Search results

This is the first study to evaluate ADHD-hyperactive/impulsive subtype in a large clinical sample of adults with ADHD. The Quality of Life, Effectiveness, Safety and Tolerability (QuEST) study included 725 adults who received clinician diagnoses of any ADHD sub-type. Cross-sectional baseline data from 691 patients diagnosed with the hyperactive/impulsive (HI), inattentive (IA) and combined sub-types were used to compare the groups on the clinician administered ADHD-RS, clinical features and health-related quality of life. A consistent pattern of differences was found between the ADHD-I and combined subtypes, with the combined subtype being more likely to be diagnosed in childhood, more severe symptom severity and lower HRQL. Twenty-three patients out of the total sample of 691 patients (3%) received a clinician diagnosis of ADHD -hyperactive/impulsive subtype. Review of the ratings on the ADHD-RS-IV demonstrated, however, that this group had ratings of inattention comparable to the inattentive group. There were no significant differences found between the ADHD-HI and the other subtypes in symptom severity, functioning or quality of life. The hyperactive/impulsive subtype group identified by clinicians in this study was not significantly different from the rest of the sample. By contrast, significant differences were found between the inattentive and combined types. This suggests that in adults, hyperactivity declines and inattention remains significant, making the hyperactive/impulsive sub-type as defined by childhood criteria a very rare condition and raising questions as to the validity of the HI subtype in adults.

In this chapter, we focus on specially designed instruction (SDI) as a core value for the field of specific learning disabilities (SLD). SDI is at the heart of special education, and the field of LD has been built on the core value that effective instruction improves student outcomes. We describe a two-step test and an extended example of what is and is not SDI for Matt, a student with an SLD. Finally, we discuss some of the confusion surrounding SDI and the need for the field to return to its core value of individualized, intentional, targeted, evidence- or high leverage practice–based, and systematic instruction for students with SLD.

Both broad and discipline-specific curriculum standards have shifted from a focus on learning discrete content material to a broader understanding of the processes used by disciplinary experts. Using the example of historical thinking in history/social studies, we discuss how this shift may impact students with disabilities and their participation in the general education curriculum and classroom. Specific examples of what close reading and sourcing look like in the classroom and how researchers in special education have addressed them are provided. We conclude with how this shift in thinking about process over the regurgitation of facts may be both advantageous and overwhelming to students with disabilities and their teachers.

Current issues of Publishers' Weekly are reporting serious shortages of paper, binders board, cloth, and other essential book manufacturing materials. Let us assure you these shortages are very real and quite severe.

Students with learning disabilities (LD) have a wide range of academic needs. Since the passing of P.L. 94-142, significant research has been done on effective interventions for this group of students. Starting with the Learning Disabilities Research Institutes through the recent Handbook of Learning Disabilities, reviews of lines of research make several broad ideas about interventions clear. Primary among these is that students with LD can learn if provided with appropriate, effective instruction. Specifics about this idea and its implications are discussed in the following chapter.

An inquiry into the constitution of the experience of patienthood. It understands “becoming a patient” as a production of a subjectivity, in other words as a process of individuation and milieu that occurs through an ontology of production. This ontology of production can, of course, also be understood as a political ontology. Therefore, this is, first of all, an inquiry into a mode of production, and, secondly, an inquiry into its relation to the issue of social justice – because of effects of digital divisions. In these terms, it also reflects on how expert discourses, such as in medical sociology and science studies (STS), can (and do) articulate their problems.

An integrative mode of discourse analysis, strongly related to discursive institutionalism, called semantic agency theory: it considers those arrangements (institutions, informal organizations, networks, collectivities, etc.) and assemblages (intellectual equipment, vernacular epistemologies, etc.) that are constitutive of how the issue of “patient experience” can be articulated form its position within an ontology of production.

The aim not being the production of a finite result, what is needed is a shift in how “the construction of patient experience” is produced by expert discourses. While the inquiry is not primarily an empirical study and is also limited to “Western societies,” it emphasizes that there is a relation between political ontologies (including the issues of social justice) and the subjectivities that shape the experiences of people in contemporary health care systems, and, finally, that this relation is troubled by the effects of the digital divide(s).

A proposal “to interrogate and trouble” some innovative extensions and revisions – even though it will not be able to speculate about matters of degree – to contemporary theories of biomedicalization, patienthood, and managed care.

Managers today, in looking for ways to manage their staff effectively and to increase productivity, too often turn to the latest “management tool” or technique as the panacea to all their manpower problems. Attracted by glossy promises or presentations, these are introduced, generally from the top, without reference to the ever‐growing research evidence. Reviews some of the research into the use of goals in organizations. Concludes that there is research evidence to show that staff at all levels involved in setting their own goals will increase their production, quality and motivation, but that the setting of goals does not require a complex and costly process. The use of any goal is better than no goal but outcomes are better in simple participative systems.

Aim of the present monograph is the economic analysis of the role of MNEs regarding globalisation and digital economy and in parallel there is a reference and examination of some legal aspects concerning MNEs, cyberspace and e‐commerce as the means of expression of the digital economy. The whole effort of the author is focused on the examination of various aspects of MNEs and their impact upon globalisation and vice versa and how and if we are moving towards a global digital economy.