Ramp and constant power trials produce equivalent critical power estimates

The standard critical power test protocol on the cycle prescribes a series of trials to exhaustion, each at a different but constant power setting. Recently the protocol has been modified and applied to a series of trials to exhaustion each at a different ramp incremental rate. This study was undertaken to compare critical power and anaerobic work capacity estimates in the same group of subjects when derived from the two protocols. Ten male subjects of mixed athletic ability cycled to exhaustion on eight occasions in randomized order over a 3-wk period. Four trials were performed at differing constant power settings and four trials on differing ramp incremental rates. Both critical power and anaerobic work capacity were estimated for each subject by curve fitting of the ramp model and of three versions of the constant power model. After adjusting for inter-subject variability, no significant differences were detected between critical power estimates or between anaerobic work capacity estimates from any model formulation or from the two protocols. It is concluded that both the ramp and constant power protocols produce equivalent estimates for critical power and anaerobic work capacity.

Children's cooperative behavior and interactions in trained and untrained work groups in regular classrooms

This study examined group and individual factors that facilitate changes in cooperation and learning outcomes in trained and untrained work groups of elementary school-age children. The study had two foci. The first was to determine if the cooperative behaviors and interactions of children in classroom groups who were trained in cooperative learning skins were different from those of children who were given no training, and the second was to investigate small group interactions and achievement in these groups over time. The results showed that there were observable differences between student interactions in the two conditions and these differences were maintained over time. Compared with children in the untrained groups, those in the trained groups were consistently more cooperative and helpful to each other; they actively tried to involve each other in the learning task by using language which was more inclusive (e.g., frequent use of ''we''), and they gave more explanations to assist each other as they worked together. It appeared that as the children worked together over time, they became more responsive to the learning needs of each other. Furthermore, the children in the trained groups performed significantly better on the learning outcomes questionnaire than those in the untrained groups. (C) 1997 Society for the Study of School Psychology. Published by Elsevier Science Ltd.