Search results

Process-oriented guided-inquiry learning (POGIL) is a student-centered instructional strategy to actively engage students in the classroom in promoting content mastery, critical thinking, and process skills. The students organize into groups of three to four, and each group member works collaboratively to construct their understanding as they proceed through the embedded learning cycle in the POGIL activity. Each group member has a specific role and actively engages in the learning process. The roles rotate periodically, and each student has the opportunity to develop essential process skills, such as leadership skills, oral and written communication skills, team-building skills, and information-processing skills. The student groups are self-managed, and the instructor serves as a facilitator of student learning. A POGIL activity typically contains a model that the students deconstruct using a series of guided, exploratory questions. The students develop concepts (concept invention) as the group members reach a valid, consensus conclusion. The students apply their concepts to new problems completing the learning cycle. The authors implemented POGIL instruction in several chemistry courses at Jackson State University and Tuskegee University. They share their initial findings, experiences, and insights gained using a new instructional strategy.

This paper examines the effects on families of a broad range of intervention programs designed to assist family caregivers of persons with mental illness. In so doing, the paper critically discusses the intervention designs utilized, similarities and differences in intervention modalities, the characteristics of study subjects, and the effects of these intervention programs on a variety of caregiver outcomes. The paper addresses the degree to which particular interventions are more effective than others, and assesses the strengths, weaknesses, and limitations of these intervention studies. Implications for future practice, policy, and research are presented.

This paper evaluates the modern baseline presumption of nonconsent in sexual assault (rape) cases in light of different theories of sexuality (feminism on the one hand and sex positivism/queer theory on the other) and in light of how sexuality manifests itself in the lives of contemporary young women. The authors analyze social science literature on contemporary heterosexual practices such as sexting and hook-ups, as well as contemporary media imagery, to inform a contemporary understanding of the ways in which young people perceive and experience sex. Using this evidence as a foundation, the authors reconsider the ongoing utility of a baseline presumption of nonconsent in sexual assault cases. This paper demonstrates the complex relationship between women’s sexual autonomy, the contemporary culture’s encouragement of women’s celebration of their own sexual objectification and the persistence of high rates of unwanted sex. In the end, it demonstrates why a legal presumption against consent may neither reduce the rate of nonconsensual sex, nor raise the rate of reported rapes. At the same time, it shows how the presumption itself is unlikely to generate harmful consequences: if it deters anything, it likely deters unwanted sex, whether consented to or not.