This study examines (1) the extent to which student engagement is associated with experimental and traditional measures of academic performance, (2) whether the relationships between engagement and academic performance are conditional, and (3) whether institutions differ in terms of their ability to convert student engagement into academic performance. The sample consisted of 1,058 students at 14 four-year colleges and universities that completed several instruments during 2002. Many measures of student engagement were linked positively with such desirable learning outcomes as critical thinking and grades, although most of the relationships were weak in strength. The results suggest that the lowest-ability students benefit more from engagement than classmates, first-year students and seniors convert different forms of engagement into academic achievement, and certain institutions more effectively convert student engagement into higher performance on critical thinking tests.

The Collegiate Learning Assessment (CLA) is a computer administered, open-ended (as opposed to multiple-choice) test of analytic reasoning, critical thinking, problem solving, and written communication skills. Because the CLA has been endorsed by several national higher education commissions, it has come under intense scrutiny by faculty members, college administrators, testing experts, legislators, and others. This article describes the CLA's measures and what they do and do not assess, how dependably they measure what they claim to measure, and how CLA scores differ from those on other direct and indirect measures of college student learning. For instance, analyses are conducted at the school rather than the student level and results are adjusted for input to assess whether the progress students are making at their school is better or worse than what would be expected given the progress of "similarly situated" students (in terms of incoming ability) at other colleges.

No abstract

How effective has the Vermont program been in meeting its goals? What goals appear to be in conflict in programsof this type? Why is there a need for “caution and moderate expectations”?

Background Constitutional DICER1 mutations have been associated with pleuropulmonary blastoma, cystic nephroma, Sertoli-Leydig tumours and multinodular goitres, while somatic DICER1 mutations have been reported in additional tumour types. Here we report a novel syndrome termed GLOW, an acronym for its core phenotypic findings, which include Global developmental delay, Lung cysts, Overgrowth and Wilms tumour caused by mutations in the RNase IIIb domain of DICER1. Methods and results We performed whole exome sequencing on peripheral mononuclear blood cells of an affected proband and identified a de novo missense mutation in the RNase IIIb domain of DICER1. We confirmed an additional de novo missense mutation in the same domain of an unrelated case by Sanger sequencing. These missense mutations in the RNase IIIb domain of DICER1 are suspected to affect one of four metal binding sites located within this domain. Pyrosequencing was used to determine the relative abundance of mutant alleles in various tissue types. The relative mutation abundance is highest in Wilms tumour and unaffected kidney samples when compared with blood, confirming that the mutation is mosaic. Finally, we performed bioinformatic analysis of microRNAs expressed in murine cells carrying specific Dicer1 RNase IIIb domain metal binding site-associated mutations. We have identified a subset of 3p microRNAs that are overexpressed whose target genes are over-represented in mTOR, MAPK and TGF-β signalling pathways. Conclusions We propose that mutations affecting the metal binding sites of the DICER1 RNase IIIb domain alter the balance of 3p and 5p microRNAs leading to deregulation of these growth signalling pathways, causing a novel human overgrowth syndrome.

No abstract

No abstract

A number of challenges are encountered when evaluating a large-scale, multisite educational reform aimed at changing classroom practice. The challenges include substantial variability in implementation with little information on actual practice, lack of common, appropriate outcome measures, and the need to synthesize evaluation results across multiple study sites. This article describes an approach to addressing these challenges in the context of a study of the relationships between student achievement and instructional practices in the National Science Foundation’s Systemic Initiatives (SI) program. We gathered data from eleven SI sites and investigated relationships at the site level and pooled across sites using a planned meta-analytic approach. We found small but consistent positive relationships between teachers’ reported use of standards-based instruction and student achievement. The article also describes the ways in which we addressed the challenges discussed, as well as a number of additional obstacles that need to be addressed to improve future evaluations of large-scale reforms.