Impacts of school-wide positive behaviour support: Results from National Longitudinal Register Data

Problem behaviour in schools may have detrimental effects both on students' well-being and academic achievement. A large literature has consistently found that school-wide positive behaviour support (SWPBS) successfully addresses social and behavioural problems. In this paper, we used population-wide longitudinal register data for all Norwegian primary schools and a difference-in-difference (DiD) design to evaluate effects of SWPBS on a number of primary and secondary outcomes, including indicators of externalising behaviour, school well-being, pull-out instruction, and academic achievement. Indications of reduced classroom noise were found. No other effects were detected. Analyses revealed important differences in outcomes between the intervention and control schools, independent of the implementation of SWPBS, and that a credible design like DiD is essential to handle such school differences.     

Group disagreement: a belief aggregation perspective

The debate on the epistemology of disagreement has so far focused almost exclusively on cases of disagreement between individual persons. Yet, many social epistemologists agree that at least certain kinds of groups are equally capable of having beliefs that are open to epistemic evaluation. If so, we should expect a comprehensive epistemology of disagreement to accommodate cases of disagreement between group agents, such as juries, governments, companies, and the like. However, this raises a number of fundamental questions concerning what it means for groups to be epistemic peers and to disagree with each other. In this paper, we explore what group peer disagreement amounts to given that we think of group belief in terms of List and Pettit’s (Econ Philos 18:89–110, 2002; Group agency: the possibility, design, and status of corporate agents, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2011) ‘belief aggregation model’. We then discuss how the so-called ‘equal weight view’ of peer disagreement is best accommodated within this framework. The account that seems most promising to us says, roughly, that the parties to a group peer disagreement should adopt the belief that results from applying the most suitable belief aggregation function for the combined group on all members of the combined group. To motivate this view, we test it against various intuitive cases, derive some of its notable implications, and discuss how it relates to the equal weight view of individual peer disagreement.

     

On the Assessment of Situational Intrinsic and Extrinsic Motivation: The Situational Motivation Scale (SIMS)

The purpose of the present research was to develop and validate a situational (or state) measure of motivation, the Situational Motivation Scale (SIMS). The SIMS is designed to assess the constructs of intrinsic motivation, identified regulation, external regulation, and amotivation (E. L. Deci & R. M. Ryan, 1985, 1991) in field and laboratory settings. Five studies were conducted to develop and validate the SIMS. Overall, results show that the SIMS is composed of 4 internally consistent factors. The construct validity of the scale is also supported by correlations with other constructs as postulated by current theories. Moreover, the SIMS is responsive to experimental induction as evidenced by data gathered through a laboratory study. In sum, the SIMS represents a brief and versatile self-report measure of situational intrinsic motivation, identified regulation, external regulation, and amotivation.