title: Errorless compliance training: Used by a researcher and teacher aides to increase compliance of children under five years of age in either the home or education setting

authors: Noorland, Jana Maree

subjects: Errorless Compliance Training

abstract: Errorless Compliance Training (ECT) was developed as a nonaversive alternative approach to traditional compliance training (Ducharme  Worling,1994; Ducharme, Popynick, Pontes,  Steele,1996). Experiment 1 aimed to see if this method could be used to increase the compliance of three children aged four, with two of the participants‟ treatments taking place in the family home and the third taking place in an early education setting. Results showed that all participants had increases in the level of compliance to specific requests. Child 1 and 3 completed all phases of the training and showed significant increases in compliance to Level 4 requests compared to that of the baseline data. Child 2 reached Phase 3 only, however, he still had significant increases in compliance in Phase 2 and 3 of the treatment. The results suggest that Errorless Compliance Training was successful in increasing compliance with these participants, who were four years of age, in an early education setting as well as in home settings. Experiment 2 aimed to increase compliance with two children in a primary school setting, by teaching the teacher aides working with the children Errorless Compliance Training following Ducharme‟s (1996) procedure. Replication of Ducharme‟s Errorless Compliance Training findings to increased compliance was not possible. A range of issues meant the Observational Probability Analyses were not completed in the time frame and treatment could not begin. Experiment 2‟s results suggest that Errorless Compliance Training may not be a treatment that can be easily implemented by teacher aides within the school setting. One reason for this is that the Observation Probability Analysis requires all requests to be delivered each session, which takes
ii
approximately two hours, therefore the sessions are not able to be completed within the time restraints of the teacher aides.

text: Errorless compliance training: Used by a researcher and teacher aides to increase compliance of children under five years of age in either the home or education setting Errorless Compliance Training (ECT) was developed as a nonaversive alternative approach to traditional compliance training (Ducharme  Worling,1994; Ducharme, Popynick, Pontes,  Steele,1996). Experiment 1 aimed to see if this method could be used to increase the compliance of three children aged four, with two of the participants‟ treatments taking place in the family home and the third taking place in an early education setting. Results showed that all participants had increases in the level of compliance to specific requests. Child 1 and 3 completed all phases of the training and showed significant increases in compliance to Level 4 requests compared to that of the baseline data. Child 2 reached Phase 3 only, however, he still had significant increases in compliance in Phase 2 and 3 of the treatment. The results suggest that Errorless Compliance Training was successful in increasing compliance with these participants, who were four years of age, in an early education setting as well as in home settings. Experiment 2 aimed to increase compliance with two children in a primary school setting, by teaching the teacher aides working with the children Errorless Compliance Training following Ducharme‟s (1996) procedure. Replication of Ducharme‟s Errorless Compliance Training findings to increased compliance was not possible. A range of issues meant the Observational Probability Analyses were not completed in the time frame and treatment could not begin. Experiment 2‟s results suggest that Errorless Compliance Training may not be a treatment that can be easily implemented by teacher aides within the school setting. One reason for this is that the Observation Probability Analysis requires all requests to be delivered each session, which takes
ii
approximately two hours, therefore the sessions are not able to be completed within the time restraints of the teacher aides.

year: 2010

title: New Zealand seagrass – More threatened than IUCN review indicates

authors: Matheson, Fleur E.

subjects: New Zealand

abstract: A recent article describing an extinction risk assessment of the world’s seagrass species (Short et al., 2011) assigned New Zealand’s only seagrass species, Zostera muelleri, to the IUCN Red List category of ‘Least Concern’. We are concerned that this assignment does not reflect the true status of Z. muelleri in New Zealand (one of three countries where this species occurs) and that such a categorisation will detract from efforts to prevent further decline of this species.

text: New Zealand seagrass – More threatened than IUCN review indicates A recent article describing an extinction risk assessment of the world’s seagrass species (Short et al., 2011) assigned New Zealand’s only seagrass species, Zostera muelleri, to the IUCN Red List category of ‘Least Concern’. We are concerned that this assignment does not reflect the true status of Z. muelleri in New Zealand (one of three countries where this species occurs) and that such a categorisation will detract from efforts to prevent further decline of this species.

year: 2011

title: He aha te reo 'Tuturu'? (what is an official language?)

authors: Harlow, Ray

subjects: te reo Māori

abstract: Nō te tau 1987 ka whakaaetia e te Whare Pāremata o Aotearoa te Ture Reo Māori, arā, he ture hei whakamana i te reo Māori hei reo tūturu mō Niu Tïreni, hei tuku atu hoki te mana ki te reo Māori i roto i ētahi whakahaere o ngā ture, ā, hei whakamana hoki i te whakatūnga o te Kōmihana mō te Reo Māori, ā, me te whakaingoa hoki i ngā mahi me ngā mana o taua Kōmihana. Ko te whakamāoritanga o te 5(a) o ngā wāhanga, e pēnei ana: He mana anō ka homai e ngā wāhanga 3 me te 4, engari kāore he mana i tua atu i ēnei i te whakaaetia. He aha aua mana? Mō te wāhanga tuawhā, e mārama ana, ko ngā mana kei reira e takoto ana, arā, te mana o te tangata, ahakoa ko wai, e whaiwāhi ana ki ngā whakahaere kōti, ki te whakaputa kōrero ki te reo Māori. Engari ki te tahuri ki te tuatoru o ngā wāhanga, kāore i āta whakatakotoria ngā mana e pā ana ki taua wāhanga. Kāore hoki he ture atu anā i tēnei e āta whakamāramatia nei aua mana. Nō reira, he tino pātai e pā ana ki te mana o te reo Māori i Aotearoa ko tēnei: he aha ngā mana o tēnei mea, o te “reo tūturu” o tētahi whenua? He aha te tikanga o te kupu nei, “reo tūturu”? He huarahi e taea ai tēnei urupounamu te whakautu, ko te āta titiro i ngā tikanga o ētahi atu whenua e rua nei, neke atu rānei ngā reo e whaimana ana i roto i te ture, kia kitea ai te tino āhua o te mea nei, te reo tūturu, i roto i te ao whānui, me te whakahāngai i aua tikanga ki te tū o te reo Māori i roto i Aotearoa (tirohia Waite, 1992 II, 47-8). Ko te kaupapa o te pepa e takoto atu nei he āta titiro i te tūnga o tētahi reo kotahi, arā, o te reo Romanihi i roto i Huiterangi, i te taha o ētahi reo e toru, o ngā reo Tiamana, Wīwī, Itariana; he rangahau i te tū o taua reo i raro i te ture, i roto i ngā whakahaere tūmatanui o taua whenua. 

"In 1987 the New Zealand Parliament passed The Māori Language Act, An Act to declare the Māori language to be an official language of New Zealand, to confer the right to speak Māori in certain legal proceedings, and to establish Te Kōmihana Mō Te Reo Māori and define its functions and powers. Section 5(a) implies that there are rights granted by virtue of sections 3 and 4 and that these may not be construed to affect any rights beyond these. But what are these rights? With respect to section 4 it is clear, these are the rights specified there, that is, the right of any party to certain types of hearing to speak Māori. When one turns to section 3, there are no rights specifically laid out, nor is there any other legislation detailing those rights. Thus, an important question for the status of Māori within New Zealand is: what are the rights implied in the term “official language”? What is the meaning of the expression “official language”? A way to approach this question is to investigate the situation in other countries with two or more official languages, in order to discover how this term is understood generally in the world, and to apply appropriate aspects of this situation to New Zealand (see Waite, 1992 II, 47-8). This paper reports on research into all aspects of the status and situation of Rhaetoromansh in Switzerland beside three other languages, German, French and Italian. One aspect of this general study was the investigation of the legal status of the language, and its status within governmental institutions."

text: He aha te reo 'Tuturu'? (what is an official language?) Nō te tau 1987 ka whakaaetia e te Whare Pāremata o Aotearoa te Ture Reo Māori, arā, he ture hei whakamana i te reo Māori hei reo tūturu mō Niu Tïreni, hei tuku atu hoki te mana ki te reo Māori i roto i ētahi whakahaere o ngā ture, ā, hei whakamana hoki i te whakatūnga o te Kōmihana mō te Reo Māori, ā, me te whakaingoa hoki i ngā mahi me ngā mana o taua Kōmihana. Ko te whakamāoritanga o te 5(a) o ngā wāhanga, e pēnei ana: He mana anō ka homai e ngā wāhanga 3 me te 4, engari kāore he mana i tua atu i ēnei i te whakaaetia. He aha aua mana? Mō te wāhanga tuawhā, e mārama ana, ko ngā mana kei reira e takoto ana, arā, te mana o te tangata, ahakoa ko wai, e whaiwāhi ana ki ngā whakahaere kōti, ki te whakaputa kōrero ki te reo Māori. Engari ki te tahuri ki te tuatoru o ngā wāhanga, kāore i āta whakatakotoria ngā mana e pā ana ki taua wāhanga. Kāore hoki he ture atu anā i tēnei e āta whakamāramatia nei aua mana. Nō reira, he tino pātai e pā ana ki te mana o te reo Māori i Aotearoa ko tēnei: he aha ngā mana o tēnei mea, o te “reo tūturu” o tētahi whenua? He aha te tikanga o te kupu nei, “reo tūturu”? He huarahi e taea ai tēnei urupounamu te whakautu, ko te āta titiro i ngā tikanga o ētahi atu whenua e rua nei, neke atu rānei ngā reo e whaimana ana i roto i te ture, kia kitea ai te tino āhua o te mea nei, te reo tūturu, i roto i te ao whānui, me te whakahāngai i aua tikanga ki te tū o te reo Māori i roto i Aotearoa (tirohia Waite, 1992 II, 47-8). Ko te kaupapa o te pepa e takoto atu nei he āta titiro i te tūnga o tētahi reo kotahi, arā, o te reo Romanihi i roto i Huiterangi, i te taha o ētahi reo e toru, o ngā reo Tiamana, Wīwī, Itariana; he rangahau i te tū o taua reo i raro i te ture, i roto i ngā whakahaere tūmatanui o taua whenua. 

"In 1987 the New Zealand Parliament passed The Māori Language Act, An Act to declare the Māori language to be an official language of New Zealand, to confer the right to speak Māori in certain legal proceedings, and to establish Te Kōmihana Mō Te Reo Māori and define its functions and powers. Section 5(a) implies that there are rights granted by virtue of sections 3 and 4 and that these may not be construed to affect any rights beyond these. But what are these rights? With respect to section 4 it is clear, these are the rights specified there, that is, the right of any party to certain types of hearing to speak Māori. When one turns to section 3, there are no rights specifically laid out, nor is there any other legislation detailing those rights. Thus, an important question for the status of Māori within New Zealand is: what are the rights implied in the term “official language”? What is the meaning of the expression “official language”? A way to approach this question is to investigate the situation in other countries with two or more official languages, in order to discover how this term is understood generally in the world, and to apply appropriate aspects of this situation to New Zealand (see Waite, 1992 II, 47-8). This paper reports on research into all aspects of the status and situation of Rhaetoromansh in Switzerland beside three other languages, German, French and Italian. One aspect of this general study was the investigation of the legal status of the language, and its status within governmental institutions."

year: 2000-10