Little is known about the relative effects of post-secondary learning services for students with learning disabilities. We compared outcomes for students with learning disabilities who selected to: (1) take an academic learning success course (course-intervention), (2) have regular individual interventions (high-intervention) or (3) use services only as needed (low-intervention). Pre-and post-test comparisons revealed improvements in academic self-efficacy and academic resourcefulness for students in the course-and high-intervention groups. The course-intervention group also showed decreases in their failure attributions to bad luck and increases in their general repertoire of learned resourcefulness skills in comparison to the high-intervention group and had significantly higher year-end GPAs in comparison to the low-intervention group. Here we find positive outcomes for students with learning disabilities taking a course that teaches postsecondary learning and academic skills.

Positive outcomes have been reported for university preparation courses for students without disabilities. Little is known about whether these courses can offer the same benefit to students with learning disabilities and whether the inclusion of psychosocial factors, in addition to academic skills, would benefit both groups. First-level students with and without learning disabilities were tested on variables known to influence academic performance at the beginning and end of a university preparation course. Results revealed that students entering university with and without learning disabilities have similar challenges. Both groups showed increases in attentiveness, and academic and general resourcefulness after the course. Students with learning disabilities experienced greater gains in academic self-efficacy in comparison to their non-disabled peers. The study showed benefits in including psychosocial measures in a university preparation course, and that integrating students with learning disabilities into the course could help to alleviate the limited resources of disabilities programs.

Though the Tavistock group relations paradigm is now more than seventy years old, its unique conceptualisation of unconscious group processes remains nonetheless essential for understanding and affecting this volatile, uncertain, complex, and ambiguous time. An adapted Tavistock group relations event called the Exploring Difference Workshop (EDW) takes place in the context of: 1) increasing attention to endemic racism within Canadian society; and 2) increasingly obvious limitations of dominant modes of anti-racism training framed within discourses of equity and multiculturalism. This article discusses new contributions group relations methodology can provide through the EDW to engage with the intractable and painful aspects of talking about racism in "the here and now". The article offers an analysis of key themes emerging from the workshops and the consultations supporting participants' learning about "difference" and self–other relationships. It proposes that the EDW enables deeper understanding of, and dialogue about, the (un)conscious processes affecting racism and anti-racism education, and offers a means for enhancing collaboration across difference in these times.

This article examines the limitations of the medical model's formulation of survivors of sexual abuse. It argues that therapeutic goals framed within the medical model reflect the outcomes of mastery and rational control in liberal individualistic conceptions of the self. Through a critical analysis of auto-biographical vignettes of a survivor's experiences, the article proposes that a post-structural understanding of living beside traumatic experience is helpful in fully recognizing the issues faced by survivors of sexual abuse. It outlines 6 contributions that the formulation of living beside traumatic experience offers to current understandings of survivors.