Development and Design of a Merged Secondary and Special Education Teacher Preparation Program

As middle and secondary classrooms become increasingly inclusive, some special educators may not be prepared to teach content, and some general educators may not be prepared to address diverse learning needs. This mismatch between the reality of today\u27s schools and traditional teacher preparation has led to the development of new models for teacher education that integrate or merge special education and general education. Integrated and merged models are two approaches to combining special and general education pedagogy for teacher education. In merged programs, faculty in general and special education collaborate to develop one program in which all candidates receive licensure in both general and special education. Merged programs are developed through the extensive and deliberate collaboration of general and special educationfaculty to redesign the teacher education curriculum and field experiences. However, while several merged programs have been developed to prepare elementary candidates, programs for middle/secondary candidates are scarce. When faculty from Curriculum and Instruction and Special Education consider creating a merged secondary program, many questions and issues arise. These questions and issues were addressed in the development and implementation of the Secondary Dual Educator\u27s Program (SDEP). The overall purpose of SDEP is to develop strategic teachers with the versatility to meet the learning needs of all secondary students. This article describes the process used by cross-department faculty to develop the program design and components and how program evaluation led to revisions that strengthened the program

Exploring Predictors of Sense of Belonging in Trinidad and Tobago

Over the past two decades, Trinidad and Tobago has promoted explosive expansion of tertiary education. As with many growing postsecondary education systems, this increase in tertiary enrollment has led to the development of student support services (Haddad & Altbach, 2009). The field of student services is growing throughout the Caribbean (Reynolds, 2008), but there is currently little research on the role of student services in fostering students’ sense of belonging specific to the Caribbean cultural context. Using data from over 900 students at the University of Trinidad and Tobago, we examined students’ sense of belonging in the context of T&T. Findings point to the key role that student services professionals play in promoting students’ sense of belonging, but the limited interactions that students are having with student services staff and key differences by students’ race, religion, program level, and major should be noted. We also identified the indirect role of cocurricular engagement in promoting sense of belonging and the main barriers that prevent students from participating in more cocurricular activities. These findings have important implications for the work of student services professionals in T&T and also expand our understanding of constructs, such as student engagement and sense of belonging, ideas that have been well-researched in the US to a very different tertiary education system

Patients' Choices for Return of Exome Sequencing Results to Relatives in the Event of Their Death

Peer Reviewedhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/116009/1/jlme12290.pd

Using Genetic Technologies To Reduce, Rather Than Widen, Health Disparities

Evidence shows that both biological and nonbiological factors contribute to health disparities. Genetics, in particular, plays a part in how common diseases manifest themselves. Today, unprecedented advances in genetically based diagnoses and treatments provide opportunities for personalized medicine. However, disadvantaged groups may lack access to these advances, and treatments based on research on non-Hispanic whites might not be generalizable to members of minority groups. Unless genetic technologies become universally accessible, existing disparities could be widened. Addressing this issue will require integrated strategies, including expanding genetic research, improving genetic literacy, and enhancing access to genetic technologies among minority populations in a way that avoids harms such as stigmatization

The clinical imperative for inclusivity: Race, ethnicity, and ancestry (REA) in genomics.

The Clinical Genome Resource (ClinGen) Ancestry and Diversity Working Group highlights the need to develop guidance on race, ethnicity, and ancestry (REA) data collection and use in clinical genomics. We present quantitative and qualitative evidence to characterize: (1) acquisition of REA data via clinical laboratory requisition forms, and (2) information disparity across populations in the Genome Aggregation Database (gnomAD) at clinically relevant sites ascertained from annotations in ClinVar. Our requisition form analysis showed substantial heterogeneity in clinical laboratory ascertainment of REA, as well as marked incongruity among terms used to define REA categories. There was also striking disparity across REA populations in the amount of information available about clinically relevant variants in gnomAD. European ancestral populations constituted the majority of observations (55.8%), allele counts (59.7%), and private alleles (56.1%) in gnomAD at 550 loci with pathogenic and likely pathogenic expert-reviewed variants in ClinVar. Our findings highlight the importance of implementing and supporting programs to increase diversity in genome sequencing and clinical genomics, as well as measuring uncertainty around population-level datasets that are used in variant interpretation. Finally, we suggest the need for a standardized REA data collection framework to be developed through partnerships and collaborations and adopted across clinical genomics

Recommendations for ethical approaches to genotype-driven research recruitment

Recruiting research participants based on genetic information generated about them in a prior study is a potentially powerful way to study the functional significance of human genetic variation. However, it also presents significant ethical challenges that, to date, have received only minimal consideration. We convened a multi-disciplinary workshop to discuss key issues relevant to the conduct and oversight of genotype-driven recruitment and to translate those considerations into practical policy recommendations. Workshop participants were invited from around the U.S., and included genomic researchers and study coordinators, research participants, clinicians, bioethics scholars, experts in human research protections, and government representatives. Discussion was directed by experienced facilitators and informed by empirical data collected in a national survey of IRB chairs and in-depth interviews with research participants in studies where genotype-driven recontact occurred. A high degree of consensus was attained on the resulting 7 recommendations, which cover informed consent disclosures and choices, the process for how and by whom participants are recontacted, the disclosure of individual genetic research results, and the importance of tailoring approaches based on specific contextual factors. These recommendations are intended to represent a balanced approach—protecting research participants, yet avoiding overly restrictive policies that hinder advancement on important scientific questions

Clinical Genetics Lacks Standard Definitions and Protocols for the Collection and Use of Diversity Measures

Genetics researchers and clinical professionals rely on diversity measures such as race, ethnicity, and ancestry (REA) to stratify study participants and patients for a variety of applications in research and precision medicine. However, there are no comprehensive, widely accepted standards or guidelines for collecting and using such data in clinical genetics practice. Two NIH-funded research consortia, the Clinical Genome Resource (ClinGen) and Clinical Sequencing Evidence-generating Research (CSER), have partnered to address this issue and report how REA are currently collected, conceptualized, and used. Surveying clinical genetics professionals and researchers (n = 448), we found heterogeneity in the way REA are perceived, defined, and measured, with variation in the perceived importance of REA in both clinical and research settings. The majority of respondents (>55%) felt that REA are at least somewhat important for clinical variant interpretation, ordering genetic tests, and communicating results to patients. However, there was no consensus on the relevance of REA, including how each of these measures should be used in different scenarios and what information they can convey in the context of human genetics. A lack of common definitions and applications of REA across the precision medicine pipeline may contribute to inconsistencies in data collection, missing or inaccurate classifications, and misleading or inconclusive results. Thus, our findings support the need for standardization and harmonization of REA data collection and use in clinical genetics and precision health research

Getting Genetic Ancestry Right for Science and Society

There is a scientific and ethical imperative to embrace a multidimensional, continuous view of ancestry and move away from continental ancestry categorie