1 / 25

Full Implementation Results for General Psychology @ Frostburg State University

Full Implementation Results for General Psychology @ Frostburg State University. Primary FSU NCAT Team: Megan E. Bradley, Ph.D. Bill Southerly, Ph.D. Cindy D. Hay, MDE & MS Joseph Hoffman, Ph.D. John Bowman, Ph.D. MCRI Workshop May 29, 2009. Psyc150: General Psychology

bherrington
Download Presentation

Full Implementation Results for General Psychology @ Frostburg State University

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Full Implementation Results for General Psychology @ Frostburg State University • Primary FSU NCAT Team: • Megan E. Bradley, Ph.D. • Bill Southerly, Ph.D. • Cindy D. Hay, MDE & MS • Joseph Hoffman, Ph.D. • John Bowman, Ph.D. MCRI Workshop May 29, 2009 Presented at the MCRI Workshop May 2009 by Dr. Megan E. Bradley

  2. Psyc150: General Psychology • Frostburg State University in Frostburg, Maryland • Annual enrollment: About 900 • Mostly traditional students and 1st year students • Required course for Psychology Majors and 5 other majors • Replacement Model Presented at the MCRI Workshop May 2009 by Dr. Megan E. Bradley

  3. Impact on Student Learning General Psychology Students Presented at the MCRI Workshop May 2009 by Dr. Megan E. Bradley

  4. Pilot Comparisons *Significantly different; p = .005 (eta2 = .027), p = .000 (eta2 = .075) Presented at the MCRI Workshop May 2009 by Dr. Megan E. Bradley

  5. Pilot Results: 50 Question Common Comprehensive Final Exam* Mean Test Scores *Instructors blind to exam content • *A one-way ANOVA of section on final exam percentage grades was significant, F = 23.251, p = .000, eta2 = .090. Also significant with GPA as covariate: F = 29.192, p = .000, eta2 = .11. Presented at the MCRI Workshop May 2009 by Dr. Megan E. Bradley

  6. Pilot Results: 50 Question Common Comprehensive Final Exam Presented at the MCRI Workshop May 2009 by Dr. Megan E. Bradley

  7. Pilot Results: 50 Question Common Comprehensive Final Exam • Final exam scores positively correlated with average scores on MQs • r =.523, p = .000 Presented at the MCRI Workshop May 2009 by Dr. Megan E. Bradley

  8. Pilot Results: Extra Credit Final Exam Essay Question on Prejudice • Assessment #2: Comparison of extra credit essay question on final exam • All instructors blind to exam content • Question: Discuss the psychological phenomenon of prejudice. In your answer, feel free to reflect on causes/explanations, consequences of being a victim of prejudice, and/or ideas to counter prejudice. Presented at the MCRI Workshop May 2009 by Dr. Megan E. Bradley

  9. Pilot Results: Extra Credit Final Exam Essay Question on Prejudice • Assessment #2: Comparison of extra credit essay question on final exam • Scoring rubric emphasized use of psychological concepts • No upper limit for scores • 1 point per correct use of psychological concepts • 1 point per accurate definition of terms • 1 point per additional psychological concept Presented at the MCRI Workshop May 2009 by Dr. Megan E. Bradley

  10. Pilot Results: Extra Credit Final Exam Essay Question on Prejudice • Mode • Traditional = 0 or 1 • Redesign = 1, 2, 2, 3 Mean Test Scores • *A one-way ANOVA of section on essay grades was significant, F = 6.787, p = .000, eta2 = .153. Presented at the MCRI Workshop May 2009 by Dr. Megan E. Bradley

  11. Pilot Results: Extra Credit Final Exam Essay Question on Prejudice • Essay score positively correlated with • Grade on semester long prejudice project • r =.328, p = .000 • Grade across all online discussions • r = .244, p = .005 Presented at the MCRI Workshop May 2009 by Dr. Megan E. Bradley

  12. Pilot Redesign Issues & Implementation Solutions Increase use of more learning principles Spacing effect: 3 unit exams Deeper learning: Reduced overall coverage “Deadline Disorder” Reduced to: MQs, Discussions, Prejudice Activity 2 weeks to complete Presented at the MCRI Workshop May 2009 by Dr. Megan E. Bradley

  13. Pilot Redesign Issues & Implementation Solutions Students not ready for blended design “Freshmen don’t do optional” + “Students need structure” Required computer lab 1x/wk Students needed more in-class assistance Updated our online instructor’s manual to include brief direct instruction Presented at the MCRI Workshop May 2009 by Dr. Megan E. Bradley

  14. Pilot Redesign Issues & Implementation Solutions Need for more campus-wide support Held 3 workshops on redesign Implemented student support services programs Tutoring, Supplemental Instruction ORIE + Learning Communities Wellness initiative Presented at the MCRI Workshop May 2009 by Dr. Megan E. Bradley

  15. Full Implementation Results: 43 Common Questions (3 exams)* Mean Test Scores *Instructors blind to exam content • *A one-way ANOVA of section (3 total) on common question percentage was significant, F = 25.852, p = .000, eta2 = .825. Presented at the MCRI Workshop May 2009 by Dr. Megan E. Bradley

  16. Factually-Based versus Conceptually-Based Questions Mean Test Scores Mean Test Scores • *Factual: F = 18.480, p = .000, eta2 = .771 • Conceptual: F = 23.941, p = .000, eta2 = .813 Presented at the MCRI Workshop May 2009 by Dr. Megan E. Bradley

  17. Full Implementation Results: Pre vs. Post Prejudice Essay • Mode • Pre-Essay = 0 or 1 • Post-Essay = 0,1, 2, 3, 4 Mean Test Scores • *A one-way repeated measures ANOVA on essay grades was significant, F = 230.71, p = .000, eta2 = .420. Presented at the MCRI Workshop May 2009 by Dr. Megan E. Bradley

  18. Full Implementation Results: Pre vs. Post Prejudice Essay • Essay score positively correlated with • Grade on semester long prejudice project • r =.119, p = .030 Presented at the MCRI Workshop May 2009 by Dr. Megan E. Bradley

  19. Previous average: 12.5% 18% prior to pilot Pilot Semester Traditional sections: 4% Redesign sections: 22% Full Implementation - Fall 12.8% DWF Rate Presented at the MCRI Workshop May 2009 by Dr. Megan E. Bradley

  20. Impact on Student Learning ULAs Presented at the MCRI Workshop May 2009 by Dr. Megan E. Bradley

  21. ULA Benefits • “Field Experience” course for top students • Leadership in Psychology Certificate Program • Interning as a ULA • Research experience included Presented at the MCRI Workshop May 2009 by Dr. Megan E. Bradley

  22. ULA Benefits • Future opportunities • Graduate School • Teaching or Research Assistantship • Prestigious Internships • Most recent: Leadership Institute Presented at the MCRI Workshop May 2009 by Dr. Megan E. Bradley

  23. Plan: $89 to $32 Reality: $89 to $26 Reason: Only 50% of ULAs getting paid Biggest cost effectiveness: Tripling capacity in class Staffing Cost Savings Presented at the MCRI Workshop May 2009 by Dr. Megan E. Bradley

  24. Use of savings Realized: Communication Response System Implementation (“clickers”) Laptop lab Future sustainability Support to Chair? Cost Savings Presented at the MCRI Workshop May 2009 by Dr. Megan E. Bradley

  25. Special Thanks • Our administrative team…for the support • Joseph Hoffman & John Bowman • USM…for seizing an opportunity • Don Spicer & Nancy Shapiro • Board of Regents • NCAT…for the vision, knowledge & skills • Carol Twigg & Carolyn Jarmon Presented at the MCRI Workshop May 2009 by Dr. Megan E. Bradley

More Related