No abstract

There is growing concern among some commentators regarding the academic preparation and performance of male college students in the United States (Wilson, 2007). In this study, gender differences in approaches to learning and study strategies were examined in three samples of community college and university students (N ϭ 650; 274 men, 376 women) utilizing two instruments. Significant multivariate effects for gender were found for both approaches to learning and study strategies. Women scored significantly higher than men did on Deep Approach, Achieving Approach, Motivation, Self-Testing, use of Study Aids, and Time Management. Effect sizes ranged from small to medium (Cohen, 1992). These findings may be indicative of the types of academicsrelated behaviors and attitudes with which college men may need to be remediated.

No abstract

There are various opinions concerning the value of positive reinforcement when discussing modifying behaviors of young children. In some cases, individuals considered positive reinforcement difficult to implement and, in extreme cases, even felt it to be detrimental. Educators often use praise interchangeably with positive reinforcement when indeed an important distinction exists between the two. This paper discusses the differences between positive reinforcement and praise and demonstrates how to effectively apply positive reinforcement to help manage behavior of young children.

The authors' purpose in this study was to gather evidence on the validity of scores on an instrument designed to evaluate levels of metacognition in problem solving--Swanson's 15-item metacognition questionnaire (1990, 1993). Forty-three participants took part in this study: 21 professors and 22 graduate students from several Western and Midwestern campuses in the fields of psychology and educational psychology. A Kendall Coefficient of concordance (W) was performed to determine the consistency of ranked responses for professors, students, and both groups combined, and to determine whether their responses matched those of the scoring key for the instrument we studied. This analysis indicated problems for some of the responses to this instrument, as demonstrated through the ranking task developed in this study. Many of the professors disagreed with the ranking of the responses suggested by Swanson. There is certainly a need for more instruments to validly measure metacognition. This instrument is one that, with some modification, might be used more in research on metacognition.