Comparison of the effects of inquiry-based cooperative learning and demonstrations in science education

The reported research project involved studying how teaching science using demonstrations, inquiry-based cooperative learning groups, or a combination of the two methods affected sixth grade students’ understanding of air pressure and density. Three different groups of students were each taught the two units using different teaching methods. Group one learned about the topics through both demonstrations and inquirybased cooperative learning, whereas group two only viewed demonstrations, and group three only participated in inquiry-based learning in cooperative learning groups. The study was designed to answer the following two questions: 1. Which teaching strategy works best for supporting student understanding of air pressure and density: demonstrations, inquirybased labs in cooperative learning groups, or a combination of the two? 2. And what effect does the time spent engaging in a particular learning experience (demonstrations or labs) have on student learning? Overall, the data did not provide sufficient evidence that one method of learning was more effective than the others. The results also suggested that spending more time on a unit does not necessarily equate to a better understanding of the concepts by the students. Implications for science instruction are discussed.

The Geology and Mineralogy of the Independence Mining District

From 1888 until 1893 the district was a booming mining camp. Seven stamp mills were running and ore was be­ing mined from the Independence, King Solomon, Poorman, Golden, Hidden Treasure and Crown claims. The town of Independence, which was on the Boulder River at the fork of Basin Creek, boasted a population of 400 people.

The European baseline series in 10 European Countries, 2005/2006--results of the European Surveillance System on Contact Allergies (ESSCA)

BACKGROUND: Continual surveillance based on patch test results has proved useful for the identification of contact allergy. OBJECTIVES: To provide a current view on the spectrum of contact allergy to important sensitizers across Europe. PATIENTS/METHODS: Clinical and patch test data of 19 793 patients patch tested in 2005/2006 in the 31 participating departments from 10 European countries (the European Surveillance System on Contact Allergies' (ESSCA) www.essca-dc.org) were descriptively analysed, aggregated to four European regions. RESULTS: Nickel sulfate remains the most common allergen with standardized prevalences ranging from 19.7% (central Europe) to 24.4% (southern Europe). While a number of allergens shows limited variation across the four regions, such as Myroxylon pereirae (5.3-6.8%), cobalt chloride (6.2-8.8%) or thiuram mix (1.7-2.4%), the differences observed with other allergens may hint on underlying differences in exposures, for example: dichromate 2.4% in the UK (west) versus 4.5-5.9% in the remaining EU regions, methylchloroisothiazolinone/methylisothiazolinone 4.1% in the South versus 2.1-2.7% in the remaining regions. CONCLUSIONS: Notwithstanding residual methodological variation (affecting at least some 'difficult' allergens) tackled by ongoing efforts for standardization, a comparative analysis as presented provides (i) a broad overview on contact allergy frequencies and (ii) interesting starting points for further, in-depth investigation.

STrengthening the REporting of Genetic Association studies (STREGA)--an extension of the STROBE statement

Making sense of rapidly evolving evidence on genetic associations is crucial to making genuine advances in human genomics and the eventual integration of this information in the practice of medicine and public health. Assessment of the strengths and weaknesses of this evidence, and hence the ability to synthesize it, has been limited by inadequate reporting of results. The STrengthening the REporting of Genetic Association studies (STREGA) initiative builds on the STrengthening the Reporting of OBservational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) Statement and provides additions to 12 of the 22 items on the STROBE checklist. The additions concern population stratification, genotyping errors, modelling haplotype variation, Hardy-Weinberg equilibrium, replication, selection of participants, rationale for choice of genes and variants, treatment effects in studying quantitative traits, statistical methods, relatedness, reporting of descriptive and outcome data and the volume of data issues that are important to consider in genetic association studies. The STREGA recommendations do not prescribe or dictate how a genetic association study should be designed, but seek to enhance the transparency of its reporting, regardless of choices made during design, conduct or analysis.

STrengthening the REporting of Genetic Association Studies (STREGA)--an extension of the STROBE statement

Making sense of rapidly evolving evidence on genetic associations is crucial to making genuine advances in human genomics and the eventual integration of this information in the practice of medicine and public health. Assessment of the strengths and weaknesses of this evidence, and hence the ability to synthesize it, has been limited by inadequate reporting of results. The STrengthening the REporting of Genetic Association studies (STREGA) initiative builds on the STrengthening the Reporting of OBservational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) Statement and provides additions to 12 of the 22 items on the STROBE checklist. The additions concern population stratification, genotyping errors, modelling haplotype variation, Hardy-Weinberg equilibrium, replication, selection of participants, rationale for choice of genes and variants, treatment effects in studying quantitative traits, statistical methods, relatedness, reporting of descriptive and outcome data, and the volume of data issues that are important to consider in genetic association studies. The STREGA recommendations do not prescribe or dictate how a genetic association study should be designed but seek to enhance the transparency of its reporting, regardless of choices made during design, conduct, or analysis.

Strengthening the reporting of genetic association studies (STREGA): an extension of the strengthening the reporting of observational studies in epidemiology (STROBE) statement

Making sense of rapidly evolving evidence on genetic associations is crucial to making genuine advances in human genomics and the eventual integration of this information in the practice of medicine and public health. Assessment of the strengths and weaknesses of this evidence, and hence, the ability to synthesize it, has been limited by inadequate reporting of results. The STrengthening the REporting of Genetic Association (STREGA) studies initiative builds on the Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) statement and provides additions to 12 of the 22 items on the STROBE checklist. The additions concern population stratification, genotyping errors, modeling haplotype variation, Hardy-Weinberg equilibrium, replication, selection of participants, rationale for choice of genes and variants, treatment effects in studying quantitative traits, statistical methods, relatedness, reporting of descriptive and outcome data, and the volume of data issues that are important to consider in genetic association studies. The STREGA recommendations do not prescribe or dictate how a genetic association study should be designed, but seek to enhance the transparency of its reporting, regardless of choices made during design, conduct, or analysis.

STrengthening the REporting of Genetic Association Studies (STREGA): an extension of the STROBE statement

Making sense of rapidly evolving evidence on genetic associations is crucial to making genuine advances in human genomics and the eventual integration of this information in the practice of medicine and public health. Assessment of the strengths and weaknesses of this evidence, and hence the ability to synthesize it, has been limited by inadequate reporting of results. The STrengthening the REporting of Genetic Association studies (STREGA) initiative builds on the Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) Statement and provides additions to 12 of the 22 items on the STROBE checklist. The additions concern population stratification, genotyping errors, modelling haplotype variation, Hardy-Weinberg equilibrium, replication, selection of participants, rationale for choice of genes and variants, treatment effects in studying quantitative traits, statistical methods, relatedness, reporting of descriptive and outcome data, and the volume of data issues that are important to consider in genetic association studies. The STREGA recommendations do not prescribe or dictate how a genetic association study should be designed but seek to enhance the transparency of its reporting, regardless of choices made during design, conduct, or analysis.

STrengthening the REporting of Genetic Association studies (STREGA): an extension of the STROBE Statement

Making sense of rapidly evolving evidence on genetic associations is crucial to making genuine advances in human genomics and the eventual integration of this information into the practice of medicine and public health. Assessment of the strengths and weaknesses of this evidence, and hence the ability to synthesize it, has been limited by inadequate reporting of results. The STrengthening the REporting of Genetic Association studies (STREGA) initiative builds on the STrengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) Statement and provides additions to 12 of the 22 items on the STROBE checklist. The additions concern population stratification, genotyping errors, modeling haplotype variation, Hardy-Weinberg equilibrium, replication, selection of participants, rationale for choice of genes and variants, treatment effects in studying quantitative traits, statistical methods, relatedness, reporting of descriptive and outcome data, and issues of data volume that are important to consider in genetic association studies. The STREGA recommendations do not prescribe or dictate how a genetic association study should be designed but seek to enhance the transparency of its reporting, regardless of choices made during design, conduct, or analysis.

Strengthening the reporting of genetic association studies (STREGA): an extension of the STROBE statement

Making sense of rapidly evolving evidence on genetic associations is crucial to making genuine advances in human genomics and the eventual integration of this information in the practice of medicine and public health. Assessment of the strengths and weaknesses of this evidence, and hence the ability to synthesize it, has been limited by inadequate reporting of results. The STrengthening the REporting of Genetic Association studies (STREGA) initiative builds on the Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) Statement and provides additions to 12 of the 22 items on the STROBE checklist. The additions concern population stratification, genotyping errors, modeling haplotype variation, Hardy-Weinberg equilibrium, replication, selection of participants, rationale for choice of genes and variants, treatment effects in studying quantitative traits, statistical methods, relatedness, reporting of descriptive and outcome data, and the volume of data issues that are important to consider in genetic association studies. The STREGA recommendations do not prescribe or dictate how a genetic association study should be designed but seek to enhance the transparency of its reporting, regardless of choices made during design, conduct, or analysis.

Strengthening the reporting of genetic association studies (STREGA): an extension of the STROBE Statement

Making sense of rapidly evolving evidence on genetic associations is crucial to making genuine advances in human genomics and the eventual integration of this information in the practice of medicine and public health. Assessment of the strengths and weaknesses of this evidence, and hence the ability to synthesize it, has been limited by inadequate reporting of results. The STrengthening the REporting of Genetic Association studies (STREGA) initiative builds on the Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) Statement and provides additions to 12 of the 22 items on the STROBE checklist. The additions concern population stratification, genotyping errors, modeling haplotype variation, Hardy-Weinberg equilibrium, replication, selection of participants, rationale for choice of genes and variants, treatment effects in studying quantitative traits, statistical methods, relatedness, reporting of descriptive and outcome data, and the volume of data issues that are important to consider in genetic association studies. The STREGA recommendations do not prescribe or dictate how a genetic association study should be designed but seek to enhance the transparency of its reporting, regardless of choices made during design, conduct, or analysis.

A METAGENOMIC STUDY OF THE TICK MIDGUT

A Metagenomic Study of the Tick Midgut Daniel Yuan, B.S. Supervisory Professor : Steven J. Norris, Ph.D. Southern tick–associated rash illness (STARI) or Master’s disease is a Lyme-like illness that occurs following bites by Amblyomma americanum, the lone-star tick. Clinical symptoms include a bull’s eye rash similar to the erythema migrans lesions of Lyme disease, as well as fever and joint pains. Lyme disease is caused by Borrelia burgdorferi and related spirochetes. However, B. burgdorferi has not been detected in STARI patients, or in ticks in the South Central U.S. The causative agent of STARI has not been identified, although it was once thought to be caused by another Borrelia species, Borrelia lonestari. Furthermore, while adult A. americanum have up to a 5.6% Borrelia lonestari infection rate, the prevalence of all Borrelia species in Texas ticks as a whole is not known. Previous studies indicate that 6%-30% of Northern Ixodes scapularis ticks are infected by Borrelia burgdorferi while only 10% of Northern A. americanum and I. scapularis ticks are infected by Borrelia species. The first specific aim of this project was to determine the bacterial community that inhabits the midgut of Texas and Northeastern ticks by using high throughput metagenomic sequencing to sequence bacterial 16S rDNA. Through the use of massively parallel 454 sequencing, we were able to individually sequence hundreds of thousands of 16S rDNA regions of the bacterial flora from 133 ticks from the New York, Missouri and Texas. The presence of previously confirmed endosymbionts, specifically the Rickettsia spp. and Coxiella spp., that are commonly found in ticks were confirmed, as well as some highly prevalent genera that were previously undocumented. Furthermore, multiple pathogenic genera sequences were often found in the same tick, suggesting the possibility of co-infection of multiple pathogenic species. The second specific aim was to use Borrelia specific primers to screen 344 individual ticks from Missouri, Texas and the Northeast to determine the prevalence of Borrelia species in ticks. To screen for Borrelia species, two housekeeping genes, uvrA and recG, were selected as well as the 16S-23S rDNA intergenic spacer. Ticks from Missouri, Texas and New York were screened. None of the Missouri or Texas ticks tested positive for Borrelia spp. The rate of I. scapularis infection by B.burgdorferi is dependent on tick feeding activity as well as reservoir availability. B. burgdorferi is endemic in the Northeast, sometimes reported as highly present in over 50% of all I. scapularis ticks. 11.6% of all New York ticks were positive for a species of Borrelia, however only 6.9% of all New York ticks were positive for B. burgdorferi. Despite being significantly lower than 50%, the results still fall in line with previous reports of about the prevalence of B. burgdorferi. 1.5% of all Texas ticks were positive for a Borrelia species, specifically B. lonestari. While this study was unable to identify the causative agent for STARI, 454 sequencing was able to provide a tremendous insight into the bacterial flora and possible pathogenic species of both the I. scapularis and the A. americanum tick.

The "Image" of the Pharaoh in Judahite and Israelite Society According to the Glyptic Evidence

Among the many thousand scarabs, scaraboids and other stamp-seal amulets unearthed in Iron Age contexts in Cis- and Transjordan, there are many such seals showing royal Egyptian imagery on their bases. Focusing mainly on Pharaonic motifs, the paper aims to catalogue the principal iconemes, to trace their development throughout the Iron Ages and to extrapolate their significance vis-à-vis the contemporary glyptic assemblages. As will be shown, the royal imagery of the Egyptian king underwent considerable changes during pre-monarchic and monarchic times in Israel/Judah. This allows – to some extent – deducing the perception of the ‘image’ of the Egyptian king in this part of the Southern Levant at the close of the second and during the first centuries of the first millennium BCE. While the local seal production not only vividly copied earlier and contemporary Egyptian prototypes, it also developed idiosyncratic ‘Pharaonic’ motifs that were produced for the local market. On the other hand, imported Egyptian glyptic goods – such as scarabs and other amulet types – reveal further facets of the consumer behavior. They, too, shed light upon the ideological and religious preferences of the local population and illuminate the development of the vernacular attitude towards the Pharaonic symbols of power – including their obvious political and sacred connotations.

Validity assessment of the Breast Cancer Risk Reduction Health Belief scale.

BACKGROUND: : Women at increased risk of breast cancer (BC) are not widely accepting of chemopreventive interventions, and ethnic minorities are underrepresented in related trials. Furthermore, there is no validated instrument to assess the health-seeking behavior of these women with respect to these interventions. METHODS: : By using constructs from the Health Belief Model, the authors developed and refined, based on pilot data, the Breast Cancer Risk Reduction Health Belief (BCRRHB) scale using a population of 265 women at increased risk of BC who were largely medically underserved, of low socioeconomic status (SES), and ethnic minorities. Construct validity was assessed using principal components analysis with oblique rotation to extract factors, and generate and interpret summary scales. Internal consistency was determined using Cronbach alpha coefficients. RESULTS: : Test-retest reliability for the pilot and final data was calculated to be r = 0.85. Principal components analysis yielded 16 components that explained 64% of the total variance, with communalities ranging from 0.50-0.75. Cronbach alpha coefficients for the extracted factors ranged from 0.45-0.77. CONCLUSIONS: : Evidence suggests that the BCRRHB yields reliable and valid data that allows for the identification of barriers and enhancing factors associated with use of breast cancer chemoprevention in the study population. These findings allow for tailoring treatment plans and intervention strategies to the individual. Future research is needed to validate the scale for use in other female populations. Cancer 2009. (c) 2009 American Cancer Society.