No description available.

Many Computer-Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW) applications go to great lengths to maximize transparency by making available participants\' actions and respective application states to all others in real-time. Designers might intend to enhance coordination through increased transparency, but what other outcomes might be influenced by these choices? We developed two versions of a CSCW application to support a group idea generation task for collocated groups. One version had diminished transparency in comparison to the other. We studied the effects of this varied transparency on the groups\' generativity and collaboration. We found that in modulating transparency there was a trade-off between generativity and collaboration. Groups with diminished transparency felt that their groupmates built on their ideas more, but groups with increased transparency were more generative. These findings are tentative but suggest that the full story of group vs. solitary, private vs. public manipulations of technology, at least in the area of idea generation, is not yet sufficiently theorized or understood. / Master of Science

Inadequate interprofessional collaboration (IPC) and communication among health care professionals are associated with medical errors and mortality. Guided by the theory of goal attainment and the chronic care model, a systematic review was conducted to explore the evidence related to whether interprofessional collaborative primary care can have a positive effect on health outcomes for patients living with diabetes (PLWD). The systematic review followed the Joanna Briggs Institute method for systematic reviews and results were complied with the PRISMA evidence-based minimum set for reporting. Data were analyzed to identify if IPC positively impacted the health outcomes of PLWD, as evidenced by a reduction in hemoglobin A1c and body mass index. Five studies met the inclusion criteria of English-speaking, peer-reviewed studies. Statistically significant improvement in hemoglobin A1c (p < 0.001) and body mass index (p = 0.026) was shown in 2 studies. Two studies lacked robust statistical analysis of the data; however, researchers showed an average reduction in participants' hemoglobin A1c from 10.6% to 8.8% (N = 45) in one study and a change of -0.7 to -0.9% (N = 3) in another. A fifth study showed that collaboration patterns that included equitable and comprehensive participation of 3 disciplines resulted in a lower proportion of patients with hemoglobin A1c levels greater than 9%. Four out of the 5 research studies noted the integration of pharmacists into the interprofessional collaborative team. The implication for positive social change for this systematic review is that the greater use of interprofessional collaboration and communication may improve the outcomes of patients with diabetes in primary care settings.

Indiana University-Purdue University Indianapolis (IUPUI) / When the child welfare system becomes involved with a family in need of services it does so with the goal of concluding its involvement by finding a safe and permanent placement for the children, ideally with their parents. This challenging and complicated work often has many issues that need to be addressed before a successful closure can occur. To achieve this goal, multiple service providers with various backgrounds, degrees, and professions are tasked with working with each other and the family through a collaborative team called a multidisciplinary team (MDT). However, collaboration is not always guaranteed, and conflict can emerge as the team attempts to best serve the family. This conflict may emerge among professionals and between professionals and the family. Although the underlying factors of collaboration and conflict have been documented and studied, research on the process of resolving conflict when it occurs in MDTs is severely lacking in the literature. Furthermore, MDTs specific to the child welfare system also lack the focus they deserve within the child welfare literature. This grounded theory study addresses the gap by focusing on child welfare MDTs and specifically on home-based therapists (N=20) to determine not only their perceptions of facilitators and barriers to collaboration but also the process that they and their fellow service providers engage in when addressing and resolving conflict. In conducting this qualitative study, this researcher used grounded theory to construct a theory outlining the processes that home-based therapists utilize to resolve conflict within MDTs, starting with the emergence of the conflict and detailing the decision making process through the team’s reaction and the ultimate decision or final result. In the future, these findings could be used to aid and train other MDT members as they face their own conflicts with the hope that a more efficient conflict resolution process will lead to a more effective MDT that keeps its focus on the family and provides the needed treatment and services in a timely manner.

Legitimacy in natural resource management refers to the degree to which citizens accept and comply with stated goals and policies. Lack of legitimacy can threaten collaborative-based watershed groups that rely on voluntary compliance to achieve their water quality goals. These groups are locally-based, and sprouted up due to the complexities and political barriers that have prevented better control of non-point, or diffuse, pollution off the landscape and into streams and lakes. One of the most cited requirements for legitimacy in natural resource collaborations is inclusive representation. An exploratory study of several watershed groups in Wisconsin and Illinois uncovered a worrisome exclusion of key stakeholders in the watershed along with an absence of certain demographic groups. Key underrepresented stakeholders included farmers, federal government officials, and national environmental groups. The absence of farmer participation is especially troubling considering the large amount of agricultural land contained within two of the basins studied. In addition, the voluntary nature of watershed group collaboration led to a stilted demographic base, with white males of higher income and education dominating the process. Public participation in watershed groups has been cited numerous times in the literature as a key ingredient of legitimacy, yet it seems that the citizens in the watershed rely on elected officials for their representation. Results from this survey uncovered a lack of participation by elected officials, however, and this provided another barrier to inclusive and high-quality representation in watershed organizations. Another common feature of watershed collaborations is consensus decision-making, but these consensus groups often exhibited exclusion of "difficult" stakeholders, as well as self-exclusion of people who lacked patience with the time-consuming nature of the process. Survey results also indicated that some people felt contentious issues were being avoided in an attempt to reach consensus, as was documented in the literature. Accountability was an identified as a threat to legitimacy in both the focus groups and surveys, and there were doubts about follow-through once projects were agreed upon. Umbrella organizations that provided capacity-building and scientific expertise would often switch to other funded projects, and some wondered if outcomes could be maintained. Government was often cited in the surveys and focus groups as an entity that can be used to foster accountability, but the same respondents seemed to detest more government regulation while embracing accountability. Overall, respondents seemed conflicted about the role of government in these collaborations. Lack of trust was found to be very intense in the two Wisconsin watersheds, due mostly to run-ins with the Department of Natural Resources (DNR). Lack of trust spurred participation in watershed groups, particularly, when property owners lived lakeside. Meetings would become crowed as landowners wary of regulation or restrictions on their property came to protect their turf. While lack of trust may encourage participation, it also reduces overall legitimacy in the three watersheds studied in this paper, and still appears to be a large stumbling block to legitimacy despite many years of effort. Scientific uncertainty regarding sources of pollutants added to distrust between municipalities in the Illinois watershed, and this was exacerbated by a paucity of monitoring stations and baseline data. The watershed groups studied in this paper were three of the most successful and long-standing collaborations in this region -- and benefitted from effective leadership, capacity-building at multiple scales, transparency, and quality representation. But even in these groups many red flags emerged to threaten legitimacy, and hence the long-term sustainability and success of such groups. More research is needed to test some of the ideas uncovered here, but relying on a voluntary-approach to deal with the insidious problem of non-point source pollution may be a recipe for disaster. Alternative management strategies must be developed to combat runoff pollution, and it seems that more regulation and strict benchmarks should be instituted at the local level --- and be nested within larger scales at the state, regional, and federal level. In this type of strategy the local government would provide the "sticks" with land-use controls and pollution fees, and the state could be a source of "carrots" in the way of funding for projects.

Indiana University-Purdue University Indianapolis (IUPUI) / Due to a shortage of affordable housing, gaps in social welfare infrastructure, and the criminalization of homelessness, public libraries find themselves providing daytime shelter to patrons experiencing homelessness. Their needs and crises have created demands on staff and security that exceed their training and role. Sometimes police are involved, exposing patrons to possible arrest. To fill this knowledge and service gap, libraries have begun hiring social workers. Early research on the broad role of social workers suggests they are changing how libraries respond to crises with patrons experiencing homelessness in four keyways: by providing an option to calling 911; influencing code of conduct implementation, serving patrons, and equipping staff. However, no study has given an in-depth explanation of how social workers are changing libraries’ responses to crises with patrons experiencing homelessness. The purpose of this study is to explain how the role of the social worker influences how libraries respond when patrons experiencing homelessness are in crises. Considered through lenses of role theory, social cognitive theory, and the humanization framework, this embedded multiple-case study of three U.S. urban libraries collected 91 surveys and conducted 46 Zoom interviews. It includes the perspectives of 107 participants across six roles: patrons experiencing homelessness, social workers, front-facing staff, security, location managers, and CEOs. The social workers’ influence was perceived to reduce behavior incidents, exclusions, and arrests around three themes: (1) being an option, with subthemes of in-house referrals and de-escalation; (2) running interference, with subthemes of low barrier access and barrier-busting services; and (3) buffering, with subthemes of equipping, influencing code of conduct implementation, and advocating and being present during security and police interactions. Three models of library social work and their impact on the social worker’s role of de-escalation were identified and described: The Sign Up and Summon Model, the Outreach and Summon Model, and the Social Work Center Model. In addition, a commingled rival was found: the impact of the Black Lives Matter movement. The implications of the findings include recommendations for structuring library social work practice to reduce exclusions and arrests of patrons experiencing homelessness. / 2025-05-22

Principal leadership matters. While school principals impact student achievement in mostly indirect ways, the cumulative effect of their agency to design the school program, organize teacher and staff interactions and opportunities to collaborate, and make other important decisions that influence the culture of the school meaningfully affects the experience of staff and students. This research into principal leadership has sought to make a contribution to the understanding of what makes principals effective in their work. The existing research into what makes principals effective has consistently found that any single theory of leadership, like “instructional leadership,” in isolated application will not be fully effective across all contexts. Rather, an integrated theory of leadership that recognizes the complexity of the principal role, the necessary emphasis on collective responsibility and action, and the significance of the school context is necessary in order to explore and extend the understanding of effective school leadership. Leading from an inquiry stance offers a framework for principal leadership that builds upon this existing research literature about effective school leadership. Therefore, this study sought to understand what leading from an inquiry stance looked like in practice and its impact on the culture of collaboration among teachers. The findings of this research study indicate that leading from an inquiry stance promotes the culture of collaboration among teachers, “anti-inquiry” practices undermine the culture of collaboration among teachers, and relational trust between principals and their teachers is a critical attribute for effective leadership around a shared vision of school improvement. / Educational Leadership

Indiana University-Purdue University Indianapolis (IUPUI) / The authorship of the five additions to Thomas Kyd’s The Spanish Tragedy remains a conundrum. Ben Jonson was first thought responsible, but a majority of scholars argue against his involvement. Other candidates have been proposed, namely Thomas Dekker, Thomas Heywood, William Shakespeare, and John Webster. Past attribution studies have mainly focused on Shakespeare due to the fourth addition, the Painter’s Scene, which has been perceived to exhibit Shakespearean quality. John Nance’s lexical study of the fourth addition makes a most compelling case: Shakespeare’s hand is almost certainly present. Warren Stevenson, Hugh Craig, Brian Vickers, and Douglas Bruster have also supported an attribution to Shakespeare; however, their research errs in assuming a single author wrote all five of the additions. This assumption is disproven by Gary Taylor’s work on the first addition, which is the first to identify Heywood, not Shakespeare, as its likely author. Taylor’s conclusion emphasizes that the additions could embody revisions by more than one playwright, such as in the case of Sir Thomas More. Therefore, the authorship of the other additions must remain conjectural until further study. My thesis is the first to independently explore the third addition’s authorship, and based on lexical evidence, the following analysis disproves claims of Shakespeare’s presence within the third addition.

No description available.

No description available.