Increasing compliance with wearing a medical device in children with autism

Health professionals often recommend the use of medical devices to assess the health, monitor the well-being, or improve the quality of life of their patients. Children with autism may present challenges in these situations as their sensory peculiarities may increase refusals to wear such devices. To address this issue, we systematically replicated prior research by examining the effects of differential reinforcement of other behavior (DRO) to increase compliance with wearing a heart rate monitor in 2 children with autism. The intervention increased compliance to 100% for both participants when an edible reinforcer was delivered every 90 s. The results indicate that DRO does not require the implementation of extinction to increase compliance with wearing a medical device. More research is needed to examine whether the reinforcement schedule can be further thinned

A study of organizational dynamics and environmental influences in the development of a drug abuse center for youth.

EducationDoctor of Education (Ed.D.

Conference, Conciliation, and Persuasion: The Seventh Circuit\u27s Groundbreaking Approach to Analyzing the EEOC\u27s Pre-Suit Obligations

In EEOC v. Mach Mining, LLC, the Seventh Circuit sharply diverged with its sister circuits when it held that the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC)\u27s statutorily mandated conciliation process is immune from judicial review. In Mach Mining, the Seventh Circuit addressed the provision contained in Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 that requires the EEOC to engage in informal methods of conference, conciliation, and persuasion with an employer before it can file a discrimination lawsuit against that employer. These pre-suit negotiations, or conciliation, provide an opportunity for the EEOC to reach an out-of-court agreement with an employer without seeking judicial remedy. Although Title VII requires that conciliation occur before the EEOC can file its lawsuit, the Seventh Circuit held that the EEOC\u27s conciliation process is not—and should not be—subject to any level of judicial review. In other words, courts may not conduct any investigation whatsoever into any aspect of the EEOC\u27s conciliation efforts. At first glance, it seems as though the Seventh Circuit has taken an extreme approach to interpreting the conciliation requirement. Upon closer examination, however, it becomes apparent that the Seventh Circuit\u27s interpretation of the conciliation requirement is fully consistent with the text and purpose of Title VII. The language of Title VII does not authorize judicial review of the conciliation process. On the contrary, Title VII effectively insulates the conciliation process from judicial scrutiny by granting the EEOC full discretion in defining and executing the conciliation process and by requiring that the process remain confidential. Furthermore, allowing judicial review of the conciliation process undermines both the purpose of conciliation and the spirit of Title VII. As the Mach Court noted, [t]here is no indication that Title VII\u27s directive to conciliate was for the special benefit of the employers or that they have a right to conciliation. 1 Rather, Congress was focused on effective enforcement of the anti-discrimination standards of Title VII, not creating new rights for employers. 2 The EEOC\u27s General Counsel, David Lopez, aptly summarized the result in Mach, stating that [the Seventh Circuit] carefully applied the letter of the law ... in a way that promotes Title VII\u27s goals, protects victims of discrimination, and preserves the EEOC\u27s critical law-enforcement prerogatives. 3 Footnotes: 1 EEOC v. Mach Mining, LLC, 738 F.3d 171, 175 (7th Cir. 2013). 2 Id. at 180. 3 EEOC, EEOC In Landmark Ruling, Seventh Circuit Holds Employers Cannot Challenge EEOC Conciliation, at http://www.eeoc.gov/eeoc/newsroom/release/12-20-13b.cfm (Dec. 20, 2013)

Performance metrics and auditing framework using application kernels for high‐performance computer systems

Peer Reviewedhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/97468/1/cpe2871.pd

Towards a framework for critical citizenship education

Increasingly countries around the world are promoting forms of "critical" citizenship in the planned curricula of schools. However, the intended meaning behind this term varies markedly and can range from a set of creative and technical skills under the label "critical thinking" to a desire to encourage engagement, action and political emancipation, often labelled "critical pedagogy". This paper distinguishes these manifestations of the "critical" and, based on an analysis of the prevailing models of critical pedagogy and citizenship education, develops a conceptual framework for analysing and comparing the nature of critical citizenship

Proposed method for predicting pair matching of skeletal elements allows too many false rejections

Byrd proposes a method for predicting pair matches in commingled remains to reduce visual comparison. The method compares differences between left and right postcranial element measurements in commingled samples with differences in known pairs from a reference sample using a t-score approach. We duplicated his protocol using six elements from two samples of known paired elements (n=854 to 1063) and calculated the number of pairs correctly predicted. Time commitment was estimated by mathematically attempting matches with all left and right elements in these samples. Although the results show an 86% reduction in the number of potential pairs requiring visual matching, we do not recommend the method because (i) the normality assumption for use of a t-score approach is violated, (ii) no account is made for bilateral asymmetry, and (iii) the high rate of false rejections (up to 22%) undermines its ability to show true incompatibilities for potential pair matches