The 9th annual INDUS-EM 2013 Emergency Medicine Summit, “Principles,Practices, and Patients,” a level one international meeting,Kerala University of Health Sciences and Jubilee Mission Medical College and Research Institute,Thrissur, Kerala,India, October 23–27, 2013

INDUS-EM is India’s only level one conference imparting and exchanging quality knowledge in acute care. Specifically, in general and specialized emergency care and training in trauma, burns, cardiac, stroke, environmental and disaster medicine. It provides a series of exchanges regarding academic development and implementation of training tools related to developing future academic faculty and residents in Emergency Medicine in India. The INDUS-EM leadership and board of directors invited scholars from multiple institutions to participate in this advanced educational symposium that was held in Thrissur, Kerala in October 2013.     

Improving Students' Critical Thinking: Empirical Support for Explicit Instructions Combined with Practice

This experiment investigated the impact of different types of critical thinking instruction and dispositions on bias in economics students' (N = 141) reasoning performance. The following conditions were compared: (A) implicit instruction; (B) implicit instruction with practice; (C) implicit instruction with explicit instruction and practice; (D) implicit instruction with explicit instruction, practice, and self‐explanation prompts; and (E) implicit instruction with explicit instruction, practice, and activation prompts. Results showed that explicit instruction combined with practice is required to improve critical thinking (i.e., conditions A/B < C/D/E). Prompting during practice had no added performance benefits. Participants' dispositions toward actively open‐minded thinking predicted their pre‐test and post‐test scores but did not interact with instruction condition, suggesting that receiving explicit instruction combined with practice was equally effective for all students. Copyright © 2014 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Can students evaluate their understanding of cause-and-effect relations? The effects of diagram completion on monitoring accuracy

For effective self-regulated study of expository texts, it is crucial that learners can accurately monitor their understanding of cause-and-effect relations. This study aimed to improve adolescents' monitoring accuracy using a diagram completion task. Participants read six texts, predicted performance, selected texts for restudy, and were tested for comprehension. Three groups were compared, in which learners either completed causal diagrams immediately after reading, completed them after a delay, or received no-diagram control instructions. Accuracy of predictions of performance was highest for learning of causal relations following delayed diagram completion. Completing delayed diagrams focused learners specifically on their learning of causal relations, so this task did not improve monitoring of learning of factual information. When selecting texts for restudy, the participants followed their predictions of performance to the same degree, regardless of monitoring accuracy. Fine-grained analyses also showed that, when completing delayed diagrams, learners based judgments on diagnostic cues that indicated actual understanding of connections between events in the text. Most important, delayed diagram completion can improve adolescents' ability to monitor their learning of cause-and-effect relations.     

Morality‐ and identity‐related antecedents of children's guilt and shame attributions in events involving physical illness

It is theorised that guilt‐ and shame‐related appraisals vary on two separate dimensions. Guilt implies an appraisal that one has either committed a moral transgression or that one has otherwise been involved in the creation of a morally wrong outcome. Shame implies one's appraisal that the current event or condition reflects negatively on one's identity. To test these claims, 206 7‐ to 16‐year‐old children gave shame and guilt ratings of three types of events that were drawn from the domain of physical illness and that were designed to elicit primarily guilt, primarily shame, or both emotions. The 12‐year‐olds and older children's ratings were fully consistent with our hypothesis. Younger children's greatest difficulty was in not attributing shame to protagonists who were involved in causing a moral wrong without there being the threat of an unwanted identity.     

Using Historical Knowledge to Reason About Contemporary Political Issues: An Expert–Novice Study

People often justify history's place in the curriculum by its relationship to citizenship, yet there is little research to help educators picture how people use historical knowledge for civic purposes. This expert–novice study used the think-aloud method to examine how eight political scientists and eight high school students employed historical knowledge to reason about a political issue. Findings indicated that detailed historical narrative played an important role for experts’ reasoning, and the experts used narrative to frame the issue, support their positions, and evaluate historical claims. Participating students used narrative as well, but their narratives were lacking in detail. They never used history to frame the problem, contextualize documents, or to support their positions, and they rarely used narrative to evaluate claims. These differences in how experts and novices use history to make sense of the present have implications for history instruction and research in history and civic education.     

Concurrent validity of the wide range assessment of visual motor abilities in typically developing children ages 4 to 11 years

Pediatric clinicians working with school-age children use the Wide Range Assessment of Visual Motor Abilities (WRAVMA) as a method for evaluating visual perception and motor skills in children despite limited information on concurrent validity. Whether it may be substituted for the Beery-Buktenica Developmental Test of Visual-Motor Integration (VMI) and has suitable estimates of concurrent validity were examined with a convenience sample of 91 typically developing children ages 4 to 11 years. No systematic concurrent validity between the WRAVMA and the VMI emerged. Only two subtests of the WRAVMA (Matching with Visual Perception, and Pegboard with Motor Coordination) gave scores statistically significantly correlated with those on the VMI, and these correlations were weak, accounting for very small amounts of the shared variance. As such, they have low clinical relevance. These findings do not provide evidence of concurrent validity to support the use of WRAVMA as an alternative method for the VMI for assessing children's visual perception and motor skills.