This effectiveness study examined a supplemental reading intervention that may be appropriate as one component of a response-to-intervention (RTI) system. First-grade students in 31 schools who were at risk for reading difficulties were randomly assigned to receive Responsive Reading Instruction (RRI; Denton, 2001;Denton & Hocker, 2006; n = 182) or typical school practice (TSP; n =240). About 43% of the TSP students received an alternate school-provided supplemental reading intervention. Results indicated that the RRI group had significantly higher outcomes than the TSP group on multiple measures of reading. About 91% of RRI students and 79% of TSP students met word reading criteria for adequate intervention response, but considerably fewer met a fluency benchmark.

No abstract

Objectives:To examine the relationship between study strategies and performance on a high stakes medical licensing exam entitled the United States Medical Licensing Examination Step 1.Methods:The action research project included seventy nine student participants at the Texas A&M Health Science Center College of Medicine during their pre-clinical education. Data collection included pre-matriculation and matriculation academic performance data, standardized exam data, and the Learning and Study Strategies Instrument. Multiple regression analyses were conducted. For both models, the dependent variable was the Step 1 score, and the independent variables included Medical College Admission Test, Undergraduate Grade Point Average, Year 1 Average, Year 2 Average, Customized National Board of Medical Examiners Average, Comprehensive Basic Science Exam score, and Learning and Study Strategy Instrument sub-scores. Model 2 added Comprehensive Basic Science Self-Assessment average.Results:Concentration (Model 1 - β = .264; Model 2 - β = .254) was the only study strategy correlated with Step 1 performance. The other statistically significant predictors were Customized National Board of Medical Examiners Average (β = .315) and Year 2 Average (β = .280) in Model 1 and Comprehensive Basic Science Self-Assessment Average (β = .338) in Model 2.Conclusions:There does appear to be a relationship between the study strategy concentration and Step 1 licensing exam performance. Teaching students to practice and utilize certain techniques to improve concentration skills when preparing for and taking exams may help improve licensing exam scores.

Integrating interprofessional education (IPE) activities and curricular components in health professions education has been emphasized recently by the inclusion of accreditation standards across disciplines. The Interprofessional Education Collaborative (IPEC) established IPE competencies in 2009, but evaluating how activities link to competencies has not been investigated in depth. The purpose of this project is to investigate how well two IPE activities align with IPEC competencies. To evaluate how our IPE activities met IPEC competencies, we developed a checklist and an observation instrument. A brief description of each is included as well as the outcomes. We analyzed Disaster Day, a simulation exercise that includes participants from Nursing, Medicine, and Pharmacy, and Interprofessional Healthcare Ethics (IPHCE), a course that introduced medical, nursing, and pharmacy students to ethical issues using didactic sessions and case discussions. While both activities appeared to facilitate the development of IPE competencies, Disaster Day aligned more with IPEC competencies than the IPHCE course and appears to be a more comprehensive way of addressing IPEC competencies. However, offering one IPE activity or curricular element is not sufficient. Having several IPE options available, utilizing the tools we developed to map the IPE curriculum and evaluating competency coverage is recommended.