Downloads & Free Reading Options - Results

In 2009, the U.S. Institute of Education Sciences (IES) allocated $120 million to establish the Reading for Understanding (RfU) initiative. This initiative responded to concern that children's improvement in reading comprehension had leveled off over the previous few decades, coupled with the observation that research on reading comprehension had sufficiently matured to warrant a major investment in improving student performance. The RfU initiative involved a research and development network of six interconnected teams focused on improving reading comprehension for students in pre-kindergarten (pre-K) through grade 12. The "Reaping the Rewards of the Reading for Understanding Initiative" report articulates findings and common themes concerning the nature and development, assessment, and the enactment of curriculum and instruction of reading comprehension. It synthesizes work both within and across the six research teams, reviewing over 200 scholarly articles from this substantial and unprecedented effort to determine what has been learned about understanding and improving reading comprehension. Key findings include: (1) the importance of emphasizing comprehension in pursuit of knowledge and insight; (2) redoubling efforts to enhance language development, both oral and written, for students across the age-span; and (3) changing the culture of classrooms to emphasize collaboration, deep comprehension, critique, and the generative use of comprehension.

The goal of the What Works Clearinghouse (WWC) Practice Guide, "Foundational Skills to Support Reading for Understanding in Kindergarten through 3rd Grade," is to offer educators specific, evidence-based recommendations for teaching foundational reading skills to students in kindergarten through 3rd grade. The guide suggests instructional practices that can be implemented after students have mastered early reading skills. The guide provides teachers, reading coaches, principals, and other educators with instructional recommendations that can be implemented in conjunction with existing standards or curricula and does not recommend a particular curriculum. This brief summary report focuses on the fourth of the four recommendations: Ensure that each student reads connected text every day to support reading accuracy, fluency, and comprehension. Reading connected text--that is, multiple sentences related to each other--requires greater skill than reading isolated words. To read and understand connected text, students must quickly recognize words, integrate what they are reading with their background knowledge, and monitor their comprehension. Daily practice with reading connected text helps students increase their accuracy, fluency, and comprehension. This summary provides steps to carry out the recommendation, identifies potential roadblocks, and suggests ways to address them. [For "Foundational Skills to Support Reading for Understanding in Kindergarten through 3rd Grade. Educator's Practice Guide. NCEE 2016-4008," see ED566956.]

This draft report from the Rand Reading Study Group (RRSG)1 formulates an initial proposal concerning the research issues that the community of reading researchers most urgently needs to address over the next 10-15 years. We encourage readers of this draft version to respond with feedback about our summary of the issues, the coherence of our model of reading comprehension, and our sketch of the research enterprise. Ultimately, this document may become the basis for more formal agenda setting. At this point it is an invitation to join a conversation about an area of great practical importance: reading development and reading instruction. The proposed research agenda builds upon a number of recent efforts to summarize the knowledge base in the field of reading. These efforts include the National Research Council report on Preventing Reading Difficulties in Young Children, the Report of the National Reading Panel, and the recently published edition of the Handbook of Reading Research. Given the availability of these and other older sources,2 the RRSG did not see the need to replicate recent efforts to synthesize the knowledge base concerning initial reading and its implications for instruction and assessment of the general population. Thus we argue that the primary challenge of improving reading performance in the early grades is now to incorporate research based knowledge systematically into teacher preparation and practice. We still have much to learn, however, about how children become good comprehenders, how to design and deliver instruction, and how to prevent comprehension failure.

No Description

Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2010/11/10: CIA-RDP88-00428R000200090017-5 OTE 84-1227' 23 August 1984 MEMORANDUM FOR: Executive Officer to the DDA Executive Off.icer, UIE STAT STAT STAT SUBJECT: Luncheon Briefings for the Brookings Institution's Public Policy Conference for Corporate Executives on Understanding Federal Government Operations, 1984-.85 REFERENCE: Your Memo to DDA Office Directors (DDA 84--244.4/1.), dated 17 Aug 84, Same Subj The Office of Training and Education wishes to nominate the following officers for participation in the Brookings Luncheons as table hosts and discussants: -Chief, Professional Development Branch, Room CofC, extensio ~-Profe.ssi -11 Development Branch, Room .526 ofd extensior~- Dean of Conferences, Center fog Study of Intelligence, 1036 CofC., extension STAT EXO/OTEj Distribution: Orig - Addressee 1 - EXO Chrono 1 - OTE Registry (23Aug84) STAT STAT STAT STAT STAT Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2010/11/10: CIA-RDP88-00428R000200090017-5

Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2010/11/10: CIA-RDP88-00428R000200090017-5 OTE 84-1227' 23 August 1984 MEMORANDUM FOR: Executive Officer to the DDA Executive Off.icer, UIE STAT STAT STAT SUBJECT: Luncheon Briefings for the Brookings Institution's Public Policy Conference for Corporate Executives on Understanding Federal Government Operations, 1984-.85 REFERENCE: Your Memo to DDA Office Directors (DDA 84--244.4/1.), dated 17 Aug 84, Same Subj The Office of Training and Education wishes to nominate the following officers for participation in the Brookings Luncheons as table hosts and discussants: -Chief, Professional Development Branch, Room CofC, extensio ~-Profe.ssi -11 Development Branch, Room .526 ofd extensior~- Dean of Conferences, Center fog Study of Intelligence, 1036 CofC., extension STAT EXO/OTEj Distribution: Orig - Addressee 1 - EXO Chrono 1 - OTE Registry (23Aug84) STAT STAT STAT STAT STAT Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2010/11/10: CIA-RDP88-00428R000200090017-5

No Description

This paper represents the third installment of the Reading for Understanding (RfU) assessment framework. This paper builds upon the two prior installments (Sabatini & O'Reilly, 2013; Sabatini, O'Reilly, & Deane, 2013) by discussing the role of performance moderators in the test design and how scenario-based assessment can be used as a tool for assessment delivery. Performance moderators are characteristics of students that impact reading performance but are not considered a part of the reading construct. These include (a) background and prior knowledge, (b) metacognitive and self-regulatory strategies and behavior, (c) reading strategies, and (d) student motivation and engagement. In this paper, we argue there is added value in incorporating performance moderators into a reading test design. We characterize added value with respect to the validity of the claims derived from test scores, the interpretation of the test scores, and the relevance to instruction. As a second aim, we present a case for using scenario-based assessments and how they can be used to integrate into the test design both the performance moderators as well as other features that make the assessment more instructionally relevant.

In May 2016, an invitational symposium on the Reading for Understanding (RfU) initiative was held in Alexandria, Virginia. Co-hosted by ETS and the Council of Chief State School Officers (CCSSO), the symposium brought together some 160 state and local education leaders to examine the results of the Reading for Understanding Initiative. The goal of the U.S. Department of Education-sponsored initiative was to accelerate the research on reading across grades preK-12. In 2010, five grant projects were awarded to focus on learning and instruction, and one project on assessment. In this policy report, the authors begin by framing the need for a focused, national effort to achieve universal, advanced reading literacy, arguing that it is an issue of equity as well as individual and national prosperity. The second portion presents a discussion of practical recommendations for lead practitioners, summarizing key insights from the RfU Research Initiative, remaining research challenges, and policy and practice recommendations for enhancing reading achievement across the educational developmental span from pre-K to secondary school graduation. In this report, the authors attempted to capture and communicate some key insights that can serve as principles for action now. Using the "race to the moon" metaphor, they suggested that change would require a shared vision that places value on the importance of improving reading development for all citizens. Second, the destination must be clear: What it means to be a proficient reader in the twenty-first century has changed, and assessment and instruction should follow suit. Third, change requires engineering a system that impacts policy through assessment, instruction, curriculum, professional development, and implementation of innovation for sustainability and continuous improvement. Adapting to the gradual accumulation of solid, stable empirical findings of research is important, but so too is learning to adapt educational practices to better serve children of today, large percentages of whom continue to fail to achieve reading comprehension levels at the standards that have been set for our nation. In the spirit of empirical science, the authors recommend that innovations in policies and practices should be considered and implemented where needed, but with an eye toward understanding better what works for whom and when. The insights illuminated here hopefully can serve as a foundation for such innovation.

In May 2016, an invitational symposium on the Reading for Understanding (RfU) initiative was held in Alexandria, Virginia. Co-hosted by ETS and the Council of Chief State School Officers (CCSSO), the symposium brought together some 160 state and local education leaders to examine the results of the Reading for Understanding Initiative. The goal of the U.S. Department of Education-sponsored initiative was to accelerate the research on reading across grades preK-12. In 2010, five grant projects were awarded to focus on learning and instruction, and one project on assessment. In this policy report, the authors begin by framing the need for a focused, national effort to achieve universal, advanced reading literacy, arguing that it is an issue of equity as well as individual and national prosperity. The second portion presents a discussion of practical recommendations for lead practitioners, summarizing key insights from the RfU Research Initiative, remaining research challenges, and policy and practice recommendations for enhancing reading achievement across the educational developmental span from pre-K to secondary school graduation. In this report, the authors attempted to capture and communicate some key insights that can serve as principles for action now. Using the "race to the moon" metaphor, they suggested that change would require a shared vision that places value on the importance of improving reading development for all citizens. Second, the destination must be clear: What it means to be a proficient reader in the twenty-first century has changed, and assessment and instruction should follow suit. Third, change requires engineering a system that impacts policy through assessment, instruction, curriculum, professional development, and implementation of innovation for sustainability and continuous improvement. Adapting to the gradual accumulation of solid, stable empirical findings of research is important, but so too is learning to adapt educational practices to better serve children of today, large percentages of whom continue to fail to achieve reading comprehension levels at the standards that have been set for our nation. In the spirit of empirical science, the authors recommend that innovations in policies and practices should be considered and implemented where needed, but with an eye toward understanding better what works for whom and when. The insights illuminated here hopefully can serve as a foundation for such innovation.

No Description

No Description

For their 61st annual conference, the Association of Literacy Educators and Researchers (ALER) met in St. Petersburg, Florida. This year's conference theme was "Engaging All Readers through Explorations of Literacy, Language, and Culture," which was also used as the title for this year's "Yearbook." This "Yearbook" contains articles about innovative strategies for teachers and teacher leaders, research trends within teacher education programs, and innovative and seminal strategies for preservice teachers. Included are double-peer reviewed papers, the presidential address, and the keynote address: (1) Systems Without a Process: Know What To Do and Then Do It Well (David D. Paige); (2) Reclaiming Creative Literacy Practices (Thomas W. Bean); (3) Understanding Reasoning and Academic Language in Economics (Chang Yuan); (4) "There Might Be Words on the Screen, but it's Not the Same": Engaging Tweens in Literacy through Minecraft Book Groups (Carolyn Stufft); (5) Stranger than Nonfiction: Identifying and Modeling Text Structures in Fiction Picturebooks (Tracey S. Hodges and Sharon D. Matthews); (6) "Es Lo Que Hacemos"/It's What We Do: Translanguaging to Make Meaning During Read Alouds (Erin Greeter); (7) Research on Reader's Theater (Faida Stokes and Chase Young); (8) What DO they do all day?: Field Experiences in Literacy Coaching (Katherine Brodeur, Susan Massey, Lisa Ortmann, and Cynthia Bertelsen); (9) The Engaged Learning Model: The Impact of Digital Literacy and Problem-Based Learning on Fourth Graders' Vocabulary and General Reading Outcomes (James E. Gentry, Chris Sloan, and Robin Pate); (10) Teachers Implementing Coaching Mindsets: A Path to Literacy Leadership (Aimee Morewood, Susan Taylor, Julie Ankrum, Allison Swan Dagen, and Angela Curfman); (11) High Stakes Testing in Teacher Education: Responses and Implications (Maryann Mraz, Bob Rickelman, S. Michael Putman, Paola Pilonieta, and Jean Vintinner); (12) The Lasting Impact of a University Common Reading Program (Kristen Ferguson, Natalya Brown, and Linda Piper); (13) Honoring All of the Language Arts: A Constructivist Approach to Preservice Teachers' Classroom Observations (Delane Bender-Slack and Teresa Young); (14) Preservice Teachers' Sense of Efficacy for Literacy Instruction: Examination of an Undergraduate Delivery System (Corinne Valadez, Tomas Espinosa, Johnathan Hill, and Maureen Sullivan); (15) Cohort Participation: Impact on Personal Learning Networks (Caryssa K. Retrum, Elizabeth Alderton, Glady Van Harpen, and Stephanie Bernander); (16) Disrupting the University Curriculum: Engaging Preservice Teachers in a Study Abroad "Passport" Activity (Virginia R. Massaro, Joan A. Rhodes, and Sharon Zumbrunn); (17) "If You're Not Reading, You're Not Growing": Exploring the Reading Habits of Preservice Teachers in a Children's Literature Course (Bethanie Pletcher and Tomas Espinosa); (18) Shaping and Being Shaped: Exploring Preservice Teachers' Literacy Autobiographies (Stacey J. Korson and Connie Beckner Hodge); (19) Supporting Literacy Teaching Through Rehearsal (Nicholas Husbye); (20) Phonics and Phonemic Awareness in a Teacher Preparation Program: An Analysis of the Achievement and Perceptions of Pre-Service Teachers (Stacey Bose); (21) The Power of Family Involvement: Preparing Preservice Teachers to Understand More about the Out of School Literacy Lives and Cultures of Children (Kathryn V. Dixon, Martha M. Foote, and Juan J. Araujo with Rhonda Clark, Carol Revelle, and Tami Morton); (22) Supporting the Literacy Development of At-Risk First Time College Students through the Exploration of Language and Culture (Connie Briggs, Patricia A. Watson, and Ivan Dole); and (23) Exploring the Reading Strategy Use of EFL College Students: Tri-lingual Chinese Students Attending a University in Korea (Kay Hong-Nam and Susan Szabo). [For the Thirty-Ninth Yearbook, see ED594524.]

This self-study program for the high-school level contains lessons on: What to Look for in Narrative Writing, Interpreting Figurative Writing, Keeping Track of the Subject in Writing, and Reading Literature for Understanding. Each of the lessons concludes with a Mastery Test to be completed by the student. (DB)

This self-study program for the high-school level contains lessons on: What to Look for in Narrative Writing, Interpreting Figurative Writing, Keeping Track of the Subject in Writing, and Reading Literature for Understanding. Each of the lessons concludes with a Mastery Test to be completed by the student. (DB)

Literacy is essential for societal success, education, and employment (Cooper et al., 2014). In alphabetic languages, teaching children systematic letter-sound relationships enables them to read words aloud (phonic decoding), allowing them access to word meanings based on their oral vocabulary knowledge. This is described as the print-to-sound-to-meaning pathway (Coltheart et al., 2001; Gough & Tunmer, 1986; Harm & Seidenberg, 2004). Theories propose that children then build a direct print-to-meaning pathway, which is ultimately a more efficient way to comprehend text. However, extensive reading experience is needed to build these direct mappings, since they are not systematic and therefore require whole-word knowledge (e.g., the meaning of CAP is unrelated to CAT, CUP, or TAP; Coltheart et al., 2001; Harm & Seidenberg, 2004). There is limited evidence supporting the idea that reading experience drives a shift from phonic decoding to whole-word reading. For example, older relative to younger children show reduced effects of print-to-sound consistency (Grainger et al., 2012; Waters et al., 1984) and word length (Kwok et al., 2017; Zoccolotti et al., 2005). However, we do not know how consistency and length effects develop longitudinally due to real-world experience with words. This longitudinal study therefore investigates if children’s reliance on phonic decoding when reading year 5 curriculum words decreases over the school year in which they learn them. More specifically, it will compare how word length and spelling-to-sound consistency influence children’s reading accuracy and response time at the end of year 4 (before they have experience with these words) and again at the end of year 5 (after they have experience with these words). It will also test if word spelling (precision of whole-word written form knowledge) and/or understanding (whole-word meaning knowledge) of these same items predicts improvements in reading response time and accuracy. Results will be relevant for optimising literacy instruction since they will show how reading efficiency is supported by the precision of children’s spelling and understanding of words. ​​References​ Coltheart, M., Rastle, K., Perry, C., Langdon, R., & Ziegler, J. (2001). DRC: A dual route cascaded model of visual word recognition and reading aloud. Psychological Review, 108(1), 204–256. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.108.1.204 Cooper, B. R., Moore, J. E., Powers, C. J., Cleveland, M., & Greenberg, M. T. (2014). Patterns of early reading and social skills associated with academic success in elementary School. Early Education and Development, 25(8), 1248–1264. https://doi.org/10.1080/10409289.2014.932236 Gough, P. B., & Tunmer, W. E. (1986). Decoding, reading, and reading disability. Remedial and Special Education, 7(1), 6–10. https://doi.org/10.1177/074193258600700104 Grainger, J., Lété, B., Bertand, D., Dufau, S., & Ziegler, J. C. (2012). Evidence for multiple routes in learning to read. Cognition, 123(2), 280–292. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2012.01.003 Harm, M. W., & Seidenberg, M. S. (2004). Computing the meanings of words in reading: Cooperative division of labor between visual and phonological processes. Psychological Review, 111(3), 662–720. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.111.3.662 Kwok, R. K. W., Cuetos, F., Avdyli, R., & Ellis, A. W. (2017). Reading and Lexicalization in Opaque and Transparent Orthographies: Word Naming and Word Learning in English and Spanish. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 70(10), 2105–2129. https://doi.org/10.1080/17470218.2016.1223705 Waters, G. S., Seidenberg, M. S., & Bruck, M. (1984). Children’s and adults’ use of spelling-sound information in three reading tasks. Memory & Cognition, 12(3), 293–305. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03197678 Zoccolotti, P., De Luca, M., Di Pace, E., Gasperini, F., Judica, A., & Spinelli, D. (2005). Word length effect in early reading and in developmental dyslexia. Brain and Language, 93(3), 369–373. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bandl.2004.10.010

The role of children's literature in helping children make sense of themselves, their experiences and their worlds either in a classroom setting or in a more therapeutic context has been well documented. What has not been researched as far as we know is the use of children's literature in the college classroom as a means of enabling students to address difficult topics such as issues of oppression and social justice in a manner that is less overwhelming and less threatening. At one Connecticut University children's literature was used in numerous classes in both early childhood education and sociology as a means of facilitating student compassion and empathy for others. Whole group read-alouds of children's literature proved to be an effective tool to help students take the risk of confronting and knowing their own personal views and then make powerful connections to those of others.

The role of children's literature in helping children make sense of themselves, their experiences and their worlds either in a classroom setting or in a more therapeutic context has been well documented. What has not been researched as far as we know is the use of children's literature in the college classroom as a means of enabling students to address difficult topics such as issues of oppression and social justice in a manner that is less overwhelming and less threatening. At one Connecticut University children's literature was used in numerous classes in both early childhood education and sociology as a means of facilitating student compassion and empathy for others. Whole group read-alouds of children's literature proved to be an effective tool to help students take the risk of confronting and knowing their own personal views and then make powerful connections to those of others.

Approved For Release 2003/07/31 : CIA-RDP80R01731R001700280005-3 mop SUBJECT: .1 I'Clt: Ir. ilec.con ttatemr:t of Understanding and. Agreolienl, Used in Connection with Apr)licati:,rs' for -a vent with the Agency. With reference to rej memoranda-1 of 20 October 1551i above subjec L an1 to our conversation of yesterd.sv, there is attached a rwisec orsion of iy suggested paper to le rookle first sten _in all a- -,lications for cerisloymeat by the kiency. The lvlsic tought behind this paper is twofold: that applicants understand at the tise of applrat; where the.; star I regardf_ng, employ:1=i, rith the Agency - not after a cast -As developed :nto a ;ftiatnrequ1rin,7, the int .rventi Office of 1-1.e Insp. c: Lor -Fence-al, and that th ',111 UrtiCilt.ndta 7 be made a natter rcc-n--;!. Probl:fly neithe:. thir -fro-v_ssed. procedure nor ark,- ot-er ;?:culd be /00 percent efftiT hu _ feel that !_7 r;that her wt.bsurrx:-.E-to vrot:1 d :saw 9 a desirable Lifer t ri a high ,e a:' t refusals. There is a35o attached a 514:1,7ec t-34 fere letter be to unsuccessfu2 ar_ralicants vten it is felt the fact ii atv !_ne make fun-doh/nu, a w?itten -9tatenlart zelilrvriate. WG: ick (20 !:Tovevl:er 1 Enclosures: 2. Paper "To All . . . etc. 2. Porn Letter Approved For Release 2003/07/31 : CIA-RDP80R01731R001700280005-3 Approved For Release 2003/07/31 : CIA-RDP80R01731R001700280005-3 To all, persons applying fo-1.- eapleynent with the Central Intelligence Agency: This paper ::s the .f.t?--3t ate in applying foreztolo!haerr-r:.'. Jrt.' Celt 111t1 t. status with the Central L-ntelligence Agency. No application pr :ceet beyond this first step if the apolicant is not in agreenert conditions stated below. General. Considerations: 1. The National :3ocuriti Let of 24 July 1947 - eitatior -whJc1 created the Central intor.j7ence Agency :-)laces nor the Loc t it responsibilitz, ( "Co advise the National ziecnrit,- Council ix re.c.1,m'E coacer-ling such Lnteilirence aciiirities of tte-goveralerrt, departnents and aFenc tho nat.1 vial. ec,17 'kr; (2) $1'20 MO) reenTrienk ationa to the Nett Jnal Secur: Council :or the ccordination of such intelligerce activities of the departments aud agencies of t Governisent 13 releta to the national secur1t-4-; (3) 453 correlate and evaluate intelligence relatiug to the national security, and IrOVICie for the appronries.1 diescualnatioh of suci, intelligence within the Cc.nru.-(14) "re performs, for the benefit of the ecristik; Letc.11-i-game agencies, such additional services of colmon concern as the National 54-uritlit- Comeil determines can be more offtnierrtly accosrplishect centrally; ar.d (5) "To perform such otner funoi,ions end duties mlate,: to intelligence affecting the national sectx, itg National Security 3ouncil may fr.= tile to Uzi The special character of tlis national responsibility requr3 the Acne to maintain correepondingl; special epploynent criteria dtitorTit fr the routine or normal ennlo:,-ment standards of other Goverment [147)112- nenT. Approved For Release 2003/07/31 : CIA-RDP80R01731R001700280005-3 Approved For Release 2003/07/31 : CIA-RDP80R01731R001700280005-3 - 2 - and agencies which do not rc the highly sensitive responsiAiity 'iTTLii 'by the Central Intell_igence Agene. It rollows tha', the invest or applicants prerequisite to their acceptance on a permanent baste a time-conaurdng process. This is called "clearalcoo 2. ?allure of an app2.icant to 1: c cleared -,3a; come about in el two way's: a. Clearenccz ri vi7:71Z-11.;;-7 Cik2 ire a ninidus of six weeks., circumstr..1,cesSU flL oLie Applications require such .3o:ter:sive Investigatn -Lhatth placed the Agency' 3 inves tii3; t I: t:-tat nett oblie,es e cstablishxt, of, al- cut31.-..- snffici set positive evidence to (dk-,Ex arv: .icalt U n?JC. ?btatnetl vrith is tile t arie the inv, ? Tati!.on 1i droppxi ark.)licaot

Approved For Release 2003/07/31 : CIA-RDP80R01731R001700280005-3 mop SUBJECT: .1 I'Clt: Ir. ilec.con ttatemr:t of Understanding and. Agreolienl, Used in Connection with Apr)licati:,rs' for -a vent with the Agency. With reference to rej memoranda-1 of 20 October 1551i above subjec L an1 to our conversation of yesterd.sv, there is attached a rwisec orsion of iy suggested paper to le rookle first sten _in all a- -,lications for cerisloymeat by the kiency. The lvlsic tought behind this paper is twofold: that applicants understand at the tise of applrat; where the.; star I regardf_ng, employ:1=i, rith the Agency - not after a cast -As developed :nto a ;ftiatnrequ1rin,7, the int .rventi Office of 1-1.e Insp. c: Lor -Fence-al, and that th ',111 UrtiCilt.ndta 7 be made a natter rcc-n--;!. Probl:fly neithe:. thir -fro-v_ssed. procedure nor ark,- ot-er ;?:culd be /00 percent efftiT hu _ feel that !_7 r;that her wt.bsurrx:-.E-to vrot:1 d :saw 9 a desirable Lifer t ri a high ,e a:' t refusals. There is a35o attached a 514:1,7ec t-34 fere letter be to unsuccessfu2 ar_ralicants vten it is felt the fact ii atv !_ne make fun-doh/nu, a w?itten -9tatenlart zelilrvriate. WG: ick (20 !:Tovevl:er 1 Enclosures: 2. Paper "To All . . . etc. 2. Porn Letter Approved For Release 2003/07/31 : CIA-RDP80R01731R001700280005-3 Approved For Release 2003/07/31 : CIA-RDP80R01731R001700280005-3 To all, persons applying fo-1.- eapleynent with the Central Intelligence Agency: This paper ::s the .f.t?--3t ate in applying foreztolo!haerr-r:.'. Jrt.' Celt 111t1 t. status with the Central L-ntelligence Agency. No application pr :ceet beyond this first step if the apolicant is not in agreenert conditions stated below. General. Considerations: 1. The National :3ocuriti Let of 24 July 1947 - eitatior -whJc1 created the Central intor.j7ence Agency :-)laces nor the Loc t it responsibilitz, ( "Co advise the National ziecnrit,- Council ix re.c.1,m'E coacer-ling such Lnteilirence aciiirities of tte-goveralerrt, departnents and aFenc tho nat.1 vial. ec,17 'kr; (2) $1'20 MO) reenTrienk ationa to the Nett Jnal Secur: Council :or the ccordination of such intelligerce activities of the departments aud agencies of t Governisent 13 releta to the national secur1t-4-; (3) 453 correlate and evaluate intelligence relatiug to the national security, and IrOVICie for the appronries.1 diescualnatioh of suci, intelligence within the Cc.nru.-(14) "re performs, for the benefit of the ecristik; Letc.11-i-game agencies, such additional services of colmon concern as the National 54-uritlit- Comeil determines can be more offtnierrtly accosrplishect centrally; ar.d (5) "To perform such otner funoi,ions end duties mlate,: to intelligence affecting the national sectx, itg National Security 3ouncil may fr.= tile to Uzi The special character of tlis national responsibility requr3 the Acne to maintain correepondingl; special epploynent criteria dtitorTit fr the routine or normal ennlo:,-ment standards of other Goverment [147)112- nenT. Approved For Release 2003/07/31 : CIA-RDP80R01731R001700280005-3 Approved For Release 2003/07/31 : CIA-RDP80R01731R001700280005-3 - 2 - and agencies which do not rc the highly sensitive responsiAiity 'iTTLii 'by the Central Intell_igence Agene. It rollows tha', the invest or applicants prerequisite to their acceptance on a permanent baste a time-conaurdng process. This is called "clearalcoo 2. ?allure of an app2.icant to 1: c cleared -,3a; come about in el two way's: a. Clearenccz ri vi7:71Z-11.;;-7 Cik2 ire a ninidus of six weeks., circumstr..1,cesSU flL oLie Applications require such .3o:ter:sive Investigatn -Lhatth placed the Agency' 3 inves tii3; t I: t:-tat nett oblie,es e cstablishxt, of, al- cut31.-..- snffici set positive evidence to (dk-,Ex arv: .icalt U n?JC. ?btatnetl vrith is tile t arie the inv, ? Tati!.on 1i droppxi ark.)licaot

No Description

Approved For Release 2008/06/11 :CIA-RDP85B01152R001001310031-0 ? ? ROUTING AND RECORD SHEET SUBJECT: (Optional) Memorandum of Understanding (~~10U) , Support for the Analyst IDD~A RagieLr~ Fi 1 e Environment (SAFE) Program Advisor 4~ FROM` DD/ICS ODP D EXTENSION No. pCI/ICS 83-3766 / DATE 21 June 1983 TO: (Officer designation, room number, and building) DATE OFFICER'S COMMENTS (Number each comment to show from whom RECEIVED FORWARDED INITIALS ro whom. Draw a line across column after each comment.) 1? ~DDA ~~ 9~' 9$ ti .~~ e9 ~,,A z. ~~'J ~^~ L9 1983 ~Y YY Y~' s=/D1~ ~i7lYi~~ ^- 4. g' 0 ST s. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. il. 12. 13. 14. 15. FORM 61 O USEDITIONSUS I-79 AT Approved For Release 2008/06/11 :CIA-RDP85B01152R001001310031-0 Approved For Release 2008/06/11 :CIA-RDP85B01152R001001310031-0 ? DCI/ICS 83-3766 21 June 1983 Memorandum of Understanding ((d0U), Support for the Analysts' File Environment (SAFE} Program Advisor a program advisor, has been assigned to provide regular STAT and continuing independent assessments on the health of the SAFE program. 0 STAT 1. As a consequence of the SAFE program redirection last summer, the SAFE project now commands high visibility within the Intelligence Community and receives continuing congressional interest. In support of senior managers, who have continued their close attention to the programs' evolution, will su ort and re ort directly to Director of STAT This position, which is purely advisory in nature, excludes any responsibility for the day-to-day management of the SAFE program. Day-to-day management responsibilities clearly reside with the manager of the Consolidated SAFE Project Office (CSPO), who reports to senior managers in both CIA and DIA, who have accepted complete accountability for the success or failure of the SAFE program. the IC Staff, and Director of Data Processing (D/ODP). STAT 2. will assume a dual role, as both an IC Staff advisor and a SAFE consultant. As information is gathered on program issues affecting SAFE development, system quality assurance, and operations support, an objective and ongoing review of the SAFE program will be provided. Operating guidelines established to outline interaction with SAFE program personnel and to facilitate the regular exchange of information on SAFE are as follows: - Regular contact with the program Quality Assurance Contractor, Geodynamics Corporation, contingent on prior coordination with the CSPO program manager and COTR. - Access to CSPO project personnel down to CSPO sectional managers and their deputies and senior CIA and DIA user representatives. - Attendance at meetings to include design reviews, monthly management and technical meetings, weekly segment status meetings, and special conferences on significant project initiatives. - Access to project documents to include official contractor documentation, contractor monthly reports, calendar of major scheduled SAFE meetings and formal reports prepared by CSPO. UNCLASSIFIED STAT STAT Approved For Release 2008/06/11 :CIA-RDP85B01152R001001310031-0 Approved For Release 2008/06/11 :CIA-RDP85B01152R001001310031-0 ? Access to information and ersonnel according to these guidelines will be afforded to to enable the development of useful program STAT assessments. STAT AD/ICS // D/ODP E oise R. Pag Approved For Release 2008/06/11 :CIA-RDP85B01152R001001310031-0

-Approved For Release 2000/08/ 0500080011-8 Assistant Director, Special Operations Earetutive for Administration and Management 6 August 1947 Memorandum of Understanding - Security Maintenance for Deployeen Transferred from Vouchered Funds to OSO Unveuchered Funde 1. Attention is invited to attached oepy of Memorandum of Understanding between personnel of your Office and mine. A si ned cop is an file in my office, and I assume that MMMra also have copies. 2. 1 believe that the procedure agreed upon will obviate further difficulty of the type indicated in your memorandum of 2 July. 4 I nolosures 1. Memo 2 July it ADSO to PCI re Security Breach 2. Mew 24 June fr 3. Memo 23 June tr 4. Cy Memo t nderstan ng mibt 1#s, #0 cbaA$!t % Mos. 0 r-I 4440004 L_j C` a R ai1rasged To: Approved For Release 2000/08/28 : CIA-RDP78-04718A000500080011-8 25X1C Approved For Release 2000/08/28 : CIA-RDP78-04718A000500080011-8 Approved For Release 2000/08/28 : CIA-RDP78-04718A000500080011-8 Approved For Release 2000/08/28 : CIA-RDP78-04718A000500080011-8 MISSING PAGE ORIGINAL DOCUMENT MISSING PAGE(S): Approved For Release 2000/08/28 : CIA-RDP78-04718A000500080011-8

This document offers materials for a year-long course on general basic reading skills that was part of a workplace literacy project developed by Mercer County Community College (New Jersey), and its partners. The document contains the following: (1) outlines (each of which contains objectives, a topical outline, and list of textbooks) for two parts of the course; (2) diaries describing how a teacher conducted each part of the course; (3) lists of sample vocabulary; (4) lists of supplies, equipment, and procedures for particular work tasks (cleaning a restroom, cleaning a water fountain, and cleaning a showerroom); (5) handouts containing questions for the learner to answer in writing; and (6) spelling assignments. Ten references are listed. (CML)

In a few urban elementary schools, in-depth, literature-based discussions are taking place under the Junior Great Books Program. For years, Junior Great Books has been a program available to limited numbers of students in special settings. Beginning in 1993, funding from the Ameritech Foundation allowed the Great Books Foundation to support the program as part of the regular curriculum in five urban school districts. Five years later, the Program has substantial evidence that its approach of engaging students in "shared inquiry" about literature's most abiding themes can thrive in high-poverty schools. Program staff have also learned that the implementation of Junior Great Books varies from school to school, classroom to classroom, and teacher to teacher depending on a variety of factors. This report provides a snapshot of three schools using the Junior Great Books Program. Information from the report was derived from site visits, participation in the Junior Great Books leader training, and participation in focus groups about the program. The report lists 10 specific lessons learned about the use of this program in urban schools. Taken together, the 10 lessons show that the poorest students in the United States can benefit from a high quality curriculum that provides all students with opportunities to engage with literature through reading and discussion. (SLD)

In a few urban elementary schools, in-depth, literature-based discussions are taking place under the Junior Great Books Program. For years, Junior Great Books has been a program available to limited numbers of students in special settings. Beginning in 1993, funding from the Ameritech Foundation allowed the Great Books Foundation to support the program as part of the regular curriculum in five urban school districts. Five years later, the Program has substantial evidence that its approach of engaging students in "shared inquiry" about literature's most abiding themes can thrive in high-poverty schools. Program staff have also learned that the implementation of Junior Great Books varies from school to school, classroom to classroom, and teacher to teacher depending on a variety of factors. This report provides a snapshot of three schools using the Junior Great Books Program. Information from the report was derived from site visits, participation in the Junior Great Books leader training, and participation in focus groups about the program. The report lists 10 specific lessons learned about the use of this program in urban schools. Taken together, the 10 lessons show that the poorest students in the United States can benefit from a high quality curriculum that provides all students with opportunities to engage with literature through reading and discussion. (SLD)

In a few urban elementary schools, in-depth, literature-based discussions are taking place under the Junior Great Books Program. For years, Junior Great Books has been a program available to limited numbers of students in special settings. Beginning in 1993, funding from the Ameritech Foundation allowed the Great Books Foundation to support the program as part of the regular curriculum in five urban school districts. Five years later, the Program has substantial evidence that its approach of engaging students in "shared inquiry" about literature's most abiding themes can thrive in high-poverty schools. Program staff have also learned that the implementation of Junior Great Books varies from school to school, classroom to classroom, and teacher to teacher depending on a variety of factors. This report provides a snapshot of three schools using the Junior Great Books Program. Information from the report was derived from site visits, participation in the Junior Great Books leader training, and participation in focus groups about the program. The report lists 10 specific lessons learned about the use of this program in urban schools. Taken together, the 10 lessons show that the poorest students in the United States can benefit from a high quality curriculum that provides all students with opportunities to engage with literature through reading and discussion. (SLD)

The Regional Educational Laboratory (REL) Southeast developed a Professional Learning Community (PLC) Facilitators Guide to support educators in the implementation of recommendations from the What Works Clearinghouse's. The practice guide focuses on the foundational reading skills that enable students to read words, relate those words to their oral language, and read connected text with sufficient accuracy and fluency to understand what they read. The practice guide, developed by a panel of experts comprised of researchers and practitioners, presents four recommendations that educators can use to improve literacy skills in the early grades. Professional Learning Communities (PLCs) are a form of professional development in which small groups of educators with shared interests work together with the goals of expanding their knowledge and improving their craft. REL Southeast developed PLC materials focused on the practice guide that were designed to assist a literacy leader in guiding a professional learning community in applying the recommendations from the practice guide. The materials include a facilitator's guide, participant activities, and YouTube videos. The facilitator's guide includes a framework for facilitators to conduct each of the ten PLC sessions. It also includes participant activities, discussion questions, small- and whole-group activities, and implementation and reflection activities. The participant's activities include reflection questions, lesson plan examples and templates, video-viewing guides, and sharing opportunities. The videos illustrate practices presented in the foundational reading skills practice guide. [For the Facilitator's Guide, see ED569149. For "Foundational Skills to Support Reading for Understanding in Kindergarten through 3rd Grade. Educator's Practice Guide. NCEE 2016-4008," see ED566956.]

No Description

No Description

Course objectives for the three credit hour Lakota Oral Literature (college level English) course presented in this publication are to: perceive through the reading and hearing of Lakota legends a better understanding of the known world of the Lakota people which existed prior to white contact; understand the origin of the laws which the Lakota people obeyed throughout centuries to the present; appreciate the world of the supernatural and its relationship with the Lakota people; understand that an oral tradition has as much validity and importance as a written tradition; and understand the source of reasoning in the Lakota sense as conveyed through the oral tradition. Each of the six individual units presented in this publication includes sections devoted to: (1) organization of the unit for the instructor; (2) unit objectives; (3) reading materials; (4) "important facts" (precepts); and (5) discussion topics or activities. The six units are titled as follows: "The Creation of the Universe and the Creation of Living Creatures"; "The Circle of Evil Spirits"; "The Order of Things"; "The Lakota People Come to the Earth"; "Ohunkakan"; and "Ehanni Wicowoyake". Also included are a supplementary bibliography (23 entries) and a filmography (10 entries). (JC)

This guide offers a set of 13 lessons designed to help learners understand the components of reading that are part of becoming a more fluent reader, and to guide them as they work with the teacher to set their own goals for reading. The lessons can be used as an independent mini-course, or they can be integrated into an existing curriculum. The guide is not intended as a comprehensive reading course or curriculum; rather, it can inform teachers and students as they plan learning activities that address the goals and skill needs of learners. For example, some learners, particularly those at a beginning reading level, may benefit from a highly structured curriculum of direct reading instruction, and this guide can help point them in that direction. The guide is for teachers of adult basic education learners who read at a 0-6 reading level. Students can take the information they learn from the lessons in this guide and apply it directly to their own reading. It can also be adapted for use with ESOL learners. However, some activities are not appropriate or may need to be modified for beginning-level ESOL learners. The 13 lessons are: (1) The Demands of Reading; (2) Goals for Reading, Part 1; (3) Goals for Reading, Part 2; (4) The Components of Reading; (5) Analyzing Words; (6) Reading Words by Sight; (7) Reading with Fluency; (8) Developing Reading Vocabulary; (9) Developing Reading Comprehension; (10) Developing an Individual Reading Profile; (11) Reviewing the Individual Reading Profile; (12) Understanding Learning Disabilities; and (13) Improving Your Spelling (Optional). Appended is a Goals List. [This publication was developed with Ashley Hager, Barbara Garner, Cristine Smith, Mary Beth Bingman, Lenore Balliro, Lisa Mullins, Lou Anna Guidry, and Susan McShane. "NCSALL Teaching Materials" are funded by the Educational Research and Development Centers program, as administered by the Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education, through contract to Harvard University.]

To better understand the early stages of literacy, a study investigated how young children learn about the registers of the written story genre. Subjects, 47 kindergraten children, were individually read to and then asked to "pretend-read" one or two selected picture storybooks on three consecutive days; their readings were audiotaped and their comments--with the adult's responses--were also recorded. Results of a textual-linguistic analysis showed that by the third reading, children's pretend readings were already close approximations of the actual text, although all of the children had been initially unfamiliar with the stories. Findings indicated (1) that these approximations could not be explained simply in terms of rote memory; and (2) that, by the time they reach kindergarten, children are fairly sensitive to written language registers; (3) that the development of these registers, characterized by various kinds of approximations and overextensions, is a constructive process in children's cognitive/linguistic development; and (4) that some element triggers children to create implicit rather than explicit meanings from texts, allowing them to learn to read by reading. Overall, findings suggested that the message dimension of written language provides an important continuity from prereading to reading. (The two stories used in the study, coding examples of the token types for each book, a 10-page bibliography, and extensive statistical data are appended.) (JD)

235 pages :

Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2010/12/08: CIA-RDP57-00011A001000130002-0 SLLKd Copy orb. 21 May 1956 i(1 A}DUM F W, s Fro3.e% Comwadcations officer :iI' CT I UndWttWdtr% Coaosening Caiunioatitn: Sepnriee for Project Slietrs E:7 i. 9 IN C`E dated 19 My 19%. from Project Lsat1ocas Of floor to J. A. OWn TrA rsfersom .-i is in a rrant with the discusslva held 15 Way 1956 on the sbosubject mad the aotises proposed in pars ! thsreot most with rp- spprovsl for ip1.mentation. J. A. aim 0620"Is Deputy Pro3..t Dira tee 1 - Comm 2 - Ops 3 - Matedtiel L A *tn/Seourity 5-JAG 6 - Chron. Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2010/12/08: CIA-RDP57-0001 lAO01000130002-0

Approved For Release 2008/08/21: CIA-RDP90BO1370R000200270007-4 STAT Approved For Release 2008/08/21: CIA-RDP90BO1370R000200270007-4 Approved For Release 2008/08/21: CIA-RDP90BO1370R000200270007-4 16 AUG 1984 MEMORANDUM FOR: Deputy Director for Intelligence Deputy Director for Operations Deputy Director for Science and Technology General Counsel Inspector General Director, Office of Legislative Liaison Comptroller Director, Public Affairs Office FROM: Harry E. Fitzwater Deputy Director for Administration SUBJECT: Luncheon Briefings for the Brookings Institution Public Policy Conference for Corporate Executives on Understanding Federal Government Operations, 1984 - 1985 1. The Brookings Institution has requested that the Agency participate in its Public Policy Conference for Corporate .Executives on Understanding Federal Government Operations. This is to request that you and your Deputy serve as host at two of 12 luncheon briefings in 1984 - 1985. We also ask your cooperation in identifying members of your staff to participate as table hosts and discussants in the briefings. 2. Dates for the 1984 - 1985 programs are attached. The format for the programs will continue as in the past: luncheon in the Executive Dining Room at 1200 hours, followed by a briefing in the DCI Conference Room at 1300 hours concluding at 1400 hours. The first program will be held on Tuesday (23 Oct) instead of Friday (26 Oct) because of conflict in dates. You or your Deputy would serve as hosts for the sessions, with middle- to senior- level Agency officers participating as luncheon table hosts and discussants during the briefing. The latter will consist of a 10 to 15 minute overview of the CIA and the Intelligence Community by the host, followed by a question and answer period in which the Agency discussants, selected for their geographic and functional expertise, will participate by answering questions from the Brookings Conference visitors. The cost of the luncheons are borne by the Brookings Institution. Approved For Release 2008/08/21: CIA-RDP90BO1370R000200270007-4 ti Approved For Release 2008/08/21 : CIA-RDP90B01370R000200270007-4 SUBJECT: Luncheon Briefings for the Brookings Institution Public Policy Conference for Corporate Executives on Understanding Federal Government Operations, 1984 - 1985 3. I hope that these programs will continue to receive your support. Will you please forward a list of discussants with titles, geographic areas of expe . -e- office maili t1r addresses and telephone extensions to OTE 7~ STAT Special Progra ms Officer, 1032 Chamber a U ding. Your Executive Officer should contact 7 if there are STAT any questions regarding the re aration o ese lists. She may be reached on extension STAT Signed-. James H. McDonald Harry E. Fitzwater Attachment: As stated 2 Approved For Release 2008/08/21: CIA-RDP90B01370R000200270007-4 Approved For Release 2008/08/21: CIA-RDP90B01370R000200270007-4 SUBJECT: Luncheon Briefings for the Brookings Institution Public Policy Conference for Corporate Executives on Understanding Federal Government Operations, 1984 - 1985 The dates for the 1984 - 1985 Brookings Luncheon Briefings are as follows: 23 October 1984 (Tuesday) 30 November 1984 14 December 1984 8 February 1985 8 March 1985 22 March 1985 19 April 1985 3 May 1985 10 May 1985 24 May 1985 7 June 1985 21 June 1985 Approved For Release 2008/08/21: CIA-RDP90B01370R000200270007-4

Health statements frequently include explicit sentential negation: negative phrases that feature the negators 'no' or 'not', such as, 'This drug should not be taken on an empty stomach' (Burgers et al., 2015; Ibrahim & Idrus, 2021). There is, however, little understanding of (a) whether health statements with explicit sentential negation, as compared to positive health statements, are attended, understood and remembered with more difficulty; and (b) whether increased negation salience improves readers’ performance. Four online experiments and one eye tracking experiment were run to assess the effects of negation on the processing of health statements. In Experiment 1, participants read the statements normally for comprehension and pressed a key to indicate that they had finished reading (https://osf.io/s7gr9). Participants also answered comprehension questions immediately after reading each statement and in a delayed block. The designs of Experiment 2 and Experiment 3 were similar to that of Experiment 1, except that participants were instructed to skim read the statements. The statements were presented on screen for a limited duration to encourage skim reading, corresponding to 365 words per minute in Experiment 2 (https://osf.io/v8uk6), and 450 words per minute in Experiment 3 (https://osf.io/7tb8f). In Experiment 4 (https://osf.io/ys6m5), participants read the statements normally for comprehension, but only responded to comprehension questions in a delayed block. In Experiment 5 (https://osf.io/wy7d3), the statements were presented on screen for a limited duration to encourage skim reading, corresponding to 450 words per minute. In addition, readers eye movements were recorded. In each experiment, health statements, in the form of whole sentences, were presented to young adults aged 18-35. The statements were presented in three conditions: without negation, with negation (i.e. with the addition of ‘no’ or ‘not’) and with salient negation. In the salient condition, the negator (‘no’ or ‘not’) was bold and underlined. Sentence reading time (Expts 1 and 4) and evaluation time (Expts 1-5) were assessed, along with accuracy on comprehension questions presented at the two time-points (Expts 1-3, 5) to test for differences in understanding and remembering respectively; or at the delayed time-point only (Expt 4). In Expt 5, eye movement measures will be assessed. At present, the data for Expt 5 has not been analysed. The online experiments overall revealed that comprehension accuracy was poorer for statements containing negations, but that this effect was diminished when negations were made more visually salient. One possibility is that poorer comprehension and memory of negation may be linked to skipping of the negators. Short and commonly used negators such as 'no' and 'not' may be fixated less often. Research indicates that skipped words may not be processed to the same level as fixated words (Eskenazi & Folk, 2014). Therefore, if negators are skipped, this may result in less accurate understanding and remembering of health statements with negation. Making the negator more salient may reduce the likelihood that it is skipped. The current experiment aims to determine whether poor comprehension of negated statements is driven by eye movement behaviour. Participants will be instructed to read health statements, with their eye-movements being recorded to provide precise temporal and spatial information for online reading behaviour. Participants will answer comprehension questions immediately, after reading each statement, and in a delayed block. Crucially, this experiment aims to test whether making the negator salient results in modulation of reading behaviour, e.g. lower likelihood of skipping the negator, and longer fixation times on or after the negator; and whether these differences in eye-movement patterns are related to better comprehension for statements with salient negation.

Health statements frequently include explicit sentential negation: negative phrases that feature the negators 'no' or 'not', such as, 'This drug should not be taken on an empty stomach' (Burgers et al., 2015; Ibrahim & Idrus, 2021). There is, however, little understanding of (a) whether health statements with explicit sentential negation, as compared to positive health statements, are attended, understood and remembered with more difficulty; and (b) whether increased negation salience improves readers’ performance. Four online experiments and one eye tracking experiment were run to assess the effects of negation on the processing of health statements. In Experiment 1, participants read the statements normally for comprehension and pressed a key to indicate that they had finished reading (https://osf.io/s7gr9). Participants also answered comprehension questions immediately after reading each statement and in a delayed block. The designs of Experiment 2 and Experiment 3 were similar to that of Experiment 1, except that participants were instructed to skim read the statements. The statements were presented on screen for a limited duration to encourage skim reading, corresponding to 365 words per minute in Experiment 2 (https://osf.io/v8uk6), and 450 words per minute in Experiment 3 (https://osf.io/7tb8f). In Experiment 4 (https://osf.io/ys6m5), participants read the statements normally for comprehension, but only responded to comprehension questions in a delayed block. In Experiment 5 (https://osf.io/wy7d3), the statements were presented on screen for a limited duration to encourage skim reading, corresponding to 450 words per minute. In addition, readers eye movements were recorded. In each experiment, health statements, in the form of whole sentences, were presented to young adults aged 18-35. The statements were presented in three conditions: without negation, with negation (i.e. with the addition of ‘no’ or ‘not’) and with salient negation. In the salient condition, the negator (‘no’ or ‘not’) was bold and underlined. Sentence reading time (Expts 1 and 4) and evaluation time (Expts 1-5) were assessed, along with accuracy on comprehension questions presented at the two time-points (Expts 1-3, 5) to test for differences in understanding and remembering respectively; or at the delayed time-point only (Expt 4). In Expt 5, eye movement measures will be assessed. At present, the data for Expt 5 has not been analysed. The online experiments overall revealed that comprehension accuracy was poorer for statements containing negations, but that this effect was diminished when negations were made more visually salient. One possibility is that poorer comprehension and memory of negation may be linked to skipping of the negators. Short and commonly used negators such as 'no' and 'not' may be fixated less often. Research indicates that skipped words may not be processed to the same level as fixated words (Eskenazi & Folk, 2014). Therefore, if negators are skipped, this may result in less accurate understanding and remembering of health statements with negation. Making the negator more salient may reduce the likelihood that it is skipped. The current experiment aims to determine whether poor comprehension of negated statements is driven by eye movement behaviour. Participants will be instructed to read health statements, with their eye-movements being recorded to provide precise temporal and spatial information for online reading behaviour. Participants will answer comprehension questions immediately, after reading each statement, and in a delayed block. Crucially, this experiment aims to test whether making the negator salient results in modulation of reading behaviour, e.g. lower likelihood of skipping the negator, and longer fixation times on or after the negator; and whether these differences in eye-movement patterns are related to better comprehension for statements with salient negation.

Health statements frequently include explicit sentential negation: negative phrases that feature the negators 'no' or 'not', such as, 'This drug should not be taken on an empty stomach' (Burgers et al., 2015; Ibrahim & Idrus, 2021). There is, however, little understanding of (a) whether health statements with explicit sentential negation, as compared to positive health statements, are attended, understood and remembered with more difficulty; and (b) whether increased negation salience improves readers’ performance. Four online experiments and one eye tracking experiment were run to assess the effects of negation on the processing of health statements. In Experiment 1, participants read the statements normally for comprehension and pressed a key to indicate that they had finished reading (https://osf.io/s7gr9). Participants also answered comprehension questions immediately after reading each statement and in a delayed block. The designs of Experiment 2 and Experiment 3 were similar to that of Experiment 1, except that participants were instructed to skim read the statements. The statements were presented on screen for a limited duration to encourage skim reading, corresponding to 365 words per minute in Experiment 2 (https://osf.io/v8uk6), and 450 words per minute in Experiment 3 (https://osf.io/7tb8f). In Experiment 4 (https://osf.io/ys6m5), participants read the statements normally for comprehension, but only responded to comprehension questions in a delayed block. In Experiment 5 (https://osf.io/wy7d3), the statements were presented on screen for a limited duration to encourage skim reading, corresponding to 450 words per minute. In addition, readers eye movements were recorded. In each experiment, health statements, in the form of whole sentences, were presented to young adults aged 18-35. The statements were presented in three conditions: without negation, with negation (i.e. with the addition of ‘no’ or ‘not’) and with salient negation. In the salient condition, the negator (‘no’ or ‘not’) was bold and underlined. Sentence reading time (Expts 1 and 4) and evaluation time (Expts 1-5) were assessed, along with accuracy on comprehension questions presented at the two time-points (Expts 1-3, 5) to test for differences in understanding and remembering respectively; or at the delayed time-point only (Expt 4). In Expt 5, eye movement measures will be assessed. At present, the data for Expt 5 has not been analysed. The online experiments overall revealed that comprehension accuracy was poorer for statements containing negations, but that this effect was diminished when negations were made more visually salient. One possibility is that poorer comprehension and memory of negation may be linked to skipping of the negators. Short and commonly used negators such as 'no' and 'not' may be fixated less often. Research indicates that skipped words may not be processed to the same level as fixated words (Eskenazi & Folk, 2014). Therefore, if negators are skipped, this may result in less accurate understanding and remembering of health statements with negation. Making the negator more salient may reduce the likelihood that it is skipped. The current experiment aims to determine whether poor comprehension of negated statements is driven by eye movement behaviour. Participants will be instructed to read health statements, with their eye-movements being recorded to provide precise temporal and spatial information for online reading behaviour. Participants will answer comprehension questions immediately, after reading each statement, and in a delayed block. Crucially, this experiment aims to test whether making the negator salient results in modulation of reading behaviour, e.g. lower likelihood of skipping the negator, and longer fixation times on or after the negator; and whether these differences in eye-movement patterns are related to better comprehension for statements with salient negation.

Health statements frequently include explicit sentential negation: negative phrases that feature the negators 'no' or 'not', such as, 'This drug should not be taken on an empty stomach' (Burgers et al., 2015; Ibrahim & Idrus, 2021). There is, however, little understanding of (a) whether health statements with explicit sentential negation, as compared to positive health statements, are attended, understood and remembered with more difficulty; and (b) whether increased negation salience improves readers’ performance. Four online experiments and one eye tracking experiment were run to assess the effects of negation on the processing of health statements. In Experiment 1, participants read the statements normally for comprehension and pressed a key to indicate that they had finished reading (https://osf.io/s7gr9). Participants also answered comprehension questions immediately after reading each statement and in a delayed block. The designs of Experiment 2 and Experiment 3 were similar to that of Experiment 1, except that participants were instructed to skim read the statements. The statements were presented on screen for a limited duration to encourage skim reading, corresponding to 365 words per minute in Experiment 2 (https://osf.io/v8uk6), and 450 words per minute in Experiment 3 (https://osf.io/7tb8f). In Experiment 4 (https://osf.io/ys6m5), participants read the statements normally for comprehension, but only responded to comprehension questions in a delayed block. In Experiment 5 (https://osf.io/wy7d3), the statements were presented on screen for a limited duration to encourage skim reading, corresponding to 450 words per minute. In addition, readers eye movements were recorded. In each experiment, health statements, in the form of whole sentences, were presented to young adults aged 18-35. The statements were presented in three conditions: without negation, with negation (i.e. with the addition of ‘no’ or ‘not’) and with salient negation. In the salient condition, the negator (‘no’ or ‘not’) was bold and underlined. Sentence reading time (Expts 1 and 4) and evaluation time (Expts 1-5) were assessed, along with accuracy on comprehension questions presented at the two time-points (Expts 1-3, 5) to test for differences in understanding and remembering respectively; or at the delayed time-point only (Expt 4). In Expt 5, eye movement measures will be assessed. At present, the data for Expt 5 has not been analysed. The online experiments overall revealed that comprehension accuracy was poorer for statements containing negations, but that this effect was diminished when negations were made more visually salient. One possibility is that poorer comprehension and memory of negation may be linked to skipping of the negators. Short and commonly used negators such as 'no' and 'not' may be fixated less often. Research indicates that skipped words may not be processed to the same level as fixated words (Eskenazi & Folk, 2014). Therefore, if negators are skipped, this may result in less accurate understanding and remembering of health statements with negation. Making the negator more salient may reduce the likelihood that it is skipped. The current experiment aims to determine whether poor comprehension of negated statements is driven by eye movement behaviour. Participants will be instructed to read health statements, with their eye-movements being recorded to provide precise temporal and spatial information for online reading behaviour. Participants will answer comprehension questions immediately, after reading each statement, and in a delayed block. Crucially, this experiment aims to test whether making the negator salient results in modulation of reading behaviour, e.g. lower likelihood of skipping the negator, and longer fixation times on or after the negator; and whether these differences in eye-movement patterns are related to better comprehension for statements with salient negation.

Source: Digital Library of India Scanning Centre: C-DAC, Noida Source Library: Central Library, University Delhi Date Accessioned: 9/23/2015 16:09 The Digital Library of India was a project under the auspices of the Government of India.

Source: Digital Library of India Scanning Centre: C-DAC, Noida Source Library: Central Library, University Delhi Date Accessioned: 9/23/2015 16:09 The Digital Library of India was a project under the auspices of the Government of India.

No Description

No Description

No Description

Approved For Release 2004/ I-__. 3 ....... SECRET TIE JOINT CHIEFS OF STAFF WASHINGTON, D.C. 1030: SM-13-67 6 January 1987 FOR: Chief of Staff, US Army Chief of Naval Operations Chief of Staff, US-Air.Force Commandant of the Marine Corps Commander in Chief, Alaska Commander in Chief, Atlantic Commander in Chief, Continental Air Defense Command ,US Commander in Chief, Europe Commander in Chief, Pacific Commander in Chief, US Strike Command/ US Commander in Chief, Middle East, Southern Asia, and Africa South of the Sahara Commander in Chief, Strategic Air Command Director, Defense Intelligence Agency intelligence Agency and the Department of Defense for;Mutual Support in Contingency Situations Short of General War (C) u men; of Defense or, u pp i of ,General War. of 1~ I I ! Forwar edlherewith is a copy of the agreed Memorandum of Und'rstariding between the Central Intelligence Agency and the Depart- al Su ort in Contingency Situations Short 'M t For the Joint Chiefs of Staff: L. R. VASEY Rear Admiral, JSN Secretary JCS review(s) completed. efense :12.1 U)_.Without attachment, this memorandum is downgraded to '0,. 115 1 Copy ................ of. L...i....... Co ' s eacu ofi pacjes sezies. 1 "A" SECRET GRvUf' s~"` ?'" Down,'.a ,,.: . a i2yz?- ,nier;ais; no't auiorna;i? r Relea*e 2004/07/07 : CIA-RDP75B00159R00020016000.1-2' . II I , j.Supject: Memorandum of Understanding Between the Central Approved For Release 2004/07/07 : CIA-RDP75B00159R000200160001-2 SHORT OF GENERAL WAR (C) 3. November .1966 principles governing the planning and operational relationships, between the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) and the Department of Defense (DOD.) for the planning and execution of military plans 0 APPENDIX MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING BETWEEN THE CENTRAL NTELLIGENCE AGENCY AND THE DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE FOR MUTUAL SUPPORT IN CONTINGENCY SITUATIONS and ope ations In situations short of general war. It is .applicable to contingency plans and operations undertaken at the 'direction of US national-level authorities. 7 8 9- 10 13 25X11` 3. (U) Definitions 15 16 The definitions contained in JCS Pub 1 are applicable to this memor ndum ofd understanding. 4? (S.) 0 jectiv2 The princ pies set'forth in this memorandum shall be applied sodas to insure unity of purpose in pursuit of the I common oijeotives ~I 1 when jointly eftgaged inscontingency operations short of general GROUP 3 DOWNGRADED AT 12 YEAR INTERVALS; NOT AUTOMATICALLY DECLASSIFIED 1 Appendix- or Release 2004/07/07 : CIA-RDP75B00159R000200160001-2 17 18 19 20' 21 22i 23' 2L. 25 26 27 28 29 Approved For Release 2004/07/07 : CIA-RDP75B00159R000200160001-2 BEST COPY A VAILABLE Approved For Release 2004/07/07 : CIA-RDP75B00159R000200160001-2 Approved For Release 2004/07/07._.-C1A-RQP_75B00159R000200160001-2 SECRET I a 5. ( ) Planning Guidance a. In planning for contingency operations, mutual support 2 will be accomplished through continuing close collaboration 3 between the staffs of CIA and the Joint Chiefs of Staff 4 at the Washington level and between the unifies' command staIfs and CIA elements associated therewith. There must be an early determination as to the intelligence information needed for planning. Close consultation and collaboration between elements of CIA I DOD at the 'Washington level and between the unified 10 and. coI and staffs and CIA elements associated therewith will 11 determine the availability and adequacy of basic intelli- 12 gence information (intelligence data base) and determine the 13 req irement for all source intelligence collection and for 14 courterinte4ligence. '. 6 25X1 SECRET Approved or Rele Appendix se'2004107/Q7 : CIA-RDP75B00159R000200160001-2 25X1 Approved For Release 2004/07/07 : CIA-RDP75B00159R000200160001-2 Next 4 Page(s) In Document Exempt Approved For Release 2004/07/07 : CIA-RDP75B00159R000200160001-2 UASSIF40proved F'AfWL~004/07/07: CIA-RDP5006D1dft0001-2 SECRET ORD SIJCCT ROUTING AND REC SUBJECT: (optional) FROM: EXTENSION NO. DATE TO: (Officer designation, room number, and building) DATE OFFICER'S COMMENTS (Number each comment to show from whom RECEIVED FORWARDED INITIALS to whom. Draw a line across column after each comment.) 1. ISA 25X1 2. 1A 3. 4 4. 5. ff 6. 0-~ JOJA 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. SECRET ^ CONFIDENTIAL ^ USE ONLY ^ UNCLASSIFIED

Approved For Release 2004/ I-__. 3 ....... SECRET TIE JOINT CHIEFS OF STAFF WASHINGTON, D.C. 1030: SM-13-67 6 January 1987 FOR: Chief of Staff, US Army Chief of Naval Operations Chief of Staff, US-Air.Force Commandant of the Marine Corps Commander in Chief, Alaska Commander in Chief, Atlantic Commander in Chief, Continental Air Defense Command ,US Commander in Chief, Europe Commander in Chief, Pacific Commander in Chief, US Strike Command/ US Commander in Chief, Middle East, Southern Asia, and Africa South of the Sahara Commander in Chief, Strategic Air Command Director, Defense Intelligence Agency intelligence Agency and the Department of Defense for;Mutual Support in Contingency Situations Short of General War (C) u men; of Defense or, u pp i of ,General War. of 1~ I I ! Forwar edlherewith is a copy of the agreed Memorandum of Und'rstariding between the Central Intelligence Agency and the Depart- al Su ort in Contingency Situations Short 'M t For the Joint Chiefs of Staff: L. R. VASEY Rear Admiral, JSN Secretary JCS review(s) completed. efense :12.1 U)_.Without attachment, this memorandum is downgraded to '0,. 115 1 Copy ................ of. L...i....... Co ' s eacu ofi pacjes sezies. 1 "A" SECRET GRvUf' s~"` ?'" Down,'.a ,,.: . a i2yz?- ,nier;ais; no't auiorna;i? r Relea*e 2004/07/07 : CIA-RDP75B00159R00020016000.1-2' . II I , j.Supject: Memorandum of Understanding Between the Central Approved For Release 2004/07/07 : CIA-RDP75B00159R000200160001-2 SHORT OF GENERAL WAR (C) 3. November .1966 principles governing the planning and operational relationships, between the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) and the Department of Defense (DOD.) for the planning and execution of military plans 0 APPENDIX MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING BETWEEN THE CENTRAL NTELLIGENCE AGENCY AND THE DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE FOR MUTUAL SUPPORT IN CONTINGENCY SITUATIONS and ope ations In situations short of general war. It is .applicable to contingency plans and operations undertaken at the 'direction of US national-level authorities. 7 8 9- 10 13 25X11` 3. (U) Definitions 15 16 The definitions contained in JCS Pub 1 are applicable to this memor ndum ofd understanding. 4? (S.) 0 jectiv2 The princ pies set'forth in this memorandum shall be applied sodas to insure unity of purpose in pursuit of the I common oijeotives ~I 1 when jointly eftgaged inscontingency operations short of general GROUP 3 DOWNGRADED AT 12 YEAR INTERVALS; NOT AUTOMATICALLY DECLASSIFIED 1 Appendix- or Release 2004/07/07 : CIA-RDP75B00159R000200160001-2 17 18 19 20' 21 22i 23' 2L. 25 26 27 28 29 Approved For Release 2004/07/07 : CIA-RDP75B00159R000200160001-2 BEST COPY A VAILABLE Approved For Release 2004/07/07 : CIA-RDP75B00159R000200160001-2 Approved For Release 2004/07/07._.-C1A-RQP_75B00159R000200160001-2 SECRET I a 5. ( ) Planning Guidance a. In planning for contingency operations, mutual support 2 will be accomplished through continuing close collaboration 3 between the staffs of CIA and the Joint Chiefs of Staff 4 at the Washington level and between the unifies' command staIfs and CIA elements associated therewith. There must be an early determination as to the intelligence information needed for planning. Close consultation and collaboration between elements of CIA I DOD at the 'Washington level and between the unified 10 and. coI and staffs and CIA elements associated therewith will 11 determine the availability and adequacy of basic intelli- 12 gence information (intelligence data base) and determine the 13 req irement for all source intelligence collection and for 14 courterinte4ligence. '. 6 25X1 SECRET Approved or Rele Appendix se'2004107/Q7 : CIA-RDP75B00159R000200160001-2 25X1 Approved For Release 2004/07/07 : CIA-RDP75B00159R000200160001-2 Next 4 Page(s) In Document Exempt Approved For Release 2004/07/07 : CIA-RDP75B00159R000200160001-2 UASSIF40proved F'AfWL~004/07/07: CIA-RDP5006D1dft0001-2 SECRET ORD SIJCCT ROUTING AND REC SUBJECT: (optional) FROM: EXTENSION NO. DATE TO: (Officer designation, room number, and building) DATE OFFICER'S COMMENTS (Number each comment to show from whom RECEIVED FORWARDED INITIALS to whom. Draw a line across column after each comment.) 1. ISA 25X1 2. 1A 3. 4 4. 5. ff 6. 0-~ JOJA 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. SECRET ^ CONFIDENTIAL ^ USE ONLY ^ UNCLASSIFIED

No Description

No Description

25X1 Approved For Release 2003/07/03 : CIA-RDP80R01731 R002900440019-7 Approved For Release 2003/07/03 : CIA-RDP80R01731 R002900440019-7 25X1 25X1 25X1 Approved. For Release 2003/07103 : CIA-RDP80R01731 R002900440Q1 p7,p