their studies of mathematics. Although the learners had difficulties in accessing particular pedagogical aspects of problem solving mathematics, the findings showed a slight increase in the learners’ study attitude and study habits towards mathematics and in their problem solving skills. Moreover, the learners particularly enjoyed the activity element of the problem solving curriculum. At the end of the study the learners indicated that they preferred a modeling problem solving approach to a more traditional way of teaching mathematics. Although the study points out that implementing a problem solving curriculum into a Deaf classroom is not necessarily straightforward, it does suggest that with exposure Deaf learners can develop a propensity for working within a cognitively rich problem solving environment

Learning mathematics with mathematical software.

The study took the form of action research situated in a case study. The participants consisted of sixteen Grade 11 learners who attend a non-profit tutoring organisation called Ikamva Youth on Saturday mornings and who volunteered to learn mathematics with mathematical software. Data were collected from the learners using a structured questionnaire, journals in which learners were encouraged to record their daily experiences and by studying the learners’ own written work during the research period. Moreover, the research closed with a focus group session. The study primarily described three aspects, viz. the degree to which learners are able to work with the strands of strategic competence and adaptive reasoning with particular emphasis on interpretation and application, knowledge production and justification and social collaboration; barriers in terms of working with these strands in a digital environment that may interfere with the learning process; and, the personal (affective) response of the students to the availability of technology. Findings suggest that the participants experienced difficulties in accessing these particular strands of mathematical knowledge, and subsequently expressed the desire to revert back to a place where the teacher assumes a more direct teaching style and where the focus of mathematical learning is on technique. In other words, learners preferred routine expertise, whilst appearing to lack in adaptive expertise. With respect to the second aspect of the research, it is suggested that one of the most prominent barriers to integrating technology into mathematics does not necessarily relate to adjustments in terms of the instrumental use of software and the computer environment, but seems to stem from the learners’ own epistemologies and beliefs about the nature of what constitutes effective mathematical teaching and learning. In paying attention to the voice of the learners it surfaced that the learners tend to associate computers more strongly with a cultural tool for entertainment than with mathematical learning. Although the study points out that implementing an interactive curriculum integrated with technology into a classroom with learners from low socio-economic backgrounds is not necessarily straightforward, it does suggest that with more frequent exposure certain learners can develop a propensity for working within a cognitively rich problem-solving context and effectively employ the mathematical software as an extension of their own thinking. This study adds to broader research on the role of technology in learning by reporting that the learners felt that the contextualisation of mathematics, followed by the ability to manipulate the graph themselves were the main contributors to their mathematical learning. The learners disregarded the visualisation effect of the computer as they felt that it had very little impact on their mathematical learning

Validation of the Social Interaction Anxiety Scale in scleroderma: a Scleroderma Patient-centered Intervention Network Cohort study

Introduction: Individuals with visible differences due to medical conditions, such as systemic sclerosis (SSc; scleroderma), have reported difficulty navigating social situations because of issues such as staring, invasive questions, and rude comments. Fears or anxiety linked to situations in which a person interacts with others is known as social interaction anxiety. However, there exists no validated measurement tool to examine social interaction anxiety in rheumatologic conditions. Methods: The present study examines the reliability (internal consistency) and validity (structural and convergent) of the Social Interaction Anxiety Scale-6 (SIAS-6) in a sample of 802 individuals with SSc, and compares these psychometric properties across limited and diffuse subtypes of the disease. Multi-group confirmatory factor analysis was used to examine the factor structure of the SIAS-6 in patients with both limited and diffuse SSc. Results: A one-factor structure was found to fit well for individuals with SSc with both limited and diffuse disease. The measure demonstrated strong internal consistency reliability and convergent validity with relevant measures in expected magnitudes and directions. Conclusions: The SIAS-6 is a psychometrically robust measure that can confidently be used in SSc populations to examine social interaction anxiety. Moreover, scores can meaningfully be compared between patients with limited and diffuse disease.MD Anderson Cancer Center - University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center(undefined)Financial support: The Scleroderma Patient-centered Intervention Network (SPIN) is funded by a Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR) Emerging Team Grant for Rare Diseases (PI, Thombs; TR3-119192). In addition to CIHR funding, SPIN has received institutional contributions from the Lady Davis Institute for Medical Research of the Jewish General Hospital, Montréal, Canada and from McGill University, Montréal, Canada. SPIN has also received support from the Scleroderma Society of Ontario, Scleroderma Canada, and Sclérodermie Québec. Ms. Gholizadeh’s work on this project was supported by a Rheumatology Research Foundation: Health Professional Research Preceptorship. Dr. Kwakkenbos was supported by a CIHR Banting Postdoctoral Fellowship. Ms. Jewett was supported by a CIHR Doctoral Research Award. Dr. Thombs was supported by an Investigator Salary Award from the Arthritis Societ

Perceptions of Cancer Risk/Efficacy and Cancer-Related Risk Behaviors : Results From the HCHS/SOL Sociocultural Ancillary Study

This study evaluated the associations among perceived risk, perceived efficacy, and engagement in six cancer-related risk behaviors in a population-based Hispanic/Latino sample. Interviews were conducted with 5,313 Hispanic/Latino adults as part of the Hispanic Community Health Study/Study of Latinos (HCHS/SOL) Sociocultural Ancillary Study. Participants were recruited from the study's four field centers (Bronx, NY; Chicago, IL; Miami, FL; San Diego, CA) between February 2010 and June 2011. Perceived risk and perceived efficacy were assessed with questions drawn from the Health Interview National Trends Survey. More than half of the sample endorsed perceived risk of cancer associated with the six evaluated behaviors, as well as general perceived efficacy for preventing cancer. Adjusted logistic regression analyses demonstrated significant differences across Hispanic/Latino background groups for perceived risk associated with high consumption of alcohol and saturated fat, low consumption of fruits and vegetables, and insufficient exercise but not with smoking or low consumption of fiber. Differences were also found for the belief, "It seems like everything causes cancer" but not for other perceived efficacy items. Perceived cancer risk and perceived efficacy for preventing cancer were neither independently nor interactively associated with engagement in cancer-related risk behaviors after controlling for sociodemographic covariates. Results suggest that perceptions of risk and efficacy with regard to cancer vary across Hispanic/Latino background groups, and therefore background group differences should be considered in prevention efforts. Perceived risk and perceived efficacy were not related to cancer-related risk behaviors among Hispanics/Latinos. Further work is needed to evaluate determinants of cancer-related risk in this population

Child health, infant formula funding and South African health professionals : eliminating conflict of interest

Lake et al. refer to the Allergy Society of South Africa (ALLSA) as an example of a professional body that may be fostering transgressions of regulation R991 (R991) of the Regulations Relating to Foodstuffs for Infants and Young Children. They also infer that the low breastfeeding rate (BFR) in South Africa (SA) is a direct result of aggressive breastmilk substitute (BMS) marketing and transgressions of R991 and call for a total dissociation between BMS suppliers and healthcare professionals.The South African Medical Research Councilhttp://www.samj.org.zaam2021ImmunologyPaediatrics and Child Healt

Communications Biophysics

Contains research objectives and reports on eight research projects split into three sections.National Institutes of Health (Grant 2 PO1 NS13126)National Institutes of Health (Grant 5 RO1 NS18682)National Institutes of Health (Grant 5 RO1 NS20322)National Institutes of Health (Grant 1 RO1 NS 20269)National Institutes of Health (Grant 5 T32 NS 07047)Symbion, Inc.National Institutes of Health (Grant 5 R01 NS10916)National Institutes of Health (Grant 1 RO NS 16917)National Science Foundation (Grant BNS83-19874)National Science Foundation (Grant BNS83-19887)National Institutes of Health (Grant 5 RO1 NS12846)National Institutes of Health (Grant 1 RO1 NS21322-01)National Institutes of Health (Grant 5 T32-NS07099-07)National Institutes of Health (Grant 1 RO1 NS14092-06)National Science Foundation (Grant BNS77-21751)National Institutes of Health (Grant 5 RO1 NS11080