Context  Computer‐aided instruction is used increasingly in medical education and anatomy instruction with limited research evidence to guide its design and deployment. Objectives  To determine the effects of (a) learner control over the e‐learning environment and (b) key views of the brain versus multiple views in the learning of brain surface anatomy. Design  Randomised trial with 2 phases of study. Participants Volunteer sample of 1st‐year psychology students (phase 1, n = 120; phase 2, n = 120). Interventions  Phase 1: computer‐based instruction in brain surface anatomy with 4 conditions: (1) learner control/multiple views (LMV); (2) learner control/key views (LKV); (3) programme control/multiple views (PMV); (4) programme control/key views (PKV). Phase 2: 2 conditions: low learner control/key views (PKV) versus no learner control/key views (SKV). All participants performed a pre‐test, post‐test and test of visuospatial ability. Main outcome measures  A 30‐item post‐test of brain surface anatomy structure identification. Results The PKV group attained the best post‐test score (57.7%) and the PMV group received the worst (42.2%), with the 2 high learner control groups performing in between. For students with low spatial ability, estimated scores are 20% lower for those who saw multiple views during learning. In phase 2, students with the most static condition and no learner control (SKV) performed similarly to those students in the PKV group. Conclusions Multiple views may impede learning, particularly for those with relatively poor spatial ability. High degrees of learner control may reduce effectiveness of learning.

No abstract

No abstract

In batterer intervention programs, there are conflicting recommendations about best practices for responding to client dropout. Risk management philosophies emphasize the importance of swift and sure sanctions for failure to comply with program attendance requirements. In contrast, change theory emphasizes the importance of providing clients with multiple opportunities to engage in treatment. To clarify the implications of each of these philosophies, the current study examined rates of program dropout, reinstatement, and completion in a consecutive sample of 294 probation-mandated clients referred to a large batterer intervention program. Just over half (53.7%) of men completed intervention on their first attempt. Over the 2-year follow-up study period, 73 clients were reinstated once by the intervention program, 23 clients were reinstated twice, and 5 clients reinstated three (or more) times. Reinstated clients were, in general, more similar to men who failed to complete than those who completed on their first attempt. Although rates of dropout at each reentry point were quite high (56% to 80%), 32 of the 73 (43.7%) reinstated clients eventually completed. There were significant costs associated with providing clients with additional chances to complete the program, with successful reinstatement requiring an average of 7.55 phone calls to clients, 3.82 phone calls to referral agents, one letter, and 0.73 in-person meetings. Results are discussed in terms of practice and policy implications of risk management and change theory approaches to dropout.