Developing procedural flexibility: Are novices prepared to learn from comparing procedures?

Background. A key learning outcome in problem‐solving domains is the development of procedural flexibility, where learners know multiple procedures and use them appropriately to solve a range of problems (e.g., Verschaffel, Luwel, Torbeyns, & Van Dooren, 2009 ). However, students often fail to become flexible problem solvers in mathematics. To support flexibility, teaching standards in many countries recommend that students be exposed to multiple procedures early in instruction and be encouraged to compare them. Aims. We experimentally evaluated this recommended instructional practice for supporting procedural flexibility during a classroom lesson, relative to two alternative conditions. The alternatives reflected the common instructional practice of delayed exposure to multiple procedures, either with or without comparison of procedures. Sample. Grade 8 students from two public schools (N= 198) were randomly assigned to condition. Students had not received prior instruction on multi‐step equation solving, which was the topic of our lessons. Method. Students learned about multi‐step equation solving under one of three conditions in math class for about 3 hr. They also completed a pre‐test, post‐test, and 1‐month‐retention test on their procedural knowledge, procedural flexibility, and conceptual knowledge of equation solving. Results. Novices who compared procedures immediately were more flexible problem solvers than those who did not, even on a 1‐month retention test. Although condition had limited direct impact on conceptual and procedural knowledge, greater flexibility was associated with greater knowledge of both types. Conclusions. Comparing procedures can support flexibility in novices and early introduction to multiple procedures may be one important reason.     

From racial discrimination to risky sex: prospective relations involving peers and parents

This study investigated how early experience with racial discrimination affected the subsequent risky sexual behaviors of a diverse sample of African American youths (N = 745). The analyses focused on 3 risk-promoting factors thought to mediate the hypothesized discrimination → risky sex relation: negative affect, affiliation with deviant peers, and favorable attitudes toward risky sex. In addition, attentive parenting was examined as a protective factor. Analyses using structural equation modeling revealed that youths who perceived more racial discrimination at age 10 or 11 were engaging in more sexual risk taking at age 18 or 19. This relation was mediated by the hypothesized risk-promoting factors via pathways that were consistent with our conceptual model. Results also indicated a prospective reciprocal relation between parenting and children's deviant affiliations: deviant peer affiliations at age 10 or 11 predicted more attentive parenting behaviors by the parents; this response from the parents, in turn, predicted relatively fewer deviant affiliations when the youths were 15 or 16. Study findings are discussed in terms of their relevance to the disproportionately high rates of sexually transmitted infections among African Americans.     

Keeping People In or Out?

Abstract : In this article I argue that the Lutheran doctrine of two kingdoms provides a good basis for the legitimate participation of all citizens in political discourse and decisions, no matter what faith they hold. The argument is backed by selected insights from philosopher Jürgen Habermas and sociologists Linda Woodhead and Paul Heelas. Against this backdrop, I suggest some challenges for a theology that addresses issues related to religion and society.     

Beyond Iraq and Afghanistan: Religion and Politics in United States War‐Culture

Abstract : This article digs beneath the surface of American assumptions regarding war to explore the ethical interconnections between national identity, war, and religion. Striking differences emerge between the dynamics of religion and politics with regard to war and peace in presidential speeches regarding the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, and the analysis of war from an earlier generation, encapsulated by Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.'s “Beyond Vietnam: A Call to Conscience,” from 1967. Study of this political discourse helps us better understand our own reality in the United States, and the moral consequences of our beliefs about war, sacrifice, the human character, and the identity of the nation.     

A quantum theoretical explanation for probability judgment errors

A quantum probability model is introduced and used to explain human probability judgment errors including the conjunction and disjunction fallacies, averaging effects, unpacking effects, and order effects on inference. On the one hand, quantum theory is similar to other categorization and memory models of cognition in that it relies on vector spaces defined by features and similarities between vectors to determine probability judgments. On the other hand, quantum probability theory is a generalization of Bayesian probability theory because it is based on a set of (von Neumann) axioms that relax some of the classic (Kolmogorov) axioms. The quantum model is compared and contrasted with other competing explanations for these judgment errors, including the anchoring and adjustment model for probability judgments. In the quantum model, a new fundamental concept in cognition is advanced--the compatibility versus incompatibility of questions and the effect this can have on the sequential order of judgments. We conclude that quantum information-processing principles provide a viable and promising new way to understand human judgment and reasoning.     

APOLOGIZING WITHOUT REGRET

A common belief about the nature of agent regret is that regretting some event E is closely linked to being sorry for the occurrence of E. Or more specifically, that if one is sorry for E then she must regret E. I will call this ‘the sorry‐regret hypothesis’. My contention is that one may be sorry for some action but not regret it. I take the rejection of this ‘truism’ to be a positive development. I offer two lines of argument for rejecting the sorry‐regret hypothesis. One line of argument is based on counterexamples. The second attacks the validity of a reconstructed argument for the sorry‐regret hypothesis. It is desirable to reject the sorry‐regret hypothesis since there is a component of regret that many will not wish to be saddled with as a condition of apologizing. To regret an act, one must wish that she had not performed that act. Since a person is the person she is (speaking loosely) because of the actions she has performed, for many actions, if one regrets an action, then she wishes that she were a different person. This is a worrisome consequence.     

CALLING: THE DEVELOPMENT OF A SCALE MEASURE

This study clarifies the definition of calling—a consuming, meaningful passion people experience toward a domain—and develops a 12‐item scale measure of calling. Drawing on multiwave longitudinal, 2‐wave longitudinal, and cross‐sectional data from 1,500 participants (2,278 observations) in 4 separate domains, music, art, business, and management, we demonstrate the scale's reliability and unidimensional structure across contexts and over time. We establish the scale's convergent validity and discriminant validity. We determine criterion‐related validity through the scale's relationship to satisfaction with the calling domain, career‐related self‐efficacy, clarity of professional identity, career insight, attending a calling‐oriented college program, professional pursuit of the calling domain, and differences across the 4 domains. We discuss implications of this reliable, valid measure for theory and research on calling, meaning of work, and careers.