The Perceptions, Attitudes and Practices of Registered Dietitians Regarding Functional Foods

The term “functional food” (FF) has a variety of definitions resulting in term ambiguity. It is unclear Registered Dietitians’ (RDs) understanding and practices about FF. A descriptive, cross-sectional study investigated RDs’ perceptions, attitudes and practices regarding FF. A national random sample (n=1800) of RDs was mailed a FF questionnaire, 385 (22%) responded. Given five definitions from food-nutrition authorities, the majority of RDs did not agree on a definition, although three-fourths (n=292, 75.8%) perceived fortified foods as FF. Registered Dietitians agreed FF could improve health (n=266, 69.1%), prevent disease (n=282, 73.2%) and treat clientele (n=246, 63.9%), however were neutral (41.6%) or disagreed (37.7%) FF were herbs, or equivalent to medicine (32.7%, 49.2% respectively). Most RDs (n=290, 75.9%) ate FF; fewer (n=231, 61.4%) professionally recommended them. Nearly all (n=353) indicated interest in learning about FF. Registered Dietitians revealed inconsistencies between their perceptions, attitudes and practices regarding FF. Professional education is needed to resolve discrepancies regarding FF.

Taiwanese faculty and administrators' perceptions and preferences toward shared governance

This study investigated the perceptions, attitudes, preferences, and actual reported degree of faculty participation in decision-making in Taiwanese universities. It was aimed at exploring possible agreements and disagreements between the faculty and administrators concerning these perceptions, and between the actual and preferred degree of faculty participation in both groups. ^ Seven questions were addressed in this study: (a) What are the most and the least reported areas of faculty involvement in decision making? (b) What are the most and the least preferred areas of faculty involvement in decision-making? (c) Is there a difference between faculty and administrators' reports of faculty involvement in decision-making? (d) Is there a difference between faculty and administrators in their preference for faculty involvement in decision-making? (e) Among the faculty, is reported involvement different from preferred involvement in decision-making? (f) Among the administrators, is their reported faculty involvement different from their preferred faculty involvement? and (g) Do faculty and administrators hold different attitudes toward faculty participation in decision-making? ^ The results indicated that: (a) Faculty had the highest level of involvement in academic decisions, and had the lowest level of involvement in developing general policies. (b) Both faculty and administrators had the highest preference for faculty involvement in academic decisions, and both of them had the lowest preference for faculty involvement in general policies. (c) Administrators reported a level of involvement for the faculty that was higher than the level that the faculty themselves reported. (d) Faculty desired a higher level of involvement than they currently have, and administrators also agreed that faculty should have greater involvement. ^ The interview results indicated that the presidents believed that faculty should participate in decision-making, but they also had negative feelings towards faculty who were enthusiastic about participating. The presidents showed their support of faculty participation in academic decisions, but not in other areas. ^ The results reflected the traditional Taiwanese social expectations of the role of faculty. When the range of decisions was narrowed to the academic context, the disagreements between the faculty, administrators, and university presidents disappeared. However, when the range of decisions was expanded, the agreement declined. ^

*Postsecondary access for individuals with psychological disabilities: An analysis of federal rulings and institutional philosophies, *policies, and practices

This study was a qualitative investigation, with demographic quantitative features, of post-secondary educational access and legal guidelines for individuals with psychological disabilities. Although disability laws have positively influenced post-secondary educational attitudes and practices relative to accommodating many individuals with disabilities, prevailing stigmas regarding mental illness have discouraged the equal access to higher education for individuals with psychological disabilities. Little research concentrating on this area was found.^ Thirty-six relevant legal case decisions, focusing on a variety of realms of higher education, were scrutinized. The policies, procedures, and practices of six Southeastern United States universities were analyzed through official documents and participant responses from disability service providers and other university employees. Comparisons were made between legal cases, and within and between universities. Case findings also provided standards through which participating university practices could be studied.^ The legal analysis revealed that most institutions did not discriminate against individuals with psychological disabilities. Practices of a few of these institutions, however, suggested non-compliance despite favorable decisions on their behalf. Institutions found to have discriminatory practices were cited for inadequate procedures, or for presumptive assessments of the educational functioning levels of individuals with psychological disabilities.^ Participant university practices generally suggested disability law compliance; however, certain campus interventions were determined to be ineffective in identifying, addressing, and communicating about the educational needs of individuals with psychological disabilities. The most effective services for these individuals, who were described as rapidly increasing in number but lagging in self-advocacy and acceptance by others, went beyond legal requirements.^ Recommendations were made for institutional practices concerning disability-related documentation, written standards and operations, and student identification and referral. Directions for future research focused on study skills training for students; exposure of mental health professionals to client educational needs; and expansion of the current research, on a nationwide collegiate level, and a parallel analysis focusing on business and industry. ^