University of Iowa

This meta-analysis examined special education professional development (PD) designed to improve outcomes for students with disabilities or to train teachers on evidence-based instruction and interventions in special education. The primary focus was on the impact of special education PD on teachers’ skills, beliefs, and knowledge. A secondary aim was to examine the impact on student outcomes. Results indicated that PD had a greater effect on teacher-related measures ( g = 0.53) compared with student measures ( g = 0.17). All studies included active participation opportunities and PD topics covered literacy, behavioral support, explicit instruction, and data-based decision-making. The findings emphasize the importance for PD to apply content knowledge to evidence-based practices in special education.

Religious thought and belief in a wide variety of traditions harbors claims that, on their face, offend against both science and common sense. At their extreme, they include affirmations that are paradoxical. They seem to defy the constraints of logic and reason generally. Yet they are often neither negotiable nor confined to the arena of “primitive” religions. Here I will focus on three doctrines that have been situated at the heart of Christianity through nearly all its complex historical development and that are perplexing enough that they have been declared by many theologians to be “mysteries.” They have undoubtedly played a role in the development and interest in dialethic logics over the past few decades, for obvious reasons. This paper will challenge the claims of such devices to provide insight into the theological concerns that historically motivated the formation-history of those doctrines and their doctrinal centrality. I shall do so by offering an alternative framework for understanding those doctrines that adheres to defensible hermeneutical principles, results in rationally sensible interpretations, and provides a reading that makes better sense of their content, their historical motivations, and their importance to early Christians.

With rapid expansion of artificial intelligence (AI) in clinical documentation, responsible implementation of this tool is imperative in preserving the patient-physician relationship. Orthopaedic oncologists were surveyed to assess their utilization of, and attitudes towards, ambient listening software. An anonymous, voluntary, IRB-exempt survey (Appendix) was reviewed and distributed to members of the MSTS via the society's email listserv and distributed in paper and electronic formats to attendees at the AAOS Oncology Subspeciality day from March 14 to May 22, 2025. Sixty-three orthopaedic oncologists responded to the survey. Most (93%) practiced in an academic setting. Twenty-seven percent reported using AI with a majority using Dax Copilot. Half of AI users noted a positive impact on clinical encounters, and one respondent reported a negative impact. Most AI users (86%) reported improved efficiency and accuracy in documentation and 40% reported saving 1-2 h per clinic day. Of non-users, 71% were considering implementation. Although most orthopaedic oncologists are not using AI, the majority are considering implementation. AI users reported improvements in their documentation efficiency and accuracy. Further research is needed to understand the risks and benefits of this clinical tool from both providers' and patients' perspectives to guide responsible, widespread implementation.