Editorial board page for “Australasian Journal of Special Education”, Volume 30, Number 1

2006 ◽  
Vol 30 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-1
2015 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. 17-24
Author(s):  
Robert Reilly

Editor’s Introduction: In January 2015, members of the Editorial Board of The Journal of Transformative Leader-ship and Policy Studies (JTLPS) conducted an interview with Dr. Robert Reilly, CAPSES board member, to engage on issues surrounding special education in the 21st cen-tury. This reflective essay was culled from a transcribed interview and themed around six major areas: access, special education policy, services supported by CAPSES, social justice, teacher preparation, and creating an inclu-sive school culture for children with special needs. CAPSES primary mission is to maximize the potential of individuals with disabilities by advocating for them in public policy, and promoting high quality instruction, guidance, therapy and staff development. CAPSES is ded-icated to preserving and enhancing the leadership role of the private sector in offering alternative quality services to individuals with disabilities. By providing the highest quality instruction, therapy and guidance and advocacy to their clients, CAPSES members strive to help special education students maximize their potential and lead independent and dignified lives. Through this interview, JTLPS sought to ascertain how CAPSES works to build this potential with special education students and their fami-lies to ensure appropriate services for them.


2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jennifer R. Ledford ◽  
Kathleen Nicole Zimmerman

Two studies regarding the graphic display of single case data are presented. First, measurement and graphical display of data from studies in highly-ranked journals in special education were assessed. Measurement of desirable behaviors rather than undesirable behaviors was common and most studies used sessions and percentages as x and y-values, respectively. Data presentation (graph ratios and number of data points and sessions per cm) were highly variable; average ratios did not align with previously-published recommendations. In the second study, 50 editorial board members of special education journals were surveyed to determine preferences for graphing ratios. Preferences did not align with recommended graphing practices and varied based on thenumber of sessions depicted on the graph.


2016 ◽  
Vol 73 (3) ◽  
pp. 375-375

Many papers submitted to the Edinburgh Journal of Botany are reviewed by members of the Editorial Board and Editorial Advisory Board. The members of both Boards wish to express their thanks to the following, who have also kindly reviewed papers during the preparation of this volume.


1990 ◽  
Vol 78 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-1
Author(s):  
M. J. Brown

From this issue, Clinical Science will increase its page numbers from an average of 112 to 128 per monthly issue. This welcome change — equivalent to at least two manuscripts — has been ‘forced’ on us by the increasing pressure on space; this has led to an undesirable increase in the delay between acceptance and publication, and to a fall in the proportion of submitted manuscripts we have been able to accept. The change in page numbers will instead permit us now to return to our exceptionally short interval between acceptance and publication of 3–4 months; and at the same time we shall be able not only to accept (as now) those papers requiring little or no revision, but also to offer hope to some of those papers which have raised our interest but come to grief in review because of a major but remediable problem. Our view, doubtless unoriginal, has been that the review process, which is unusually thorough for Clinical Science, involving a specialist editor and two external referees, is most constructive when it helps the evolution of a good paper from an interesting piece of research. Traditionally, the papers in Clinical Science have represented some areas of research more than others. However, this has reflected entirely the pattern of papers submitted to us, rather than any selective interest of the Editorial Board, which numbers up to 35 scientists covering most areas of medical research. Arguably, after the explosion during the last decade of specialist journals, the general journal can look forward to a renaissance in the 1990s, as scientists in apparently different specialities discover that they are interested in the same substances, asking similar questions and developing techniques of mutual benefit to answer these questions. This situation arises from the trend, even among clinical scientists, to recognize the power of research based at the cellular and molecular level to achieve real progress, and at this level the concept of organ-based specialism breaks down. It is perhaps ironic that this journal, for a short while at the end of the 1970s, adopted — and then discarded — the name of Clinical Science and Molecular Medicine, since this title perfectly represents the direction in which clinical science, and therefore Clinical Science, is now progressing.


Author(s):  
Melissa A. Pierce

In countries other than the United States, the study and practice of speech-language pathology is little known or nonexistent. Recognition of professionals in the field is minimal. Speech-language pathologists in countries where speech-language pathology is a widely recognized and respected profession often seek to share their expertise in places where little support is available for individuals with communication disorders. The Peace Corps offers a unique, long-term volunteer opportunity to people with a variety of backgrounds, including speech-language pathologists. Though Peace Corps programs do not specifically focus on speech-language pathology, many are easily adapted to the profession because they support populations of people with disabilities. This article describes how the needs of local children with communication disorders are readily addressed by a Special Education Peace Corps volunteer.


2015 ◽  
Vol 22 (3) ◽  
pp. 93-102 ◽  
Author(s):  
Allison Breit-Smith ◽  
Jamie Busch ◽  
Ying Guo

Although a general limited availability of expository texts currently exists in preschool special education classrooms, expository texts offer speech-language pathologists (SLPs) a rich context for addressing the language goals of preschool children with language impairment on their caseloads. Thus, this article highlights the differences between expository and narrative texts and describes how SLPs might use expository texts for targeting preschool children's goals related to listening comprehension, vocabulary, and syntactic relationships.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document