The effects of ABRACADABRA on reading outcomes: An updated meta‐analysis and landscape review of applied field research

2020 ◽  
Vol 36 (3) ◽  
pp. 260-279
Author(s):  
Philip C. Abrami ◽  
Larysa Lysenko ◽  
Eugene Borokhovski
Keyword(s):  
Applied Field ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Field Research ◽  
Reading Outcomes

scholarly journals INDONESIAN ADOLESCENT COPING STRATEGY IN FACING COVID PANDEMIC 19: META ANALYSIS

2021 ◽  
Vol 5 (2) ◽  
pp. 131
Author(s):  
Syawaludin Lubis
Keyword(s):  
Cultural Values ◽  
Coping Strategy ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Field Research ◽  
Spiritual Beliefs ◽  
Literature Study ◽  
Daily Lives ◽  
Social Distancing ◽  
The Impact ◽  
At Home

The Covid 19 pandemic forced all countries to adopt Social Distancing policies to prevent the spread of the virus. The perceived impact is the change in the dynamics of people's daily lives, where this change from being accustomed to socializing to having to be alone, from interacting to isolating. Teenagers are the most felt part of the impact of this Social Distancing, ranging from school at home, sports at home, gathering at home all activities done at home, this results in the onset of stress due to monotonous and boring activities. Therefore a strategy is needed to overcome the effects of the Covid Pandemic 19. This research method is a literature study, meta-analysis that is analyzing in-depth research journals related to Coping and Covid-19 Pandemic, articles-articles sourced from reputable journal journalists including Scopus including http://link.springer.com, http://seacrh.proquest.com, http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com ,and http://tandfonline.com. The research results show that Coping Strategy is a way for someone to overcome the problems that occur in him, Coping is very adaptive and can be incorporated into the cultural values of each Individual such as the values of spiritual beliefs, thinking patterns and strengths that exist in yourself and the environment. The conclusion is trying to adapt the results of several studies on Coping to deal with Pandemic by combining the cultural potential that exists in Indonesia. This research suggestion is still theoretical, and can be continued in field research

Grape hyacinth [Muscari botryoides (L.) Mill] control in a wheat-soybean rotation

2019 ◽  
Vol 33 (04) ◽  
pp. 578-585
Author(s):  
Shawn C. Beam ◽  
Mark J. VanGessel ◽  
Kurt M. Vollmer ◽  
Michael L. Flessner
Keyword(s):  
Applied Field ◽  
Cropping Systems ◽  
Field Research ◽  
Good Control ◽  
Ornamental Plant ◽  
Product Label ◽  
Grape Hyacinth ◽  
Mill Control ◽  
Winter Fallow

AbstractGrape hyacinth is a perennial bulbous species in the Liliaceae. It is commonly grown as an ornamental plant, but it can spread into agricultural fields and become weedy, potentially interfering with harvest and fall-planted crops. There has been limited research on controlling grape hyacinth in cropping systems. Fall and spring applied field-research studies were conducted to determine grape hyacinth control with herbicides labeled for use in wheat or winter fallow before planting soybean. Among fall-applied herbicides, paraquat resulted in the greatest initial grape hyacinth control (90% to 100%). Grape hyacinth control, 16 months after application (MAA), was variable, but the top-performing treatments were glyphosate and metsulfuron plus paraquat, resulting in 65% and 50% control, respectively. After spring applications, grape hyacinth control in November (7 MAA) was variable, but top-performing treatments were glyphosate and metsulfuron, which resulted in at least 26% control. Spring-applied paraquat, carfentrazone, metsulfuron, and sulfosulfuron resulted in 73%, 68%, 69%, and 60% reductions in grape hyacinth bulb counts, compared with the nontreated control 7 MAA, and were the top-performing treatments. Despite product-label prohibitions on rotation to soybeans, no soybean yield reductions were observed from any treatment in either study. Single applications of certain herbicides in the fall or spring can result in good control (>80%) of grape hyacinth initially, but long-term control is poor, and additional research is required.

Response

2000 ◽  
Vol 27 (1) ◽  
pp. 28-28
Author(s):  
David Wyatt Seal ◽  
Frederick R. Bloom ◽  
Anton M. Somlai
Keyword(s):  
Research Ethics ◽  
Applied Field ◽  
Ethical Dilemmas ◽  
Real Life ◽  
Field Research ◽  
Institutional Review Board ◽  
Board Governance ◽  
Practical Application ◽  
Multiple Strategies ◽  
Institutional Review

Lew Margolis’s commentary on our discussion of field dilemmas delineates the basic tenets of research ethics and presents the historical backdrop for Institutional Review Board governance of the conduct of scientific research. Margolis’s commentary also highlights two important points: (1) within broad boundaries, multiple strategies may exist for resolving ethical dilemmas, and (2) field judgments about the best strategy for resolving ethical dilemmas may sometimes appear less than optimal with hindsight. These emphases reinforce the critical need for continued dialogue about the practical application of research ethics in applied field settings. We further emphasize the importance of conducting this dialogue not only in community forums but in academic arenas. The professional expertise of field researchers often is derived from direct experience with or membership in the communities being studied. For academic discussion of research ethics to have real-life utility, it is essential that conceptual discussion be translated into discussion of these issues as they apply to real-life situations demanding real-life solutions. We invite others to continue this dialogue about the practical application of research ethics to dilemmas that have been encountered during the conduct of applied field research.

scholarly journals Current State of the Evidence: Examining the Effects of Orton-Gillingham Reading Interventions for Students with or at Risk for Word-level Reading Disabilities

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Elizabeth A Stevens ◽  
Christy Austin ◽  
Clint Moore ◽  
Nancy K. Scammacca ◽  
Alexis N. Boucher ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
At Risk ◽  
Reading Instruction ◽  
Reading Disabilities ◽  
Reading Interventions ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Reading Outcomes ◽  
Grass Roots ◽  
Word Level ◽  
Current State ◽  
Rigorous Research

Over the past decade, parent advocacy groups led a grass-roots movement resulting in most states adopting dyslexia-specific legislation, with many states mandating the use of the Orton-Gillingham approach to reading instruction. Orton-Gillingham is a direct, explicit, multisensory, structured, sequential, diagnostic, and prescriptive approach to reading for students with or at-risk for world-level reading disabilities (WLRD). Evidence from a prior synthesis (Ritchey & Goeke, 2006) and What Works Clearinghouse reports (WWC, 2010) yielded findings lacking support for the effectiveness of Orton-Gillingham interventions. We conducted a meta-analysis to examine the effects of Orton-Gillingham reading interventions on the reading outcomes of students with or at risk for WLRD. Findings suggested Orton-Gillingham reading interventions do not statistically significantly improve foundational skill outcomes (i.e., phonological awareness, phonics, fluency, spelling; ES = 0.22, p = .40); though the mean effect size was positive in favor of Orton-Gillingham-based approaches. Similarly, there were not significant differences for vocabulary and comprehension outcomes (ES = 0.14; p = .59) for students with or at-risk for WLRD. More high quality, rigorous research with larger samples of students with WLRD is needed to fully understand the effects of Orton-Gillingham interventions on the reading outcomes for this population.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document