Time filter

Source Type

St. Catharines, Canada

Brock University is a public research university located in St. Catharines, Ontario, Canada. It is the only university in Canada that is located in a UNESCO Biosphere Reserve, located at the centre of Canada's Niagara Peninsula on the Niagara Escarpment. The university bears the name of Maj.-General Sir Isaac Brock, who was responsible for defending Upper Canada against the United States during the War of 1812.Brock offers a wide range of programs at the undergraduate and graduate levels, including professional degrees. Brock was ranked 3rd among Canadian universities in the "undergraduate" category for research publication output and impact indicators in 2008. Brock University is the only school in Canada and internationally to offer the MICA program. Brock University's Department of Health science offers the only undergraduate degree in Public Health in Canada. At the graduate level, Brock offers 37 programs, including 6 PhD programs.Brock's Co-op program is Canada’s fifth-largest, and the third largest in Ontario as of 2011. Graduates enjoy one of the highest employment rates of all Ontario universities at 97.2 percent.Brock has 12 Canada Research Chairs and 9 faculty members which have received the 3MTeaching Fellowship Award, the only national award that recognizes teaching excellence and educational leadership. Wikipedia.

Ciampa K.,Brock University
Journal of Computer Assisted Learning | Year: 2014

The purpose of this single-case study was to explore the lived experiences of a grade 6 teacher and students who used tablets as part of their classroom instruction. Malone and Lepper's taxonomy of intrinsic motivations for learning is used as a framework for examining whether and how this particular theory of motivation applies equally well for mobile learning. This study reports on the grade 6 teacher's and students' perceptions regarding the motivational affordances of using these mobile devices for learning. The findings are consistent with those of Malone and Lepper that motivation can be enhanced through challenge, curiosity, control, recognition, competition and cooperation. This model is helpful in informing our understanding of the motivating features of using mobile devices for learning and how mobile technologies can be used to enhance learners' motivation. © 2013 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

This paper presents an up-to-date ranking of the leading technology and innovation management (TIM) specialty journals. Citation data from the years 20062010 of the fifteen base journals are collected and analyzed. Based on the total citation score, frequency adjusted score, age adjusted score, self-citation adjusted score, and overall adjusted score, the new top 50 journals list for TIM is offered. Compared with the results from the earlier period, no statistically significant change is detected in the top half of the list; however, a significant number of well-regarded journals that did not appear in the 19972001 period have surfaced in the bottom half of the list. Overall, the top ten journals of this latest ranking are Research Policy, Strategic Management Journal, Journal of Product Innovation Management, Management Science, Academy of Management Journal, Harvard Business Review, Academy of Management Review, Research-Technology Management, Organization Science, and Technovation. The ranking order of the top ten TIM specialty journals is as follows: Research Policy, Journal of Product Innovation Management, Research-Technology Management, Technovation, R&D Management, Industrial and Corporate Change, IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, Journal of Technology Transfer, Technological Forecasting and Social Change, and Journal of Engineering and Technology Management. A fresh perspective on how TIM specialty journals relate to each other and how they link to business, economics, and management disciplines is provided. A detailed discussion of these findings, together with concluding remarks, also helps answer the question Do things change or remain the same?" © 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Tammemagi M.C.,Brock University
Journal of Thoracic Imaging | Year: 2015

Globally, lung cancer is the leading cause of cancer death and is a major public health problem. Because lung cancer is usually diagnosed at an advanced stage, survival is generally poor. In recent decades, clinical advances have not led to marked improvements in outcomes. A recent advance of importance arose when the National Lung Screening Trial (NLST) findings indicated that low-dose computed tomography screening of high-risk individuals can lead to a lung cancer mortality reduction of 20%. NLST identified high-risk individuals using the following criteria: age 55 to 74 years; Z30 pack-years of smoking; and number of years since smoking cessationr15 years. Medical screening is most effective when applied to high-risk individuals. The NLST criteria for high risk were practical for enrolling individuals into a clinical trial but are not optimal for risk estimation. Lung cancer risk prediction models are expected to be superior. Indeed, recently, 3 studies have provided quantitative evidence that selection of individuals for lung screening on the basis of estimates from highquality risk prediction models is superior to using NLST criteria or similar criteria, such as the United States Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) criteria. Compared with NLST/USPSTF criteria, selection of individuals for screening using high-quality risk models should lead to fewer individuals being screened, more cancers being detected, and fewer false positives. More lives will be saved with greater cost-effectiveness. In this paper, we review methodological background for prediction modeling, existing lung cancer risk prediction models and some of their findings, and current issues in lung cancer risk prediction modeling and discuss future research. Copyright © 2015 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.

Ashton M.C.,Brock University | Lee K.,University of Calgary | de Vries R.E.,VU University Amsterdam
Personality and Social Psychology Review | Year: 2014

We review research and theory on the HEXACO personality dimensions of Honesty-Humility (H), Agreeableness (A), and Emotionality (E), with particular attention to the following topics: (1) the origins of the HEXACO model in lexical studies of personality structure, and the content of the H, A, and E factors in those studies; (2) the operationalization of the H, A, and E factors in the HEXACO Personality Inventory-Revised; (3) the construct validity of self-reports on scales measuring the H factor; (4) the theoretical distinction between H and A; (5) similarity and assumed similarity between social partners in personality, with a focus on H and A; (6) the extent to which H (and A and E) variance is represented in instruments assessing the "Five-Factor Model" of personality; and (7) the relative validity of scales assessing the HEXACO and Five-Factor Model dimensions in predicting criteria conceptually relevant to H, A, and E. © 2014 by the Society for Personality and Social Psychology, Inc.

This paper evaluates the impact of a large-scale, community agency-driven initiative to increase physical activity (PA) in after-school programs in Ontario. In 2008, the YMCA and Boys and Girls Club (BGC) introduced CATCH Kids Club (CKC) into 330 after-school program sites. This study assessed the impact of the intervention on the quality and quantity of PA using a pretest/posttest quasi-experimental research design with a comparison non-CKC group. Data were collected at baseline (September 2008) and postintervention (May/June 2009) using the System for Observing Fitness Instruction Time (SOFIT). Nearly all sites, with the exception of the BGC baseline program (a sports program) achieved greater than 50% of time spent in MVPA. Significant differences were not found between levels of MVPA at CKC and comparison sites (59.3% vs. 64.2%), or at CKC sites at baseline versus postintervention (59.3% vs. 52.1%). BGC sites had significantly higher levels MVPA in CKC programs than in sports programs (70.8% vs. 35.2%). In postimplementation interviews, leaders reported general support but some mixed reactions related to how the program was received by participants. This paper offers support for PA programs that focus on inclusivity and enjoyment and emphasize the important role of staff competency.

Discover hidden collaborations