1 / 19

Redesigning General Psychology using Undergraduate Learning Assistants as Peer Mentors

Redesigning General Psychology using Undergraduate Learning Assistants as Peer Mentors. Increasing Student Success in Social Sciences Conference April 18, 2011 at Buffalo State College Presented by Dr. Megan E. Bradley mbradley@frostburg.edu. Psyc150: General Psychology

arnaud
Télécharger la présentation

Redesigning General Psychology using Undergraduate Learning Assistants as Peer Mentors

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. Redesigning General Psychology using Undergraduate Learning Assistants as Peer Mentors Increasing Student Success in Social Sciences Conference April 18, 2011 at Buffalo State College Presented by Dr. Megan E. Bradley mbradley@frostburg.edu

  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

  3. Academic Problems • Course drift & inefficiency • 18 sections/year • Each instructor created own syllabus, objectives, assignments, textbook, etc. • Financial difficulties at University level • Unable to retrieve lost FT faculty positions • Fewer FT faculty available to teach upper-level courses requiring greater expertise

  4. What We Did • Invited publishers to present products • Team-approach with departmental support • Created online instructor’s manual • Chose Replacement Model • Pilot semester • 2 traditional sections (N=42) • 2 redesign sections (N=99) • Tripled capacity during Full Implementation (N = 150)

  5. What We Did • Pilot Semester for Redesign Sections • In-class meeting • 1x/week; doubled capacity • Active learning • Weekly online assignments with ULA help • Pre-lecture & Mastery Quizzes • Discussions • Prejudice Activity • Academic Games & Self-Assessments

  6. Pilot Comparisons *Significantly different; p = .005 (eta2 = .027), p = .000 (eta2 = .075)

  7. Pilot Results • Redesign sections significantly better than traditional sections* • Final exam scores positively correlated with average scores on MQs • r =.523, p = .000 50 Question Common Comprehensive Final Exam: • *A one-way ANOVA of section (6 total: 2 traditional and 4 redesign) on final exam percentage grades was significant, F = 4.710, p = .000, η2 = .090.

  8. Pilot Results: 50 Question Common Comprehensive Final Exam

  9. Academic Problems Resolved • Course drift & inefficiency • 18 sections/year to 5 or 6 sections/year • Common objectives, syllabus, text, prep time, etc. • Financial difficulties at University level • Reallocation of FT faculty to upper-level courses • Fewer adjuncts needed • ULAs

  10. Pilot Redesign Issues & Implementation Solutions • Comprehensive final exam too much • 3 unit exams • Reduced overall coverage • “Deadline Disorder” • Reduced to: MQs, Discussions, Prejudice Activity • 2 weeks to complete • Students not ready for blended design • Required computer lab 1x/wk

  11. Pilot Redesign Issues & Implementation Solutions • Students needed more in-class assistance • Updated instructor’s manual to include brief direct instruction • Need for more campus-wide support • Held 3 workshops on redesign • Implemented student support services programs • Tutoring, Supplemental Instruction • Wellness initiative

  12. Full Implementation Results • Full Implementation Redesign significantly better than Pilot Redesign & Traditional sections* • Improvements worked 43 Common Questions • *A one-way ANOVA of section (3 total) on common question percentage was significant, F = 25.852, p = .000, η2 = .825.

  13. Financial Savings $90/student to $25/student 1 FT position DWF rate Previous average: 13% 18% prior to pilot Pilot Semester Traditional sections: 4% Redesign sections: 22% Full Implementation 13% Overall Results

  14. Reasons for Success • Assessed everything and figured out what worked and what didn’t • Computer lab • Use of ULAs

  15. ULA Responsibilities • Assigned 2 small groups (N = 12) of Psyc150 students for all online work • Grade Psyc150 student assignments based on rubrics • Online discussions: Moderate & grade using rubric • Answer student emails

  16. ULA Course & Recruitment • Learning Mentor in Psychology • Purpose • Field experience - Training • Review current research on peer learning & leadership/mentorship • Experience as peer mentor • By recruitment only • Get list of Psychology majors with high GPAs • Seek support from faculty members • Contact students & host information meeting(s) prior to registration

  17. Leadership in Psychology Certificate Program • 6 crs: Pre-requisites • 3 cr: Psychology “Leadership” Courses • 3 cr: Learning Mentor course – Must earn a C • 6 cr: Electives: Step 2 or 3

  18. ULA internship & paid positions • Can work as intern for our department • ULA + research assistant • Become Supplemental Instructor • Trained by another office • Run 1-3 study sessions/week • Become Tutor • Trained by tutoring office

  19. Impact • Most have been accepted into graduate programs • Many have earned assistantships • 3 earned national summer internships • 1 at Sloop Leadership Institute • In 2008, the May & December commencement speakers for College of Liberal Arts & Sciences were ULAs (& SI instructors)

More Related