Updating the Textbook: A Novel Approach to Training Graduate Students in Evidence-Based Youth Practices

Despite the ever-improving base of evidence-based practices (EBPs) for the treatment of childhood disorders, a gap between EBP research and their use in community settings continues to exist. An exciting opportunity to close this gap exists in the form of graduate student training; however, at present, several roadblocks exist. In this paper, we review the current state of graduate training in delivering EBPs and obstacles involved in training future community clinicians (i.e., graduate students) in EBPs. Next, we describe in detail our initiative to develop a curriculum that addresses these challenges. This innovative course empowered graduate students to receive training in the delivery of youth EBPs in community settings through reviews of the research literature, active learning techniques (e.g., discussions of case conceptualizations, role-playing case studies), and a written, publication-quality review of EBPs. Finally, we offer recommendations for other educators of mental health professionals (e.g., psychologists, social workers, counselors) to improve upon this curriculum in their training of graduate students in the theory and application of EBPs for treating childhood disorders.     

Bolzanian knowing: infallibility,virtue and foundational truth

The paper discusses Bernard Bolzano’s epistemological approach to believing and knowing with regard to the epistemic requirements of an axiomatic model of science. It relates Bolzano’s notions of believing, knowing and evaluation to notions of infallibility, immediacy and foundational truth. If axiomatic systems require their foundational truths to be infallibly known, this knowledge involves both evaluation of the infallibility of the asserted truth and evaluation of its being foundational. The twofold attempt to examine one’s assertions and to do so by searching for the objective grounds of the truths asserted lies at the heart of Bolzano’s notion of knowledge. However, the explanatory task of searching for grounds requires methods that cannot warrant infallibility. Hence, its constitutive role in a conception of knowledge seems to imply the fallibility of such knowledge. I argue that the explanatory task contained in Bolzanian knowing involves a high degree of epistemic virtues, and that it is only through some salient virtue that the credit of infallibility can distinguish Bolzanian knowing from a high degree of Bolzanian believing.     

Dealing with Possible Baseline Inequalities Between Experimental Groups – The Case of Motor Learning

Abstract

One important concept of experimental design is the random assignment of participants to experimental groups. This randomization process is used to prevent selection bias, as well as to provide a strong basis for a cause-and-effect relationship between the independent variable/s and the dependent variable/s. In small sample sizes, simple randomization may not provide equal groups at baseline for one or more of the variables, and therefore more restricted types of randomization, such as the stratified permuted-block randomization, can be used. A code was written to calculate the probability that simple randomization will not lead to equality between groups at baseline, and then an example of stratified permuted-block randomization was examined. The findings suggest that for certain variables that are commonly measured in experiments in motor learning, there is a relatively high probability that groups will not be equal at baseline after simple randomization. This observation reflects the small sample sizes usually found in the literature on motor learning. However, stratified permuted-block randomization does lead to greater equality among groups. Implications for researchers are discussed, and a flowchart is proposed that will allow researchers to decide whether to use simple or stratified randomization.