Educational experiences of U.S. children during the 2020-2021 school year in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic.

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic is a historic event impacting children around the globe. Prior research on the educational experiences of children during the COVID-19 pandemic focused almost exclusively on spring 2020. This article extends this literature past the initial shock of spring 2020, capturing the first full school year (2020-2021) during the COVID-19 pandemic. This registered report study utilized a national sample of 1,666 United States twins in kindergarten through 12th grade from 43 states to provide the current descriptive report of children's educational experiences during this time, as reported by their parents. Specifically, we reported on school format, parents' role in education, parent-teacher interactions, schoolwork struggles, technology access, and school services. About half of children attended in-person schooling, with many children switching from online to in-person throughout the school year. Parents saw the pandemic as a risk to their children's education. During the 2020-2021 school year of the pandemic, parents felt they had a larger role in their children's education and were less satisfied in their interactions with teachers than what they experienced during the prepandemic part of the 2019-2020 school year. Children experienced more schoolwork struggles than they had in previous years, and this was similar across age groups. For most constructs, results were equivalent across age group, but parents of younger children tended to provide more schoolwork help. Overall, this article highlights the disruptions in their educational environments that children continued to experience through the first full school year (2020-2021) of the COVID-19 pandemic. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).

A Review of Patient Experiences and Provider Education to Improve Transgender Health Inequities in the USA.

Transgender individuals are an underserved, vulnerable population. They face many inequities including barriers in both accessing and receiving adequate healthcare. These inequities are proposed here to be rooted in a lack of education about transgender people and their experiences. We begin by exploring the existing transgender healthcare research carried out in the USA, examining client experiences, provider education and attitudes, and the barriers transgender people face to obtaining proper healthcare. Secondly, we look at the previous research on educational interventions implemented with medical students and practitioners in the USA to enhance knowledge about transgender people, and increase sensitivity and awareness, while also increasing the level of comfort in working with these clients. The limitations in these fields of study are discussed in order to understand how to better serve transgender clients in the USA. We will do this through a narrative review to determine evidence-based best practices for educational intervention, uncovering gaps in the literature and highlighting where to focus in future work for researchers and practitioners.

Modern Assessments of Intelligence Must Be Fair and Equitable.

Historically, assessments of human intelligence have been virtually synonymous with practices that contributed to forms of inequality and injustice. As such, modern considerations for assessing human intelligence must focus on equity and fairness. First, we highlight the array of diversity, equity, and inclusion concerns in assessment practices and discuss strategies for addressing them. Next, we define a modern, non-g, emergent view of intelligence using the process overlap theory and argue for its use in improving equitable practices. We then review the empirical evidence, focusing on sub-measures of g to highlight the utility of non-g, emergent models in promoting equity and fairness. We conclude with suggestions for researchers and practitioners.

Developmental behavioral genetics research on school achievement is missing vulnerable children, to our detriment.

Gene-environment processes tell us how genetic predispositions and environments work together to influence children in schools. One type of gene-environment process that has been extensively studied using behavioral genetics methods is a gene-by-environment interaction. A gene-by-environment interaction shows us when the effect of your context on a phenotype differs depending on your genetic predispositions, or vice versa, when the effect of your genetic predispositions on a phenotype differs depending on your context. Developmental behavioral geneticists interested in children's school achievement have examined many different contexts within the gene-by-environment interaction model, including contexts measured from within children's home and school environments. However, this work has been overwhelmingly focused on WEIRD samples children, leaving us with non-inclusive scientific evidence. This can lead to detrimental outcomes when we overgeneralize this non-inclusive scientific evidence to racialized groups. We conclude with a call to include racialized children in more research samples.

Examining mindset and grit in concurrent and future reading comprehension: A twin study.

Noncognitive factors have gained attention in recent years as potential intervention targets for academic achievement improvement in students. Two notable facets, intelligence mindset and grit, have been of particular interest. Both have been shown to consistently improve educational outcomes, although little work has focused on reading ability. As such, we examined the relation between both grit and mindset on current, future, and change in reading comprehension ability in a twin sample. We used data from 422 twin pairs (171 monozygotic pairs, 251 dizygotic pairs) drawn from the Florida Twin Project on Reading, Behavior and Environment (Taylor et al., 2019). The racial composition of the sample included 1.00% American Indian or Alaska Native, 2.25% Asian, 13.25% Black or African American, 22.63% Hispanic, 1.00% Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander, 56.13% White, and 3.75% more than 1 race. The household income of the sample at time 1 was 16.15% below $25,000, 18.06% $25,000-49,999, 36.34% $50,000-99,999, and 29.45% $100,000 or more and closely align with the overall composition reported for the state of Florida (United States Census Bureau, 2021). Twins were on average 13 years old when the questionnaire and first reading ability measure were collected, and on average 15 years old when the second reading ability measure was collected. Weak and moderate positive correlations were found between both mindset and grit and with each reading ability score and neither were significantly related to change in reading ability. Twin modeling suggested little to no common genetic or environmental influences between mindset and grit to reading ability. In total, our results do not lend support to the notion of mindset or grit being a mechanism of change for reading ability. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved).

What Can Cognitive Science Do for People?

The critical question for cognitive scientists is what does cognitive science do, if anything, for people? Cognitive science is primarily concerned with human cognition but has fallen short in continuously and critically assessing the who in human cognition. This complacency in a world where white supremacist and patriarchal structures leave cognitive science in the unfortunate position of potentially supporting those structures. We take it that many cognitive scientists operate on the assumption that the study of human cognition is both interesting and important. We want to invoke that importance to note that cognitive scientists must continue to work to show how the field is useful to all of humanity and reflects a humanity that is not white by default. We wonder how much the field has done, and can do, to show that it is useful not only in the sense that we might make connections with researchers in other fields, win grants and write papers, even of the highest quality, but useful in some material way to the billions of non-cognitive scientists across the globe.

Intelligence Can Be Used to Make a More Equitable Society but Only When Properly Defined and Applied.

In the US, undeniable evidence shows that socioeconomic inequities explain a high proportion of individual differences in school achievement. Although not all countries show this same effect due to socioeconomic status, it is consistently found that social inequities lead to achievement gaps. These achievement gaps then manifest into trajectories that set some individuals on a path of lower incomes, poorer health and higher mortality, lower wellbeing, and other poor adult outcomes. Like James Flynn so handily reminded the scientific literature that achievement gaps are explainable by environmental factors, the inequities we see around the world are based on environments some children are exposed to. In his work, Flynn stated his belief that the suppression of scientific work on intelligence would continue to lead to social inequities. We wish to take this idea and move it forward. We believe that the scientific construct of intelligence plays a key role in helping create a more equitable society through science. We also believe that the poor perception of intelligence, rooted in historical realities, means that it will continue to be misunderstood, feared, and misused, limiting how effective it could be in helping to close gaps in achievement and in creating a more equitable society.

Evidence for a Cultural Mindset: Combining Process Data, Theory, and Simulation.

Despite large literature on Cross-Cultural Competence (3C) there is a gap in understanding learning processes and mechanisms by which people arrive at successful 3C. We present a novel perspective for 3C learning and decision-making in innovative assessment contexts. We use Mindset theory (i.e., believing ability is fixed or changeable) because it is shown to be a powerful motivator for general learning and performance and in cross-cultural contexts. We propose the notion of cultural mindsets - beliefs, affect, and cognition that govern how people adapt, learn, and update cultural information. To understand how cultural mindset affects learning and performance, we apply computational cognitive modeling using Markov decision process (MDP). Using logfile data from an interactive 3C task, we operationalize behavioral differences in actions and decision making based on Mindset theory, developing cognitive models of fixed and malleable cultural mindsets based on mechanisms of initial beliefs, goals, and belief updating. To explore the validity of our theory, we develop computational MDP models, generate simulated data, and examine whether performance patterns fit our expectations. We expected the malleable cultural mindset would be better at learning the cultural norms in the assessment, more persistent in cultural interactions, quit less before accomplishing the task goal, and would be more likely to modify behavior after negative feedback. We find evidence of distinct patterns of cultural learning, decision-making, and performance with more malleable cultural mindsets showing significantly greater cultural learning, persistence, and responsiveness to feedback, and more openness to exploring current cultural norms and behavior. Moreover, our model was supported in that we were able to accurately classify 83% of the simulated records from the generating model. We argue that cultural mindsets are important mechanisms involved in effectively navigating cross-cultural situations and should be considered in a variety of areas of future research including education, business, health, and military institutions.

Working memory capacity and the spacing effect in cued recall.

Spacing repetitions typically improves memory (the spacing effect). In three cued recall experiments, we explored the relationship between working memory capacity and the spacing effect. People with higher working memory capacity are more accurate on memory tasks that require retrieval relative to people with lower working memory capacity. The experiments used different retention intervals and lags between repetitions, but were otherwise similar. Working memory capacity and spacing of repetitions both improved memory in most of conditions, but they did not interact, suggesting additive effects. The results are consistent with the ACT-R model's predictions, and with a study-phase recognition process underpinning the spacing effect in cued recall.