Academic literature on the topic 'Write-ins'

Writing centres need to be integrated into the writing community of their host institutions, but this can be difficult: often students view them as peripheral (Bowles 2019), see them as “fix-it” shops and/or see them as places where one simply “learns to write” (Cheatle & Bullerjahn, 2015; Simpson 2010), or do not perceive a connection between their services and students’ actual, current course work (Missakian, Olson, Black & Matuchniak, 2016). In this article I discuss the practice of offering and running “dedicated drop-ins,” course- and assignment-specific drop-in sessions for writing support, as one means of addressing several of the challenges that writing centres face in terms of making themselves visible and visibly useful members of their institutional community. Our experience shows that while these “dedicated drop-ins” are not in themselves a perfect solution, they can be a useful addition to writing centres’ toolkits.

George Mason University's award-winning Writing Across the Curriculum (WAC) program supports faculty writers, mentors of writers, and teachers of writing in all disciplines across campus. From Faculty Write-Ins to syllabus and assignment consultations, the WAC Program offers a variety of resources to faculty at Mason. This poster session will display new opportunities and resources that the WAC program will be offering during the 2015-2016 academic year, as well as take suggestions for workshops and events that faculty might find useful.This poster session will also offer images and video from wac.gmu.edu website and our program's scholarly blog, The Writing Campus. The Writing Campus has become a nationally recognized professional development resource amongst scholars of writing. This session will solicit submissions from faculty at Mason who teach writing, specifically in the form of successful assignments, activities used to teach writing, or approaches to mentoring writers of all levels of skill.

Rural surgeons are performing operations typically performed by “specialists.” This study describes specialty procedures performed by general surgeons operating in a rural state and how prepared the surgeons felt starting their rural practice after residency A survey was sent to all exclusively rural surgeons actively practicing in the state, inquiring about their perception of preparedness for rural practice and specialty procedures performed. The survey had a 65.2 per cent response rate. Responders felt well prepared for rural practice after residency (mean response 4.6 ± 0.8 on a Likert scale from 1 to 5; 5 = “well prepared”). Noteworthy, specialty procedures performed by rural surgeons included hysterectomies (51.2%), thyroidectomies (81.4%), para-thyroidectomies (60.5%), carotid endarterectomies (11.6%), video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (37.2%), and lobectomies (23.3%). Prominent write-ins included nephrectomies (n = 1), ileal conduits (n = 1), open and endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair (n = 1), Whipples (n = 3), and liver resections (n = 2). Rural general surgeons perform many major operations usually performed by specialists. These surgeons felt well prepared for these operations out of residency.

Thediplomatic and religious climate in Protestant Northern Europe during the era of Louis XIV was filled with competing and at times contradictory impulses, and the repercussions of Louis's expansionist and anti-Protestant policies on the relations between the Protestant states were varied and complex. Taken in conjunction with the ascension of Catholic James II in Britain in February 1685 and the succession of the Catholic House of Neuburg in the Palatinate following the death of the last Calvinist elector in May of that year, Louis's reintroduction of the mass ins the “reunited” territories and his increasing persecution of the Huguenots in France added to an acute sense among European Protestants that the survival of their religion was threatened. It is a well-established theme in the standard literature on seventeenth-century Europe that the culmination of Louis's attack on the Huguenots in his revocation of the Edict of Nantes in October 1685 galvanized the continents Protestant powers in a common sense of outrage and united them in a spirit of political cooperation against France. Indeed, such an astute contemporary observer as Leibniz was to write in the early 1690s that it appeared now “as if all of the north is opposed to the south of Europe; the great majority of the Germanic peoples are opposed to the Latins.” Even Bossuet had to declare that “your so-called Reformation … was never more powerful nor more united. All of the Protestants have joined forces. From the outside, the Reformation is very cohesive, more haughty and more menacing than ever.”

AbstractFunctional programming languages have banned assignment because of its undesirable properties. The reward of this rigorous decision is that functional programming languages are side-effect free. There is another side to the coin: because assignment plays a crucial role in Input/Output (I/O), functional languages have a hard time dealing with I/O. Functional programming languages have therefore often been stigmatised as inferior to imperative programming languages because they cannot deal with I/O very well. In this paper, we show that I/O can be incorporated in a functional programming language without loss of any of the generally accepted advantages of functional programming languages. This discussion is supported by an extensive account of the I/O system offered by the lazy, purely functional programming language Clean. Two aspects that are paramount in its I/O system make the approach novel with respect to other approaches. These aspects are the technique of explicit multiple environment passing, and the Event I/O framework to program Graphical User I/O in a highly structured and high-level way. Clean file I/O is as powerful and flexible as it is in common imperative languages (one can read, write, and seek directly in a file). Clean Event I/O provides programmers with a high-level framework to specify complex Graphical User I/O. It has been used to write applications such as a window-based text editor, an object based drawing program, a relational database, and a spreadsheet program. These graphical interactive programs are completely machine independent, but still obey the look-and-feel of the concrete window environment being used. The specifications are completely functional and make extensive use of uniqueness typing, higher-order functions, and algebraic data types. Efficient implementations are present on the Macintosh, Sun (X Windows under Open Look) and PC (OS/2).

OBJECTIVES/SPECIFIC AIMS: To longitudinally track emerging research collaborations and assess their development and productivity. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: In four administrations (2011, 2013, 2015, 2017), all full- and part-time University of Rochester Medical Center faculty received an email invitation to complete a research collaborators survey. Respondents indicated whether they were involved in research, and if involved in research, identified collaborators from a drop-down list of investigators in the institution. Space was provided for write-ins. Full- and part-time status, faculty rank, and departmental affiliation was associated with each investigator. Grant data were obtained from a grant management database maintained by the institution’s Office of Research and Project Administration. Grant data included all submissions (funded and not funded), award number, award effective data, award final expiration date, funding amounts, principal investigator and co-investigators. Using Mathematica SNA software, for each year we identified collaborator dyads (including their characteristics such as inter/intradepartmental; investigator characteristics) and networks (e.g. size, density). RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: On average, 1800 (range 1730-2034) full- and part-time faculty received email invitations to complete the survey. An average of 403 respondents (range 385-441) completed the survey each administration. While the response rate seems low, the survey was distributed to every faculty member regardless of their primary appointment. Thus it included a large number of individuals whose role is exclusively clinical. Grant data included 4429 awards received between 2011 and 2018, involving 1395 investigators as principal or co-investigators. Survey respondents naming collaborators ranged from 233 to 280 (average 257) with 1594 to 2265 (average 1988) collaborations named each year. Overall density increased from.0204 in 2011 to.0342 in 2017. Density within the group of female investigators increased from.0219 in 2011 to.0412 in 2017. Within the group of male investigators, density increase from.0226 to.0333 in the same time span. Analysis by rank, changes over time and those with grant funding is underway. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE OF IMPACT: This methodology captured a consistent number of collaborations over an 8 year period. Analyses reveal network growth over time and of increasing heterogeneity (by gender). Analyzing research networks overtime provides an important metric to assess how research networks evolve and devolve and the characteristics of those that grow or stagnate. Further these analyses can demonstrate the impact of support provided to networks or teams by the CTSI, department or other institutional mechanism.

This article, written by JPT Technology Editor Chris Carpenter, contains highlights of paper SPE 201552, “Leak Detection in Carbon Sequestration Projects Using Machine Learning Methods: Cranfield Site, Mississippi, USA,” by Saurabh Sinha, SPE, University of Oklahoma and Los Alamos National Laboratory; Rafael Pires De Lima, Geological Survey of Brazil; and Youzuo Lin, Los Alamos National Laboratory, et al., prepared for the 2020 SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, originally scheduled to be held in Denver, 5–7 October. The paper has not been peer reviewed. Saline aquifers and depleted hydrocarbon reservoirs with good seals located in tectonically stable zones make an excellent storage formation option for geological carbon sequestration.Ensuring that carbon dioxide (CO2) does not leak from these reservoirs is the key to any successful carbon capture and storage (CCS) project. In the complete paper, the authors demonstrate automated leakage detection in CCS projects using pressure data obtained from the Cranfield reservoir in Mississippi in the US. Results indicate that even simple deep-learning architectures such as multilayer feed-forward neural networks (MFNNs) can identify a leak using pressure data. Introduction Several methods that use different types of data currently are available to detect leaks. Although some of the methods are a direct indicator of CO2 presence, they cannot provide an early warning for the leaks, thus delaying remedial measures. An ideal process for the identification of leakages requires constant and repetitive comparisons of different data. Machine-learning (ML) techniques are ideally suited for this task. In this work, the authors demonstrate the use of ML techniques such as linear model, random forest, and MFNN on time-series signals obtained from a pressure-pulse test. The methodology uses the time-series data instead of 2D images or 3D voxels, thus providing a computational advantage. The authors write that an ML algorithm can distinguish between a pressure signal corresponding to a leak vs. the pressure signal corresponding to a baseline nonleak case. The trained models can then be used as an early-warning system to flag anomalous data to then be analyzed by a human interpreter. Background A pressure-pulse test uses at least two wells: an injection well and a monitoring well. The reservoir is then shocked by a series of predetermined cycles of injection and shut-ins (i.e., a pulse). The response then is recorded at the monitoring well with a pressure gauge that measures the target formation pressure. The test may be repeated with different pulses to understand the reservoir properties better. A harmonic pulse is preferred over a square wave because it allows for spectral decomposition of the pulse to analyze the reservoir response at different frequencies. Three wells are used in the study: F1, F2, and F3. Well F1 is the injector well, where alternative cycles of injection of CO2 and shut-in are carried out. Well F2 is the monitor well, which remains shut in for the duration of the test and where the pressure is monitored with the use of a pressure gauge. An artificial leak is simulated in the test by opening a surface valve at Well F3.

A Review of: Melles, A., & Unsworth, K. (2015). Examining the reference management practices of humanities and social science postgraduate students and academics. Australian Academic & Research Libraries, 46(4), 250-276. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00048623.2015.1104790 Objective – To understand patterns in reference management practices of postgraduate students and faculty members at one institution. Design – Mixed methods online survey and semi-structured interviews. Setting – Public research university in Australia. Subjects – The survey included responses from 81 postgraduate students. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 8 postgraduate students and 13 faculty members. Methods – The researchers distributed an 18-item survey via email to approximately 800 people who previously registered for EndNote training sessions. Survey participants were also recruited via a website advertisement. The researchers recruited postgraduate student interview participants from the list of survey respondents. Librarians invited faculty members to participate in the semi-structured interviews. Interview audio recordings were transcribed and coded for data analysis. Main Results – The survey found that 71.4% (n=55) of respondents used reference management software (RMS) and 29% (n=22) did not. Over half of the students who did not use an RMS described other ad hoc or “manual” (p. 255) methods for organizing and tracking references. The majority of participants reported using EndNote (67.53%, n=52), while few respondents reported using other RMS tools like Zotero (1.3%, n=1) or Mendeley (1.3%, n = 1). Software awareness (49.32%, n=36), recommendations from faculty members (30.14%, n=22), and University support (47.95%, n=35) were the primary motivations for choosing a specific RMS. Other important factors included ease of use (32.88%, n=24) and integration with Microsoft Word (46.58%, n=34). Students preferred RMS features that support the process of accessing and using references in a paper, and reported that technical problems were the most common frustrations. The researchers found that student interview respondents were more likely to use RMS (75%, n=6) than were faculty member respondents (31%, n=4). Interview respondents varied in which RMS features they used, like importing references, PDF management, or “Cite While You Write” plug-ins (p. 258). Few interviewees used the RMS’s full functionality, either due to variations in workflow preferences or lack of awareness. Similar to survey respondents, interviewees who did not use an RMS reported their own personal practices for managing references. The time and learning curve necessary to become proficient with a particular RMS, as well as how the RMS fit into a particular task or workflow, influenced respondents’ decisions about software selection and use. Faculty members were split with their advice to students about using an RMS, with some respondents advocating that an RMS can save time and trouble later in their writing processes, while others took a more cautious or hands-off approach. Conclusion – The authors conclude that measuring RMS use or non-use does not reflect the real world complexity behind student and faculty member reference management practices. They suggest that librarians may want to rethink focusing on RMS as the sole reference management solution. Librarians should also recognize that institutional availability and support may influence users’ RMS choices. A user-centred approach would account for RMS and non-RMS users alike, and librarians should “develop a more flexible perspective of reference management as part of an approach to researchers that aims to understand their practices rather than normatively prescribe solutions” (Melles & Unsworth, 2015, p. 265). Instruction workshops should help students and faculty members select features or systems that match their existing research processes, rather than exclusively demonstrate the mechanics of a particular RMS.

A Review of: Bullers, K., Howard, A. M., Hanson, A., Kearns, W. D., Orriola, J. J., Polo, R. L., & Sakmar, K. A. (2018). It takes longer than you think: Librarian time spent on systematic review tasks. Journal of the Medical Library Association, 106(2), 198-207. https://doi.org/10.5195/jmla.2018.323 Abstract Objective – To investigate how long it takes for medical librarians to complete steps toward completion of a systematic review and to determine if the time differs based on factors including years of experience as a medical librarian and experience completing systematic reviews. Design – Survey research as a questionnaire disseminated via email distribution lists. Setting – At institutions that are members of the Association of Academic Health Sciences Libraries (AAHSL) and librarians at Association of American Medical Colleges (AAMC) or American Osteopathic Association (AOA) member institutions. Subjects – Librarians of member institutions who have worked on systematic reviews. Methods – On December 11, 2015, AAHSL library directors and librarian members of AAMC and AOA were sent the survey and the recommendation to forward the survey to librarians on staff who have worked on systematic reviews. Reminders were sent on December 17, 2015, and the survey closed for participation on January 7, 2016. Participants who had worked on a systematic review within the past five years were asked to indicate experience by the number of systematic reviews completed, years of experience as a medical librarian, and how much time was spent, in hours, on the following: initial consultations/meetings; developing and testing the initial search strategy; translating the strategy for other databases; documenting the process; delivering the search results; writing their part of the manuscript; other tasks they could identify; and any instruction (i.e., training they provided to team members necessary for completion of the systematic review). Participants also further broke down the amount of their time searching, by percentage of time, in various resources, including literature indexes/databases, included studies’ references, trial registers, grey literature, and hand searching. Participants were also given space to add additional comments. The researchers reported summary statistics for phase one and, for phase two, excluded outliers and performed exploratory factor analysis, beginning with principal components analysis (PCA), followed by a varimax rotation, to determine if there was a relationship between the time on tasks and experience. Main Results – Of the 185 completed responses, 105 were analyzed for phase one because 80 responses were excluded due to missing data or no recent experience with a systematic review. The average respondent had between 1 and 6 years of experience: 1-3 years in librarianship (49.5%) and 4-6 years (23.8%). The time reported for completion of all tasks ranged from 2 to 219 hours with a mean of 30.7 hours. Most of the variance (61.6%) was caused by “information processing” and “interpersonal instruction/training” components. Search strategy development and testing had the highest average time at 8.4 hours. Within that category, databases accounted for 78.7% of time searching, followed by other searching methods. For remaining systematic review tasks, their averages were as follows: translating research (5.4 hours), delivering results (4.3 hours), conducting preliminary consultations (3.9 hours), instruction (3.8 hours), documentation (3.0 hours), additional tasks that were written-in by respondents (2.2 hours), and writing the manuscript (1.8 hours). The most common written-in tasks were development of inclusion/exclusion criteria, critical appraisal, and deduplication. Other write-ins included retrieving full-text articles, developing protocols, and selecting a journal for publishing the systematic review. For the second phase of analysis, 12 responses were excluded as extreme outliers, and the remaining 93 responses were analyzed to detect a relationship between experience and time on task. Prior systematic review experience correlated with shorter times performing instruction, consultation, and translation of searches. However, librarian years of experience affected the percentage of time on task, where greater years of experience led to more time spent consulting and instructing than the percentage for librarians with fewer years of experience. Librarians with greater than 7 years of experience skewed trends toward shorter time on task, and, with their data excluded, years of experience showed weak positive correlation with instruction and consultation. Conclusion – Because the average librarian participating on systematic review teams has had few prior experiences and because the times can vary widely based on assigned roles, duties, years of experience, and complexity of research question, it is not advised to establish expectations for librarians’ time on task. This may be why library administrators have disparate expectations of librarians’ involvement in systematic reviews and find it difficult to allocate and anticipate staff time on systematic review projects. While it may not be possible to set specific overarching guidelines for librarians’ expected time on systematic review tasks, librarian supervisors and library directors planning for their staff to offer systematic review services should work to develop extensive understanding of the steps for conducting and assessing systematic reviews in order to better estimate time commitments.

The objectives of this service activity are: (1) increasing student knowledge about the ins and outs of writing scientific papers and scientific articles , and (2) improving the ability to write scientific articles among students of Biology Education FSTT Undikma Mataram. Community service activities were carried out for 2 days, with 3 stages of activities, namely: (1) Introduction, (2) core activities, and (3) workshops. The partner in this service activity is the Biology Education Study Program of FSTT UNDIKMA Mataram, especially for students who have taken thesis examinations and will compile articles based on their research findings. From the results of the evaluation of the activities, it can be concluded that the purpose of this service activity has been achieved according to expectations, namely increasing student knowledge about the ins and outs of writing scientific papers and scientific articles, the achievement can be seen from the results of student articles that have been presented through the presentation of the results of the preparation of their articles showing that the results are very good and in line with expectations.

Spanish émigré guitarist Celedonio Romero gave his American debut performance on a June evening in 1958. In the sixty years since, the Romero family—Celedonio, his wife Angelita, sons Celín, Pepe, and Angel, as well as grandsons Celino and Lito—has become preeminent in the world of Spanish flamenco and classical guitar in the United States. Walter Aaron Clark’s in-depth research and unprecedented access to his subjects have produced the consummate biography of the Romero family. Clark examines the full story of their genius for making music, from their outsider's struggle to gain respect for the Spanish guitar to the ins and outs of making a living as musicians. As he shows, their concerts and recordings, behind-the-scenes musical careers, and teaching have reshaped their instrument’s very history. At the same time, the Romeros have organized festivals and encouraged leading composers to write works for guitar as part of a tireless, lifelong effort to promote the guitar and expand its repertoire. Entertaining and intimate, Los Romeros opens up the personal world and unfettered artistry of one family and its tremendous influence on American musical culture. It features a gallery of forty photographs as well as appendices providing a chronology, genealogy, list of albums, and a summary of Romero publications, editions, and educational materials.