Differential ability and attainment in language and arithmetic of Dutch primary school pupils

Background . In preschool and primary education, pupils differ in many abilities and competences (giftedness). Yet mainstream educational practice seems rather homogeneous in providing age‐based or grade–class subject matter approaches. Aims . To clarify whether pupils scoring initially at high ability level do develop and attain differently at school with respect to language and arithmetic compared with those displaying other initial ability levels. To investigate whether specific individual, family, or educational variables covary with the attainment of these different types of pupils in school. Samples . Data from the large‐scale PRIMA cohort study including a total of 8,258 Grades 2 and 4 pupils from 438 primary schools in The Netherlands. Methods . Secondary analyses were carried out to construct gain scores for both language and arithmetic proficiency and a number of behavioural, attitudinal, family, and educational characteristics. The pupils were grouped into four different ability categories (highly able, able, above average, average or below average). Further analyses used Pearson correlations and analyses of variance both between‐ and within‐ability categories. Cross‐validation was done by introducing a cohort of younger pupils in preschool and grouping both cohorts into decile groups based on initial ability in language and arithmetic. Results . Highly able pupils generally decreased in attainment in both language and arithmetic, whereas pupils in average and below‐average groups improved their language and arithmetic scores. Only with highly able pupils were some educational characteristics correlated with the pupils' development in achievement, behaviour, and attitudes. Conclusions . Preschool and primary education should better match pupils' differences in abilities and competences from their start in preschool to improve their functioning, learning processes, and outcomes. Recommendations for educational improvement strategies are presented at the end of the article.     

Mentoring and the impact of the research climate

In this article, we focus on the mentoring process, and we argue that the internal and external pressures extant at research universities may create a research culture that may be antithetical to appropriate mentoring. We developed a scale based on motivation theory to determine the perceived research culture in departments and research laboratories, and a mentoring scale to determine approaches to mentoring graduate students. Participants were 610 faculty members across 49 departments at a research oriented university. The findings were that a mastery-oriented research climate and an outcome-oriented research climate were manifested at the university. More importantly, each research climate had its own unique impact on how the faculty approached mentoring graduate students. A mastery research climate was related to a more supportive approach to mentoring than the outcome research climate. We concluded by suggesting that the outcome research climate may have an adverse effect on effective mentoring and on maintaining research ethics.     

Notes on a pilgrimage to science: A fly on the wall

The paper is a set of reflections on the moral culture of modern biology built around the author's experience as a participant observer in two university laboratories. I draw parallels between laboratory culture and organized religion and point out practical problems in conducting scientific research. The notion that good biologists must be atheists is questioned and failures of organized religion are noted. The paper concludes with a suggestion that research ethics should be rooted in laboratory practice and must include vigorous principles of honesty and justice. Those are not requirements imposed from outside but internal requirements of the research community.     

The psychometricians' fallacy: Too clever by half?

The psychometricians' fallacy concludes that an attribute is quantitative from the premise that it is ordinal. This fallacy occupies a central place in the paradigm of psychometrics. Most of the founders of the discipline committed it and it makes sense of otherwise anomalous developments within the discipline, such as the permissible statistics controversy and the dominant form taken by item response theories. The fallacy is displayed by showing (1) that an attribute's quantitative structure reduces to a weak order upon differences between degrees that satisfies the double cancellation, solvability, and Archimedean conditions of conjoint measurement theory and (2) the fact that any order on the degrees themselves does not entail sufficient structure on this weak order to guarantee satisfaction of these conditions. Thus, it is possible that an ordered attribute is non‐quantitative. Also, each pair of differences between degrees of an ordinal attribute falls into one of two disjoint classes: (1) those where the order relation between the pair follows from an order on the attribute and (2) those where it is independent of that order and possibly diagnostic of quantitative structure and this fact means that the distinction between order and quantity is an empirical one.     

University Students' Perceived Self‐Efficacy in Identifying Suicidal Warning Signs and Helping Suicidal Friends Find Campus Intervention Resources

Currently, suicide is the third leading cause of death among youth 18 to 24 years of age and the second leading cause of death on college campuses. A sample of students (N = 1,019) from three midwestern universities were surveyed regarding their perceived self‐efficacy in identifying suicide warning signs and campus suicide intervention resources. The results indicated that 11% strongly believed they could recognize a friend at suicidal risk, while 17% strongly believed they could ask a friend if he or she was suicidal. Students who had received high school suicide prevention education and who had ever had a family member or friend express suicidal thoughts to them were those most confident in recognizing a friend at risk, asking a friend if he/she is suicidal, and helping a friend to see a counselor. Most (71%) were not aware of on‐campus help resources. These findings underscore the importance of suicide prevention education throughout the high school and college years.