7482 research outputs found
Sort by
Differences in How Monolingual and Bilingual Children Learn Second Labels for Familiar Objects
No full textThis thesis was conducted as part of PSY-PC 2900: Honors Research, under the direction of Dr. Megan Saylor. It looks at word learning differences in monolingual and bilingual children.Monolingual children resist learning second labels for familiar objects (e.g., a boat can be called a skiff), because they adhere to mutual exclusivity, the principle that an object has one name. It is less clear whether bilingual children observe this constraint. Study 1 demonstrated that bilingual preschoolers were more willing to accept second labels for familiar objects than monolinguals. Monolingual and bilingual children benefited from information about the relationship between the familiar and novel labels. Bilinguals, but not monolinguals, used this information to reliably accept the new words. In Study 2, monolingual preschoolers were offered additional information about the novel word, which allowed them to approach reliable learning. These studies suggest that monolingual and bilingual children differ in their adherence to mutual exclusivity, with bilingual children being both more willing to accept second labels, and requiring less information to do so.Vanderbilt UniversityPsychology and Human DevelopmentPeabody CollegeThesis completed in partial fulfillment of the requirements of the Honors Program in Psychological Science
Literacy 2.0: New Literacies in Culturally and Linguistically Diverse K-12 Classrooms
No full textTeaching and Learning Department capstone projectThis paper is a review of the literature on the impact of demographic and technological changes on research and practice of literacy education of English Language Learners (ELLs) in American K-12 school settings. It is predicated on the question “Why technology?” and draws theoretical support from Vygotsky’s (1978) sociocultural theory and Krashen's (1992) Monitor Model. It highlights the tension and challenges associated with classroom diversity and investigates research that addresses the complexity of diversity-related issues with different aspects of technology across learning contexts. It then examines the findings of the research surveyed against the aforementioned theoretical framework to advocate the effectiveness of technology. With the niche of technology underlined, the study continues to argue for the integration of technology into print-based curriculum and discuss the implications of such integration for ELLs. It also reveals the lack of assessments for new literacy skills and states why these assessments are necessary for the move towards non-print-based curriculum. Finally, based on its findings, this study will identify gaps in literature and suggest directions for future research.Department of Teaching and LearningPeabody College of Education and Human Developmen
Interactive Read-Alouds and Cross-Curricular Learning: Bridging an Implementation Gap in Today’s Classrooms
No full textTeaching and Learning Department capstone projectDespite the multitude of benefits, interactive read-alouds are being implemented less frequently and without best practices due to the current state of education, in which time and data are overpowering teachers’ ability to bring authentic, interactive read-alouds into the classroom. This Capstone Essay will explore the disconnect between best-practice implementation of interactive read-alouds and their current presentation in today’s classrooms. Keeping in mind the present need for efficiency, recommendations for cross-curricular read-alouds, particularly of science texts, will illustrate a means of providing students with the neglected content of science in an engaging and multi-functional medium. This Capstone Essay will show how melding interactive read-alouds with science content ensures that students are receiving a comprehensive knowledge base of multiple subjects while developing their overall collaboration and critical thinking abilities.Department of Teaching and LearningPeabody College of Education and Human Developmen
The neutrality laws : speech of Hon. A.H. Stephens of Georgia, in the House of Representatives, January 13, 1858, on the neutrality laws and the arrest of General Walker by Commodore Paulding
No full text
Sentencing and Prior Convictions: The Past, the Future, and the End of the Prior-Conviction Exception to Apprendi
No full textarticle published in law reviewThis article traces the fascinating history of early efforts to identify defendants and their prior convictions as well as the evolving use of prior convictions in aggravating punishment; examines how contemporary repeat offender penalties fall short of punishment goals and contribute to the racially lopsided profile of punishment today; and critiques potential justifications for the prior conviction exception to the rule in Apprendi v. New Jersey, arguing that the exception should be abandoned. The article summarizes empirical research testing the relationship between prior convictions and examining the efficacy of repeat offender sentences in reducing recidivism; collects commentary on the use of risk prediction in sentencing; surveys state-by-state eighteenth century authority that belies the claim that denying element status to prior convictions that raise the range of punishment is a longstanding tradition; evaluates the weaknesses of the case law underlying the Court's decision in Almendarez-Torres; argues that defendants need not be prejudiced when prior convictions are treated as elements; and observes that the original reason that a very small number of states in the nineteenth century stopped requiring prior convictions to be treated as elements – namely, that an offender’s criminal history was often unknown unless or until a warden recognized him – no longer exists. An earlier version of the article was delivered as the Barrock Lecture on Criminal Law at the Marquette University Law School
Once a Criminal? Regulating the Use of Prior Convictions in Sentencing
No full textarticle republished in lawyer magazineOn November 18, 2013, Nancy J. King, the Lee S. and Charles A. Speir Professor at Vanderbilt Law School, delivered Marquette Law School’s annual George and
Margaret Barrock Lecture in Criminal Law. This is an abridgment of that lecture. A longer, essay version appears in the spring 2014 issue of the Marquette Law Review
Early Implementation Study of the Arkansas Teacher Excellence and Support System (TESS): Research, Analysis, and Recommendations
No full textLeadership Policy and Organizations Department Capstone ProjectDepartment of Leadership Policy and OrganizationsPeabody College of Education and Human Developmen
Buffalo Promise Neighborhood Parents and School Choice: Who Stays, Who Leaves, and Why?
No full textLeadership Policy and Organizations Department Capstone ProjectDepartment of Leadership Policy and OrganizationsPeabody College of Education and Human Developmen
Credibility and War Powers
No full textarticle published in law reviewIn late August 2013, after Syrian civilians were horrifically attacked with sarin gas, President Barack Obama declared his intention to conduct limited airstrikes against the Syrian regime of President Bashar al-Assad. A year earlier, President Obama had announced that the use of chemical weapons was "red line" for the United States. Advocates for military action now argued that if the credibility of American threats diminished, dictators would have license to act with impunity. President Obama himself seemed to embrace this justification for action. "The international community’s credibility is on the line," he said in early September. "And America and Congress’s credibility is on the line." For all the talk of credibility, political scientists have offered devastating critiques of credibility arguments in the context of military threats. They have demonstrated not only that the concept is often deployed in incomplete and illogical ways but also that as a historical matter, a country’s "credibility" based on its reputation and past actions has little or no effect on the behavior of opponents in high-stakes international crises. In the crises in the run-up to World War I, in the Berlin crises of the late 1950s and early 1960s, and even in the crises leading to World War II, threats from countries that had previously backed down were not seen as less credible by their opponents. In some cases, the threats were even thought to be more credible. For constitutional lawyers, this research should be particularly troubling because credibility has migrated from foreign policy into the constitutional law of war powers. In a series of opinions, including on Somalia (1992), Haiti (2004), and Libya (2011), the Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel (OLC) has argued that the credibility of the United Nations Security Council is a "national interest" that can justify presidential authority to use military force without prior congressional authorization. This Essay argues that the credibility justification for the use of force should be removed from the constitutional law of presidential war powers. Incorporating credibility as one of the "national interests" that justify presidential use of force expands the President’s war powers significantly without a legitimate policy justification