While many have studied Generation 1.5 learners’ sociocultural and language learning experience, few have examined their linguistic errors in detail. This study uses two mini-corpora to compare one linguistic feature, the use of past participles, in essays by English as a Second Language (ESL) and Generation 1.5 college-level learners of various language backgrounds. The study found that Generation 1.5 learners tended to make past participle errors involving the morphological form of the past participle while ESL learners tended to make errors using the correct form in an inappropriate linguistic context. These findings suggest that although Generation 1.5 learners are proficient, sometimes nativelike, speakers of English who often demonstrate a remarkable sense of fluency in their writing, they still make errors involving grammatical forms. These findings suggest that language instruction that focuses on form is still important for their writing development. This instruction should be based on better understanding of this population’s needs and abilities.

For academic writers to use a word, they must know not only its basic meaning, its pronunciation, and the contexts in which the word is used, they must also possess more complex knowledge—a word’s collocational patterns and grammatical constraints (Colombi & Schleppegrell, 2002; Halliday, 1987, 1994). Gaining the lexicogrammatical knowledge needed to use words appropriately in college writing is a particular challenge for Generation 1.5 ESL writers. These students, who come to college with a rich academic and nonacademic vocabulary developed through years of formal study and daily interaction in English, often produce awkward or even ungrammatical sentences when they use this vocabulary productively. This paper focuses on lexicogrammatical errors commonly found in the academic writing of Generation 1.5 ESL students and discusses how discourse-based strategies for teaching grammar can be adapted to help these learners use academic vocabulary in a semantically and grammatically appropriate way. These strategies include having students look at models, teaching dictionary use, and developing students’ analytical self-editing strategies.

This study elicited provider and administrator preferences in implementing an evidence-based practice (EBP) for bipolar disorder or psychosis, family-focused therapy (FFT). Providers (n = 35) and administrators (n = 5) from three community mental health centers took part in FFT training and participated in pre- and post-training focus groups. Transcripts were examined using conventional content analysis. Providers and administrators discussed barriers to implementing EBPs. Successful EBPs were described as incorporating flexibility and close supervision to maximize provider adherence. Providers expressed preferences for structured EBPs like FFT that have both explicit implementation steps and built-in flexibility.

Assertive Community Treatment (ACT) teams are increasingly interested in improving access to ACT through discharge of improved clients to less intensive mental health care services. We report results from a process evaluation of three teams in the VA's ACT program, Mental Health Intensive Case Management (MHICM), that began to implement discharge. MHICM clinicians (n=15) describe significant barriers to discharge. Clinicians support the concept of discharge but raise concerns about clients' future stability, clients' feelings about discharge, and other aspects of the discharge process. We propose strategies that can be used to support clinicians and clients in discharge decision-making.