No abstract

Check-in/checkout (CICO) is a behavioral intervention that is used to provide systematic feedback about a student's behavior at the beginning and end of each school day. The purpose of the present study was to evaluate the effectiveness of CICO on decreasing problem behaviors and the collateral effects on mathematics performance for 4 at-risk elementary school students. A multiple-baseline across-participants design using dyads was used to analyze problem behavior collected through direct classroom observations. As ancillary measures, office discipline referrals per week as well as mathematic performance (i.e., digits correct per minute [DCPM]) were collected for each student. Treatment integrity and acceptability and social validity were also measured. Results indicate a decrease in problem behaviors as well as an increase in DCPM for each participant.

First‐year experience (FYE) courses are excellent venues for introducing freshman students to information literacy concepts. The authors, librarians and FYE instructors at their respective institutions, conducted a nationwide survey to determine whether FYE course curricula contained a library component and, if so, to what extent. Survey results indicate that the majority of FYE programs contain some type of library unit, though results varied broadly depending on institutional factors. Details the presence of a library unit in the overall curricula of FYE courses, who is developing the library component, who is teaching it, and what is being taught. Examines current practices within FYE courses and the results can be used by librarians and FYE professionals, as well as the larger academic community, to expand understanding of the role that libraries, and librarians play in this particular type of course. It will serve as a foundation for future development of FYE course curricula and can be used as documentation for conversations promoting further integration of information literacy.

The contents of the British Ornithologists' Union's journal, The Ibis, during the first half of the 20th century illustrates some of the transformations that have taken place in the naturalist tradition. Although later generations of ornithologists described these changes as logical and progressive, their historical narratives had more to do with legitimizing the infiltration of the priorities of evolutionary theory, ecology, and ethology than analyzing the legacy of the naturalist tradition on its own terms. Despite ornithologists' claim that the journal's increasing focus on ''biology'' represented a natural development after the preliminary phase of systematics and geographical ornithology, in fact a small group campaigned to bring the priorities of population ecology, behavior, and selection theory into the journal and British ornithology more generally. The problems involved in this transition highlight the importance of methodological and institutional context in determining and reinforcing appropriate research programs for ornithologists. Comparing the discipline-building rhetoric of moderns with the contents of the past illustrates how modern evaluations of 19th century research programs have been enmeshed in ornithologists' endeavors to forge new identities for traditional disciplines.

The endeavour of natural history has often been ridiculed as “mere stamp collecting” by those unwilling to see anything scientific in naturalists' work. This paper traces some of the ways the term “stamp collecting” has been used in scientific literature. It discusses how the term can be seen as a reflection of the changing methodological context in which science has been done in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries. It also points to the importance of considering the relative status of certain sciences not as a problem of what type of science is better or more important but as a problem of scientific communities competing for both resources and prestige.