(Ni-2), (Ni-3), and (Ni-2 + Ni-3): A Unique Example of Isolated and Cocrystallized Ni-2 and Ni-3 Complexes

Structural and magnetic characterization of compound {[Ni-2(L)(2)(OAC)(2)][Ni-3(L)(2) (OAc)(4)]) center dot 2CH(3)CN (3) (HL = the tridentate Schiff base ligand, 2-[(3-methylaminb-propylimino)-methyl]-phenol) shows that it is a rare example of a crystal incorporating a dinuclear Ni(II) compound, [Ni-2(L)(2)(OAc)(2)], and a trinuclear one, [Ni-3(L)(2)(OAC)(4)]. Even more unusual is the fact that both Ni (II) complexes, [Ni-2(L)(2)(OAc)(2)] (1) and [Ni-3(L)(2)(OAc)(4)(H2O)(2)] center dot CH2Cl2 center dot 2CH(3)OH (2), have also been isolated and structurally and magnetically characterized. The structural analysis reveals that the dimeric complexes [Ni-2(L)(2)(OAc)(2)] in cocrystal 3 and in compound 1 are almost identical-in both complexes, the Ni(II) ions possess a distorted octahedral geometry formed by the chelating tridentate ligand (L), a chelating acetate ion, and a bridging phenoxo group with very similar bond angles and distances. On the other hand, compound 2 and the trinuclear complex in the cocrystal 3 show a similar linear centrosymmetric structure with the tridentate ligand coordinated to the terminal Ni(II) and linked to the central Ni(II) by phenoxo and carboxylate bridges. The only difference is that a water molecule found in 2 is not present in the trinuclear unit of complex 3; instead, the coordination sphere is completed by an additional bridging oxygen atom from an acetate ligand. Variable-temperature (2-300 K) magnetic susceptibility measurements show that the dinuclear unit is antiferromagnetically coupled in both compounds (2J = -36.18 and -29.5 cm(-1) in 1 and 3, respectively), whereas the trinuclear unit shows a very weak ferromagnetic coupling in compound 3 (2J = 0.23 cm(-1)) and a weak antiferromagnetic coupling in 2 (2J = -8.7(2) cm(-1)) due to the minor changes in the coordination sphere.

A unique example of structural and magnetic diversity in four interconvertible copper(II)−azide complexes with the same Schiff base ligand: a monomer, a dimer, a chain, and a layer

Four new Cu(II)-azido complexes of formula [CuL(N-3)] (1), [CuL(N-3)](2) (2), [Cu7L2(N-3)(12)](n) (3), and [Cu2L(dmen)-(N-3)(3)](n) (4) (dmen = N,N-dimethylethylenediamine) have been synthesized using the same tridentate Schiff base ligand HL (2-[1-(2-dimethylaminoethylimino)ethyl]phenol, the condensation product of dmen and 2-hydroxyacetophenone). The four compounds have been characterized by X-ray structural analyses and variable-temperature magnetic susceptibility measurements. Complex 1 is mononuclear, whereas 2 is a single mu-1,1 azido-bridged dinuclear compound. The polymeric compound 3 possesses a 2D structure in which the Cu(II) ions are linked by phenoxo oxygen atoms and two different azide bridges (mu-1,1 and mu-1,1,3). The structure of complex 4 is a double helix in which two mu-1,3-azido-bridged alternating one-dimensional helical chains of CuL(N-3) and Cu(dmen)(N-3)(2) are joined together by weak mu-1,1 azido bridges and H-bonds. The complexes interconvert in solution and can be obtained in pure form by carefully controlling the conditions. The magnetic properties of compounds 1 and 2 show the presence of very weak antiferromagnetic exchange interactions mediated by a ligand pi overlap (J = -1.77) and by an asymmetric 1,1-N-3 bridge (J = -1.97 cm(-1)), respectively. Compound 3 presents, from the magnetic point of view, a decorated chain structure with both ferro- and antiferromagnetic interactions. Compound 4 is an alternating helicoidal chain with two weak antiferromagnetic exchange interactions (J -1.35 and -2.64 cm(-1)).

Predicting long-term growth in students' mathematics achievement: the unique contributions of motivation and cognitive strategies

This research examined how motivation (perceived control, intrinsic motivation, and extrinsic motivation), cognitive learning strategies (deep and surface strategies), and intelligence jointly predict long-term growth in students' mathematics achievement over 5 years. Using longitudinal data from six annual waves (Grades 5 through 10; Mage = 11.7 years at baseline; N = 3,530), latent growth curve modeling was employed to analyze growth in achievement. Results showed that the initial level of achievement was strongly related to intelligence, with motivation and cognitive strategies explaining additional variance. In contrast, intelligence had no relation with the growth of achievement over years, whereas motivation and learning strategies were predictors of growth. These findings highlight the importance of motivation and learning strategies in facilitating adolescents' development of mathematical competencies.