Search

While family engagement at the individual level of health care, such as families partnering with providers in decision-making about health care for an individual child has been well studied, family engagement in systems-level activities (e.g., participation in advisory and other decision-making groups, or creation and revision of policies) that impact the health services families and children receive has not. This note from the field presents a framework that describes the information and supports that help families partner with professionals and contribute to systems-level activities. Without attention to these components of family engagement, family presence and participation may be only token. We engaged an expert Family/Professional Workgroup whose members represented key constituencies and diverse geography, race/ethnicity, and areas of expertise; conducted a review of peer-reviewed publications and grey literature; and conducted a series of key informant interviews to identify best practices for supporting meaningful family engagement at the systems level. Based on an analysis of the findings, the authors identified four action-oriented domains of family engagement and key criteria that support and strengthen meaningful family engagement in systems-level initiatives. Child- and family-serving serving organizations can use this Family Engagement in Systems framework to support meaningful family engagement in the design of policies, practices, services, supports, quality improvement projects, research, and other systems-level activities., Author(s): Beth Dworetzky [sup.1] , Clarissa G. Hoover [sup.1] , Deborah Klein Walker [sup.2] Author Affiliations: (1) Family Voices, , 561 Virginia Rd, Bldg. 4, Suite 300, 01742, Concord, MA, [...]

This study is an exploratory comparison of 69 Hispanic students enrolled in first-semester general chemistry (Chem I) who attended either a Hispanic-Serving or emerging Hispanic-Serving Institution and were not successful in Chem I. Students' automaticity skills (what can be done without the aid of a calculator) in arithmetic and quantitative reasoning were analyzed based on students' personal characteristics such as gender, prior knowledge in chemistry and mathematics, entry college (i.e., STEM or not), and parents' academic background. Findings indicate that without basic automaticity skills, students enter Chem I at a deficit, but these at-risk students can be identified early in the semester to help them succeed. Results also indicate that arithmetic automaticity is more influential than quantitative reasoning in predicting academic success. A suggested high-impact practice is presented as a possible correction for these deficits.

The Math-Up Skills Tests (MUST) has been used in multiple research projects conducted by the Networking for Science Advancement (NSA) team to determine how automaticity skills (what can be done without a calculator) in arithmetic can be used to predict if students will be successful (course average = 69.5%+) in general chemistry. This study expands our investigations to include how students' quantitative literacy/quantitative reasoning (QL/QR) abilities influence their success. The NSA team studied multiple classes at eight universities (n = 1,915) within a broad geographic setting in one large, majority-minority southwestern US state. In a short amount of required classroom time, it is possible to identify students at the beginning of the semester who will struggle in first- and second-semester general chemistry (Chem I and Chem II). Results show a strong correlation between students' automaticity MUST skills and their QL/QR ability (r = 0.60) and indicate that when taking both diagnostic assessments into consideration, convincing signals appear allowing for the identification of almost 50% of the Chem I students and about 45% of the Chem II students who will not succeed. With the addition of the QL/QR to the first-week assessments, about 9% more students who enter the courses underprepared were identified than when only the MUST was administered. Outcomes indicate that students with at least average arithmetic and QL/QR automaticity abilities are those who are better prepared for these courses. For on-sequence students with at least one average or above diagnostic score, 88.3% Chem I and 90.5% Chem II were successful.

This contribution reports the process and outcomes of a multiyear effort that supported institutions in reforming general chemistry using multidimensional learning approaches in the form of performance expectations. Performance expectations are based on evidence-centered assessment design principles and describe what learners should be able to do with their knowledge, a subtle (but profound) shift from traditional course learning goals. The effort grew from the recommendations of a task force appointed in 2015 by the American Chemical Society's Division of Chemical Education and Society Committee on Education. This task force recommended a participatory process for creating general chemistry performance expectations that was distributed over, and also coordinated across, multiple institutions. With support from the ACS Education Division, this recommendation was enacted through workshops which supported faculty in developing activities and assessments that integrated content, science and engineering practices, and cross-cutting concepts--a three-dimensional structure based on the National Research Council report "A Framework for K-12 Education." From these workshops, a group of faculty committed to implementing three-dimensional performance expectations in their courses evolved. In practice, these faculty found that their institutional work resulted in designing learning performances that, while also three-dimensional, were of narrower content focus than is typical of performance expectations. This development process also led faculty to use the structures of evidence-centered design and multidimensional learning to document learning activity designs in new ways, generating a consensus activity structure. As examples of how faculty used this consensus activity structure as a new way to examine student learning and performances, development artifacts from four of the participating institutions is presented.

Omaveloxolone is a nuclear factor (erythroid‐derived 2)‐like 2 activator approved in the United States and the European Union for the treatment of patients with Friedreich ataxia aged ≥16 years, with a recommended dosage of 150 mg orally once daily on an empty stomach. The effect of the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) high‐fat breakfast on the pharmacokinetic profile of omaveloxolone observed in study 408‐C‐1703 (NCT03664453) deviated from the usual linear correlation between fed/fasted maximum plasma concentration (Cmax) and area under the concentration–time curve (AUC) ratios reported for various oral drugs across 323 food effect studies. Here, physiologically based biopharmaceutics modeling (PBBM) was implemented to predict and explain the effect of the FDA high‐fat breakfast on a 150‐mg dose of omaveloxolone. The model was developed and validated based on dissolution and pharmacokinetic data available across dose‐ranging, food effect, and drug–drug interaction clinical studies. PBBM predictions support clinical observations of the unique effect of a high‐fat meal on omaveloxolone pharmacokinetic profile, in which the Cmax increased by 350% with only a 15% increase in the AUC. Key parameters influencing omaveloxolone pharmacokinetics in the fasted state based on a parameter sensitivity analysis included bile salt solubilization, CYP3A4 activity, drug substance particle size distribution, and permeability. Mechanistically, in vivo omaveloxolone absorption was solubility and dissolution rate limited. However, in the fed state, higher bile salt solubilization led to more rapid dissolution with predominant absorption in the upper gastrointestinal tract, resulting in increased susceptibility to first‐pass gut extraction; this accounts for the lack of correlation between Cmax and AUC for omaveloxolone. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Completion of a first-semester chemistry (Chem I) course lays the foundation for understanding second-semester chemistry (Chem II) topics. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the influence of basic arithmetic skills on students' Chem II success in understanding mathematics-grounded concepts (e.g., solutions and aqueous reactions, kinetics, equilibrium, acids and bases, solubility and equilibria, thermodynamics, electrochemistry, and nuclear chemistry). Previous studies suggest a strong correlation between arithmetic preparation and performance in general chemistry courses, though few have focused on the second-semester course. In this investigation, researchers from six higher-education institutions in Texas, USA of different sizes and with student bodies of different diversities have collaborated to determine whether the Math-Up Skills Test (MUST) is able to reliably identify at-risk students from a population of n = 1599 at the beginning of a Chem II course.

First-semester general chemistry is a known "gatekeeper" course due to its high failure rate. These higher education courses are taken by students who for the most part are regularly admitted freshmen, yet many struggle to succeed. In this investigation researchers from six higher-education institutions of varied sizes with student bodies of different ethnic composition teamed up to investigate the Math-Up Skills Test (MUST) as a potential tool to identify at-risk students in first-semester general chemistry (Chem I). A large population (N = 1073) was given the MUST at the beginning of the semester. The MUST had good internal consistency with the sample (Cronbach's alpha = 0.856). The MUST offers a quick 15 minute assessment of basic mathematics ability without a calculator. Instructors may find it easier than other documented predictors, which may take more time or involve obtaining student records (e.g., Math SAT). Results from the MUST support prior findings that mathematics skills correlate with course grades in chemistry. Poor arithmetic automaticity may be an underlying factor in lower performance by many students. With statistical modeling, the MUST, along with other demographic variables, was able to identify students who would go on to make a 69.5% or better in Chem I with a high percent of accuracy. The MUST, in tandem with other demographic variables, should be considered a potential tool for early identification of students at-risk for failing the class.

Objectives Infant mortality remains a significant public health problem in the U.S. The Collaborative Improvement & Innovation Network (CoIIN) model is an innovative approach, using the science of quality improvement and collaborative learning, which was applied across 13 Southern states in Public Health Regions IV and VI to reduce infant mortality and improve birth outcomes. We provide an in-depth discussion of the history, development, implementation, and adaptation of the model based on the experience of the original CoIIN organizers and participants. In addition to the political genesis and functional components of the initiative, 8 key lessons related to staffing, planning, and implementing future CoIINs are described in detail. Methods This paper reports the findings from a process evaluation of the model. Data on the states' progress toward reducing infant mortality and improving birth outcomes were collected through a survey in the final months of a 24-month implementation period, as well as through ongoing team communications. Results The peer-to-peer exchange and platform for collaborative learning, as well as the sharing of data across the states, were major strengths and form the foundation for future CoIIN efforts. A lasting legacy of the initiative is the unique application and sharing of provisional 'real time' data to inform 'real time' decision-making. Conclusion The CoIIN model of collaborative learning, QI, and innovation offers a promising approach to strengthening partnerships within and across states, bolstering data systems to inform and track progress more rapidly, and ultimately accelerating improvement toward healthier communities, States, and the Nation as a whole., Author(s): Reem M. Ghandour [sup.1] [sup.4] , Katherine Flaherty [sup.2] [sup.3] , Ashley Hirai [sup.1] , Vanessa Lee [sup.1] , Deborah Klein Walker [sup.3] , Michael C. Lu [sup.1] Author [...]