No abstract

Although there is much research to support the effectiveness of classwide interventions aimed at improving student engagement, there is also a great deal of variability in terms of how response to group-level intervention has been measured. The unfortunate consequence of this procedural variability is that it is difficult to determine whether differences in obtained results across studies are attributable to the way in which behavior was measured or actual intervention effectiveness. The purpose of this study was to comparatively evaluate the most commonly used observational methods for monitoring the effects of classwide interventions in terms of the degree to which obtained data represented actual behavior. The 5 most common sampling methods were identified and evaluated against a criterion generated by averaging across observations conducted on 14 students in one seventh-grade classroom. Results suggested that the best approximation of mean student engagement was obtained by observing a different student during each consecutive 15-s interval whereas observing an entire group of students during each interval underestimated the mean level of behavior within a phase and the degree of behavior change across phases. In contrast, when observations were restricted to the 3 students with the lowest levels of engagement, data revealed greater variability in engagement across baseline sessions and suggested a more notable change in student behavior subsequent to intervention implementation.

Employer reluctance to hire disabled people narrows the economic and vocational opportunities of disabled people. This study investigates employer hiring decisions to identify which mainstream employers are most likely to hire disabled people. The study reports findings from interviews with eighty-seven employers in urban and regional South Australia. Analysis reveals differences across groups of employers based on their previous hiring behaviour. Communication from employment support agencies should specifically address concerns of non-hirers and light hirers. Long-term financial concerns present strong but surmountable barriers to light hirers employing disabled people. Policy mitigating long-term employer concerns could attract employers to hire disabled people for the first time (non-hirers) or return to hiring (light hirers) disabled people. Negative employers (antagonists) and employers already sustaining ongoing workplace relationships with disabled people (loyals) have insurmountable reasons to not hire any (or more) disabled people and should not be targeted.

AHURI AHURI is a national independent research network with an expert not-for-profit research management company, AHURI Limited, at its centre. AHURI's mission is to deliver high quality research that influences policy development and practice change to improve the housing and urban environments of all Australians. Using high quality, independent evidence and through active, managed engagement, AHURI works to inform the policies and practices of governments and the housing and urban development industries, and stimulate debate in the broader Australian community. AHURI undertakes evidence-based policy development on a range of priority policy topics that are of interest to our audience groups, including housing and labour markets, urban growth and renewal, planning and infrastructure development, housing supply and affordability, homelessness, economic productivity, and social cohesion and wellbeing. Acknowledgements This material was produced with funding from the Australian Government and state and territory governments. AHURI Limited gratefully acknowledges the financial and other support it has received from these governments, without which this work would not have been possible. AHURI Limited also gratefully acknowledges the contributions, both financial and in-kind, of its university research partners who have helped make the completion of this material possible. Disclaimer The opinions in this report reflect the views of the authors and do not necessarily reflect those of AHURI Limited, its Board, its funding organisations or Inquiry panel members. No responsibility is accepted by AHURI Limited, its Board or funders for the accuracy or omission of any statement, opinion, advice or information in this publication. AHURI journal AHURI Final Report journal series is a refereed series presenting the results of original research to a diverse readership of policy-makers, researchers and practitioners. Peer review statement An objective assessment of reports published in the AHURI journal series by carefully selected experts in the field ensures that material published is of the highest quality. The AHURI journal series employs a double-blind peer review of the full report, where anonymity is strictly observed between authors and referees.

This paper reports on the intentions of urban residents in two South Australian Local Government Areas (LGAs) (council areas) to use stormwater treated through a managed aquifer recharge process for various potential non-potable uses. Data were collected through an online survey of the residents in these LGAs. The key finding is that, in common with recycled sewage water, the intention to use treated stormwater was lower for uses having closer contact with people. A hypothesized model consisting of possible factors influencing the intention to use treated stormwater was developed based on the contemporary literature relating to usage of treated sewage water. Greater trust in the local water authority was shown to be associated directly and closely with a lower perceived health risk. A positive attitude by respondents to the use of treated stormwater (as an aspect of a sustainable future) was found to be more likely to result in an intention to use the treated stormwater for non-potable purposes. Respondents' perceived health risk, emotions and environmental concerns all had significant associations with their attitudes to using stormwater but were not associated with their intention to use it.