We found 128 results that contain "survey"
Posted on: #iteachmsu
PEDAGOGICAL DESIGN
Studying Team Adaptive Performance using the Board Game Pandemic Legacy
Given the COVID-19 pandemic, educators from many fields have looked to representations of pandemics to help students study topics the pandemic has accentuated. In the history of science, educators have explored inequalities in medicine, trust in experts, and responses to uncertainty. To help make these issues digestible, some educators have turned to the cooperative board game, Pandemic Legacy. Small groups work together to avert a global health crisis by managing disease. Teams play the game multiple times, but actions in one game have consequences for the next and rules change and develop as the game progresses. The game's development introduces students to new concepts at a manageable pace while giving them new problems to solve. While the game effectively introduced students to topics in the history of science, this study sought to know whether it promoted cognitive and interpersonal skills. It focused on team adaptive performance, which is linked to problem-solving and communication skills. Data was collected using three surveys. Variation in teams' responses was analyzed using the Median test. The Friedman test was used to analyze each team's adaptive performance at each of the three timesteps. All teams were initially quite confident in their ability to creatively deal with unexpected events and reported that they adapted well to new tasks. As they encountered novel situations, some teams reported that their confidence decreased. They were newly aware that they did not have creative solutions to unexpected problems. Teams aware of their limitations performed better than those who maintained their initial confidence.To access a PDF of the "Studying Team Adaptive Performance using the Board Game Pandemic Legacy" poster, click here.Description of the Poster
Studying Team Adaptive Performance using the Board Game Pandemic Legacy
Research Goal
This study examined how team adaptive performance evolves over time. Adaptative performance is understood as a process that more effectively moves a team towards its objectives. The team must recognize deviations from expected action and readjust actions to obtain the best outcome (Salas, Sims, Burke 2005; Priest et al. 2002; Marques-Quinteiro et al. 2015).
While previous studies have examined team adaptive performance in singular events, this study aimed to measure the evolution of team adaptive performance over time. Using a cooperative boardgame that changes as teams play, the study measured how well teams performed in response to three major deviations in game play that necessitated adaptation.
Research Hypothesis
Teams with higher perceived levels of adaptability will have better outcomes (the success measure) over time than teams with lower levels of adaptability
Research Methods
A total of 16 participants were divided into four teams. Each team played the cooperative board game, Pandemic Legacy (Figure 1), nine times throughout the study. Each participant completed a team adaptive performance questionnaire three times during the study, once after each major disruption in the board game. The questionnaire was designed to assess perceptions of team performance, based on Marques Quinteiro et al. 2015. It consisted of control questions about participants’ demographics as well as a 10-item Likert scale team performance questions broken down into categories assessing satisfaction, creativity, adjustability, adaptability, and positivity.
Questions to evaluate adaptability included:
Q7:We update technical and interpersonal competences as a way to better perform the tasks in which we are enrolled.
Q8: We search and develop new competences to deal with difficult situations.
Reliability Analysis showed that Cronbach alpha for Q7 and Q8 is 0.938.
Team outcomes were assessed by a success measure that evaluated each team’s number of wins (where > wins = better outcome) and number of outbreaks (where < outbreaks = better outcome)
Research Results: Success Measure
The success measure results of number of wins are displayed in a bar chart.
The success measure results of number of outbreaks are displayed in a bar chart.
Research Results: Adaptability Measure
Differences in the median score of teams’ responses to each question was calculated using the Median Test. Team 3 responded differently than at least one of the other teams to Q8 after Survey 1. Post-hoc analysis with pairwise comparison tests was conducted with a Bonferroni correction applied, revealing a statistically significant difference between Team 3 and Team 1 (p =.030), and Team 3 and Team 2 (p =.030).
Using the above method revealed no significant results after Survey 2. After Survey 3, there was a significant difference between Team 4 and Team 2 (p=.049) for Q7 and Team 1 and Team 2 (p=.049) for Q8.
A Friedman Test was performed to determine if responses to the questions changed over time. There was a statistically significant difference in Team 3’s response to Q8 (X2(2)= 6.500, p= .039). Post-hoc analysis with pairwise comparison tests was conducted with a Bonferroni correction applied, resulting in a significance difference between Team 3’s first and third survey for Q8.
Research Findings
The initial analysis suggests that teams, such as Team 3, that develop higher perceptions of their adaptability will have better outcomes once the higher perceptions are achieved. Teams, such as Team 1, that begin with high perceived levels of adaptability but did not alter their approach when the success measures indicate adaptation is needed will have poorer outcomes. Teams, such as Team 2, that report high perceptions of adaptability throughout and that correspond with the success measure, will maintain good outcomes.
Analysis of the satisfaction, creativity, adjustability, and positivity data is needed to determine if these affect the success measure or adaptability over time.
Acknowledgments
Funding provided by the MSU SUTL Fellows program, a collaboration between the Lyman Briggs College and the MSU Graduate School.
References
Marques-Quinteiro, P. et al. 2015. “Measuring adaptive performance in individuals and teams.” Team Performance Management 21, 7/8: 339-60.
Priest, H.A. et al. 2002. “Understanding team adaptability: Initial theoretical and practical considerations.” Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 46: 561-65.
Salas, E. D.E. Sims, C.S. Burke. 2005. “Is there a ‘Big Five’ in Teamwork?” Small Group Research 36, 5: 555-99.
Studying Team Adaptive Performance using the Board Game Pandemic Legacy
Research Goal
This study examined how team adaptive performance evolves over time. Adaptative performance is understood as a process that more effectively moves a team towards its objectives. The team must recognize deviations from expected action and readjust actions to obtain the best outcome (Salas, Sims, Burke 2005; Priest et al. 2002; Marques-Quinteiro et al. 2015).
While previous studies have examined team adaptive performance in singular events, this study aimed to measure the evolution of team adaptive performance over time. Using a cooperative boardgame that changes as teams play, the study measured how well teams performed in response to three major deviations in game play that necessitated adaptation.
Research Hypothesis
Teams with higher perceived levels of adaptability will have better outcomes (the success measure) over time than teams with lower levels of adaptability
Research Methods
A total of 16 participants were divided into four teams. Each team played the cooperative board game, Pandemic Legacy (Figure 1), nine times throughout the study. Each participant completed a team adaptive performance questionnaire three times during the study, once after each major disruption in the board game. The questionnaire was designed to assess perceptions of team performance, based on Marques Quinteiro et al. 2015. It consisted of control questions about participants’ demographics as well as a 10-item Likert scale team performance questions broken down into categories assessing satisfaction, creativity, adjustability, adaptability, and positivity.
Questions to evaluate adaptability included:
Q7:We update technical and interpersonal competences as a way to better perform the tasks in which we are enrolled.
Q8: We search and develop new competences to deal with difficult situations.
Reliability Analysis showed that Cronbach alpha for Q7 and Q8 is 0.938.
Team outcomes were assessed by a success measure that evaluated each team’s number of wins (where > wins = better outcome) and number of outbreaks (where < outbreaks = better outcome)
Research Results: Success Measure
The success measure results of number of wins are displayed in a bar chart.
The success measure results of number of outbreaks are displayed in a bar chart.
Research Results: Adaptability Measure
Differences in the median score of teams’ responses to each question was calculated using the Median Test. Team 3 responded differently than at least one of the other teams to Q8 after Survey 1. Post-hoc analysis with pairwise comparison tests was conducted with a Bonferroni correction applied, revealing a statistically significant difference between Team 3 and Team 1 (p =.030), and Team 3 and Team 2 (p =.030).
Using the above method revealed no significant results after Survey 2. After Survey 3, there was a significant difference between Team 4 and Team 2 (p=.049) for Q7 and Team 1 and Team 2 (p=.049) for Q8.
A Friedman Test was performed to determine if responses to the questions changed over time. There was a statistically significant difference in Team 3’s response to Q8 (X2(2)= 6.500, p= .039). Post-hoc analysis with pairwise comparison tests was conducted with a Bonferroni correction applied, resulting in a significance difference between Team 3’s first and third survey for Q8.
Research Findings
The initial analysis suggests that teams, such as Team 3, that develop higher perceptions of their adaptability will have better outcomes once the higher perceptions are achieved. Teams, such as Team 1, that begin with high perceived levels of adaptability but did not alter their approach when the success measures indicate adaptation is needed will have poorer outcomes. Teams, such as Team 2, that report high perceptions of adaptability throughout and that correspond with the success measure, will maintain good outcomes.
Analysis of the satisfaction, creativity, adjustability, and positivity data is needed to determine if these affect the success measure or adaptability over time.
Acknowledgments
Funding provided by the MSU SUTL Fellows program, a collaboration between the Lyman Briggs College and the MSU Graduate School.
References
Marques-Quinteiro, P. et al. 2015. “Measuring adaptive performance in individuals and teams.” Team Performance Management 21, 7/8: 339-60.
Priest, H.A. et al. 2002. “Understanding team adaptability: Initial theoretical and practical considerations.” Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 46: 561-65.
Salas, E. D.E. Sims, C.S. Burke. 2005. “Is there a ‘Big Five’ in Teamwork?” Small Group Research 36, 5: 555-99.
Authored by:
Melissa Charenko
Posted on: #iteachmsu
Studying Team Adaptive Performance using the Board Game Pandemic Legacy
Given the COVID-19 pandemic, educators from many fields have looked...
Authored by:
PEDAGOGICAL DESIGN
Monday, May 3, 2021
Posted on: Educator Stories
PEDAGOGICAL DESIGN
Educator Stories: Gary Roloff
This week, we are featuring, Dr. Gary Roloff, Professor and Chair in the Department of Fisheries and Wildlife. Dr. Roloff was recognized via iteach.msu.edu's Thank and Educator Initiative! We encourage MSU community members to nominate high impact Spartan educators (via our Thank an Educator form) regularly!
Read more about Dr. Roloff’s perspectives below. #iteachmsu's questions are bolded below, followed by his responses!
In one word, what does being an educator mean to you?
Empowering
Share with me what this word/quality looks like in your practice?
As an educator, I look to facilitate critical thinking, synthesis of ideas and information, acquisition of contextual knowledge, and informed judgment that ultimately results in empowered, confident decision-making and choices by our students.
Have your ideas on this changed over time? if so how?
My philosophy on this has absolutely changed over time. When I initially started teaching I leaned towards emphasizing contextual knowledge (e.g., why snowshoe hare are white in winter, why pigs turn feral so fast when released into an unconstrained environment), where there was a clear answer that could be assessed for correctness. I quickly realized that guidance for students on synthesizing and integrating contextual knowledge (and other pieces of information) to make informed arguments and decisions was a gap in my learning outcomes. Since then, I’ve worked to correct that deficiency in my course offerings.
Tell me more about your educational “setting.” This can include, but not limited to departmental affiliations, community connections, co-instructors, and students.
I am lucky enough to teach a field-based course in wildlife research and management techniques (I also teach a graduate-level course), which includes a blend of classroom and field experiences. Much of the class is hands-on and outside, and I involve our agency partners like the Michigan Department of Natural Resources and USDA Wildlife Services to teach sections of the class. This professional-student interaction is often a highlight for the students, providing an important opportunity to help build a professional network that is so critical to success. Some students in my class have gone on to work for the agencies that help me teach.
What is a challenge you experience in your educator role?
My biggest challenge is reading the classroom early and trying to adjust my delivery of content to the different learning styles that I know occur in the room. As instructors, if we fail to recognize and adjust our content and delivery to appeal to diverse learning styles we are not being fair.
Any particular “solutions” or “best practices” you’ve found that help you support student success at the university despite/in the face of this?
I started implementing a brief survey at the start of the semester in my undergraduate class to gauge personality types. The students work in groups in that class on a semester project that looks for integration and synthesis across the semester. One of my PhD students, as part of her FAST Fellows program, showed that “introverts” were at a significant disadvantage in these types of settings, unless we were able to integrate them into “extrovert” groups from the start. I stopped letting students form groups on their own, as the “introverts” and “extroverts” tended to group together; instead I purposefully mix the personality types to help create a more equitable chance of success for all students in the class.
What are practices you utilize that help you feel successful as an educator?
Last fall, I changed my standard assessment technique for the mid-term. I used to implement a standard type test, where students identify things and answer questions on paper. This fall I changed the mid-term to a field practical, where I interacted verbally with the students (i.e., an oral exam) and had them show me how to do things and explain their answers. This one-on-one assessment, though time-consuming, gave me a better sense (I believe) of how the students were learning the course content.
What topics or ideas about teaching and learning would you like to see discussed on the iteach.msu.edu platform? Why do you think this conversation is needed at msu?
Efficient, effective ways to teach our students better oral and written communication skills as part of the classes they take.
What are you looking forward to (or excited to be a part of) next semester?
I really miss the energy of campus; I’m hoping we can return to some sense of post-pandemic normalcy soon.
Don't forget to celebrate individuals you see making a difference in teaching, learning, or student success at MSU with #iteachmsu's Thank an Educator initiative. You might just see them appear in the next feature! Follow the MSU Hub Twitter account to see other great content from the #iteachmsu Commons as well as educators featured every week during #ThankfulThursdays.
Read more about Dr. Roloff’s perspectives below. #iteachmsu's questions are bolded below, followed by his responses!
In one word, what does being an educator mean to you?
Empowering
Share with me what this word/quality looks like in your practice?
As an educator, I look to facilitate critical thinking, synthesis of ideas and information, acquisition of contextual knowledge, and informed judgment that ultimately results in empowered, confident decision-making and choices by our students.
Have your ideas on this changed over time? if so how?
My philosophy on this has absolutely changed over time. When I initially started teaching I leaned towards emphasizing contextual knowledge (e.g., why snowshoe hare are white in winter, why pigs turn feral so fast when released into an unconstrained environment), where there was a clear answer that could be assessed for correctness. I quickly realized that guidance for students on synthesizing and integrating contextual knowledge (and other pieces of information) to make informed arguments and decisions was a gap in my learning outcomes. Since then, I’ve worked to correct that deficiency in my course offerings.
Tell me more about your educational “setting.” This can include, but not limited to departmental affiliations, community connections, co-instructors, and students.
I am lucky enough to teach a field-based course in wildlife research and management techniques (I also teach a graduate-level course), which includes a blend of classroom and field experiences. Much of the class is hands-on and outside, and I involve our agency partners like the Michigan Department of Natural Resources and USDA Wildlife Services to teach sections of the class. This professional-student interaction is often a highlight for the students, providing an important opportunity to help build a professional network that is so critical to success. Some students in my class have gone on to work for the agencies that help me teach.
What is a challenge you experience in your educator role?
My biggest challenge is reading the classroom early and trying to adjust my delivery of content to the different learning styles that I know occur in the room. As instructors, if we fail to recognize and adjust our content and delivery to appeal to diverse learning styles we are not being fair.
Any particular “solutions” or “best practices” you’ve found that help you support student success at the university despite/in the face of this?
I started implementing a brief survey at the start of the semester in my undergraduate class to gauge personality types. The students work in groups in that class on a semester project that looks for integration and synthesis across the semester. One of my PhD students, as part of her FAST Fellows program, showed that “introverts” were at a significant disadvantage in these types of settings, unless we were able to integrate them into “extrovert” groups from the start. I stopped letting students form groups on their own, as the “introverts” and “extroverts” tended to group together; instead I purposefully mix the personality types to help create a more equitable chance of success for all students in the class.
What are practices you utilize that help you feel successful as an educator?
Last fall, I changed my standard assessment technique for the mid-term. I used to implement a standard type test, where students identify things and answer questions on paper. This fall I changed the mid-term to a field practical, where I interacted verbally with the students (i.e., an oral exam) and had them show me how to do things and explain their answers. This one-on-one assessment, though time-consuming, gave me a better sense (I believe) of how the students were learning the course content.
What topics or ideas about teaching and learning would you like to see discussed on the iteach.msu.edu platform? Why do you think this conversation is needed at msu?
Efficient, effective ways to teach our students better oral and written communication skills as part of the classes they take.
What are you looking forward to (or excited to be a part of) next semester?
I really miss the energy of campus; I’m hoping we can return to some sense of post-pandemic normalcy soon.
Don't forget to celebrate individuals you see making a difference in teaching, learning, or student success at MSU with #iteachmsu's Thank an Educator initiative. You might just see them appear in the next feature! Follow the MSU Hub Twitter account to see other great content from the #iteachmsu Commons as well as educators featured every week during #ThankfulThursdays.
Authored by:
Kristen Surla
Posted on: Educator Stories
Educator Stories: Gary Roloff
This week, we are featuring, Dr. Gary Roloff, Professor and Chair i...
Authored by:
PEDAGOGICAL DESIGN
Monday, Feb 22, 2021
Posted on: #iteachmsu
PEDAGOGICAL DESIGN
Reimagining First-Year Writing for STEM Undergraduates as Inquiry-Based Learning in Science Studies
How can a first-year writing course help to create 21st century STEM students with foundations for interdisciplinary inquiry? Could such as curriculum engage STEM students in knowledge production in ways that help to acculturate them as collaborative, ethical, and empathetic learners? Bringing together insights from writing pedagogy, work on critical science literacy, and science studies, this round-table is hosted by the collaborative team leading an effort to rethink the first year writing course required of all students at Lyman Briggs College, MSU's residential college for STEM students. A major goal of the curriculum redesign is to develop science studies-inspired writing assignments that foster reflective experiential learning about the nature of science. The purpose of this approach is not only to demonstrate the value of inquiry in science studies (history, philosophy, and sociology of science) to STEM students as they pursue their careers, but to foster diverse inclusion in science by demystifying key aspects of scientific culture and its hidden curriculum for membership. Following the guidance of critical pedagogy (e.g. bell hooks), we aim to use the context of first-year writing instruction as an opportunity for critical reflection and empowerment. The roundtable describes how the instructional team designed the first-year curriculum and adapted it to teaching online during the pandemic, and shares data on lessons learned by both the instructor team and our students. We invite participants to think with us as we continue to iteratively develop and assess the curriculum.To access a PDF version of the "Reimagining First-Year Writing for STEM Undergraduates as Inquiry-Based Learning in Science Studies" poster, click here. Description of Poster:
Reimagining First-Year Writing for STEM Undergraduates as Inquiry-Based Learning in Science Studies
Marisa Brandt, HPS Lyman Briggs College & June Oh, English
Project Overview: Reimagining LB 133
Lyman Briggs College aims to provide a high quality science education to diverse students by teaching science in social, human, and global contexts. LB 133: Science & Culture fulfills the Tier 1 writing requirement for 80-85% of LBC students. Starting in F19, we implemented a new, collaboratively developed and taught cohort model of the LB 133 curriculum in order to take advantage of opportunity to foster a community of inquiry, inclusion, and curiosity.
First year college writing and literacy courses aim to give students skills to communicate and evaluate information in their own fields and beyond. While teaching important writing skills, LB 133 focuses on developing students’ science literacy by encouraging them to enact a subject position of a socially engaged science professional in training. LB 133 was designed based on ideas of HPS.
History, Philosophy, and Sociology (HPS) or “science studies” is an interdisciplinary field that studies science in context, often extended to include medicine, technology, and other sites of knowledge-production. LB 133 centers inquiry into relations of science and culture. One way HPS can help students succeed in STEM is by fostering inclusion. In LB 133, this occurs through demystifying scientific culture and hidden curriculum through authentic, project-based inquiry.
Like WRAC 110, LB 133 is organized around five writing projects. Each project entails a method of inquiry into science as a social, human practice and teaches them to write first as a form of sense-making about their data. (Column 2) Then, students develop writing projects to communicate what they have learned to non-scientific audiences.
Research Questions:
How did their conceptions of science change?[Text Wrapping Break] 2. Did their writing improve?[Text Wrapping Break] 3. What did they see as the most important ideas and skills they would take from the course?[Text Wrapping Break] 4. Did they want more HPS at LBC?
Data Collection:
[Text Wrapping Break]1. Analysis of the beginning and end of course Personal Writing assessments. [Text Wrapping Break]2. End of term survey. [Text Wrapping Break]3. Answers to course reflection questions.
Selected Results: See Column 3.
Conclusions: The new model seems successful! Students reported finding 133 surprisingly enjoyable and educational, for many reasons. Many felt motivated to write about science specifically, saw communication as valuable scientific skill. Most felt their writing improved and learned more than anticipated. Most learned and valued key HPS concepts and wanted to learn more about diversity in scientific cultures, and wanted to continue HPS education in LBC to do so.
Column 2 - Course Structure: Science & Culture
Assessment
Science Studies Content[Text Wrapping Break]Learning Goals
Literacy & Writing Skills Learning Goals
Part 1 - Cultures of Science
Personal Writing 1: Personal Statement [STEM Ed Op-ed][Text Wrapping Break]Short form writing from scientific subject position.
Reflect on evolving identity, role, and responsibilities in scientific culture.
Diagnostic for answering questions, supporting a claim, providing evidence, structure, and clear writing.
Scientific Sites Portfolio[Text Wrapping Break]Collaborative investigation of how a local lab produces knowledge.
Understand scientific practice, reasoning, and communication in its diverse social, material, and cultural contexts. Demystify labs and humanize scientists.
Making observational field notes. Reading scientific papers.
Peer review. Claim, evidence, reasoning. Writing analytical essays based on observation.
Part 2 - Science in Culture
Unpacking a Fact Poster
Partner project assessing validity of a public scientific claim.
Understand the mediation of science and how to evaluate scientific claims. Identify popular conceptions of science and contrast these with scientists’ practices.
Following sources upstream. Comparing sources.
APA citation style.
Visual display of info on a poster.
Perspectives Portfolio[Text Wrapping Break]Collaborative investigation of a debate concerning science in Michigan.
Identify and analyze how diverse stakeholders are included in and/or excluded from science. Recognize value of diverse perspective.
Find, use, and correctly cite primary and scholarly secondary sources from different stakeholder perspectives.
Learn communicating to a broader audience in an online platform.
Personal Writing 2: Letter + PS Revision[Text Wrapping Break]Sharing a course takeaway with someone.
Reflect again on evolving identity, role, and responsibilities in scientific culture.
Final assessment of answering questions, supporting a claim, providing evidence, structure, and clear writing.
Weekly Formative Assessments
Discussion Activities Pre-meeting writing about the readings
Reflect on prompted aspects of science and culture
Writing as critical inquiry.
Note-taking.
Preparation for discussion.
Curiosity Colloquium responses
200 words reflecting on weekly speaker series
Exposure to college, campus, and academic guests—including diverse science professionals— who share their curiosity and career story.
Writing as reflection on presentations and their personal value.
Some presenters share research and writing skills.
Column 3 - Results
Results from Personal Writing
Fall 19: There were largely six themes the op-ed assignments discussed. Majority of students chose to talk about the value of science in terms of its ubiquity, problem-solving skills and critical thinking skills, and the way it prompts technological innovation.
Fall 21: Students largely focused on 1. the nature of science as a product of human labor research embedded with many cultural issues, and 2. science as a communication and how scientists can gain public trust (e.g., transparency, collaboration, sharing failure.)
F19 & S20 Selected Survey Results
108 students responding.The full report here.
92.5% reported their overall college writing skills improved somewhat or a lot.
76% reported their writing skills improved somewhat or a lot more than they expected.
89% reported planning to say in LBC.
Selected Course Reflection Comments
The most impactful things students report learning at end of semester.
Science and Culture: Quotes: “how scientific knowledge is produced” “science is inherently social” “how different perspectives . . . impact science” “writing is integral to the scientific community as a method of sharing and documenting scientific research and discoveries”
Writing: Quotes: “a thesis must be specific and debatable” “claim, evidence, and reasoning” “it takes a long time to perfect.” Frequently mentioned skills: Thesis, research skill (citation, finding articles and proper sources), argument (evidence), structure and organization skills, writing as a (often long and arduous) process, using a mentor text, confidence.
What do you want to learn more about after this course?
“How culture(s) and science coexist, and . . . how different cultures view science”
“Gender and minority disparities in STEM” “minority groups in science and how their cultures impact how they conduct science” “different cultures in science instead of just the United States” “how to write scientific essays”
Reimagining First-Year Writing for STEM Undergraduates as Inquiry-Based Learning in Science Studies
Marisa Brandt, HPS Lyman Briggs College & June Oh, English
Project Overview: Reimagining LB 133
Lyman Briggs College aims to provide a high quality science education to diverse students by teaching science in social, human, and global contexts. LB 133: Science & Culture fulfills the Tier 1 writing requirement for 80-85% of LBC students. Starting in F19, we implemented a new, collaboratively developed and taught cohort model of the LB 133 curriculum in order to take advantage of opportunity to foster a community of inquiry, inclusion, and curiosity.
First year college writing and literacy courses aim to give students skills to communicate and evaluate information in their own fields and beyond. While teaching important writing skills, LB 133 focuses on developing students’ science literacy by encouraging them to enact a subject position of a socially engaged science professional in training. LB 133 was designed based on ideas of HPS.
History, Philosophy, and Sociology (HPS) or “science studies” is an interdisciplinary field that studies science in context, often extended to include medicine, technology, and other sites of knowledge-production. LB 133 centers inquiry into relations of science and culture. One way HPS can help students succeed in STEM is by fostering inclusion. In LB 133, this occurs through demystifying scientific culture and hidden curriculum through authentic, project-based inquiry.
Like WRAC 110, LB 133 is organized around five writing projects. Each project entails a method of inquiry into science as a social, human practice and teaches them to write first as a form of sense-making about their data. (Column 2) Then, students develop writing projects to communicate what they have learned to non-scientific audiences.
Research Questions:
How did their conceptions of science change?[Text Wrapping Break] 2. Did their writing improve?[Text Wrapping Break] 3. What did they see as the most important ideas and skills they would take from the course?[Text Wrapping Break] 4. Did they want more HPS at LBC?
Data Collection:
[Text Wrapping Break]1. Analysis of the beginning and end of course Personal Writing assessments. [Text Wrapping Break]2. End of term survey. [Text Wrapping Break]3. Answers to course reflection questions.
Selected Results: See Column 3.
Conclusions: The new model seems successful! Students reported finding 133 surprisingly enjoyable and educational, for many reasons. Many felt motivated to write about science specifically, saw communication as valuable scientific skill. Most felt their writing improved and learned more than anticipated. Most learned and valued key HPS concepts and wanted to learn more about diversity in scientific cultures, and wanted to continue HPS education in LBC to do so.
Column 2 - Course Structure: Science & Culture
Assessment
Science Studies Content[Text Wrapping Break]Learning Goals
Literacy & Writing Skills Learning Goals
Part 1 - Cultures of Science
Personal Writing 1: Personal Statement [STEM Ed Op-ed][Text Wrapping Break]Short form writing from scientific subject position.
Reflect on evolving identity, role, and responsibilities in scientific culture.
Diagnostic for answering questions, supporting a claim, providing evidence, structure, and clear writing.
Scientific Sites Portfolio[Text Wrapping Break]Collaborative investigation of how a local lab produces knowledge.
Understand scientific practice, reasoning, and communication in its diverse social, material, and cultural contexts. Demystify labs and humanize scientists.
Making observational field notes. Reading scientific papers.
Peer review. Claim, evidence, reasoning. Writing analytical essays based on observation.
Part 2 - Science in Culture
Unpacking a Fact Poster
Partner project assessing validity of a public scientific claim.
Understand the mediation of science and how to evaluate scientific claims. Identify popular conceptions of science and contrast these with scientists’ practices.
Following sources upstream. Comparing sources.
APA citation style.
Visual display of info on a poster.
Perspectives Portfolio[Text Wrapping Break]Collaborative investigation of a debate concerning science in Michigan.
Identify and analyze how diverse stakeholders are included in and/or excluded from science. Recognize value of diverse perspective.
Find, use, and correctly cite primary and scholarly secondary sources from different stakeholder perspectives.
Learn communicating to a broader audience in an online platform.
Personal Writing 2: Letter + PS Revision[Text Wrapping Break]Sharing a course takeaway with someone.
Reflect again on evolving identity, role, and responsibilities in scientific culture.
Final assessment of answering questions, supporting a claim, providing evidence, structure, and clear writing.
Weekly Formative Assessments
Discussion Activities Pre-meeting writing about the readings
Reflect on prompted aspects of science and culture
Writing as critical inquiry.
Note-taking.
Preparation for discussion.
Curiosity Colloquium responses
200 words reflecting on weekly speaker series
Exposure to college, campus, and academic guests—including diverse science professionals— who share their curiosity and career story.
Writing as reflection on presentations and their personal value.
Some presenters share research and writing skills.
Column 3 - Results
Results from Personal Writing
Fall 19: There were largely six themes the op-ed assignments discussed. Majority of students chose to talk about the value of science in terms of its ubiquity, problem-solving skills and critical thinking skills, and the way it prompts technological innovation.
Fall 21: Students largely focused on 1. the nature of science as a product of human labor research embedded with many cultural issues, and 2. science as a communication and how scientists can gain public trust (e.g., transparency, collaboration, sharing failure.)
F19 & S20 Selected Survey Results
108 students responding.The full report here.
92.5% reported their overall college writing skills improved somewhat or a lot.
76% reported their writing skills improved somewhat or a lot more than they expected.
89% reported planning to say in LBC.
Selected Course Reflection Comments
The most impactful things students report learning at end of semester.
Science and Culture: Quotes: “how scientific knowledge is produced” “science is inherently social” “how different perspectives . . . impact science” “writing is integral to the scientific community as a method of sharing and documenting scientific research and discoveries”
Writing: Quotes: “a thesis must be specific and debatable” “claim, evidence, and reasoning” “it takes a long time to perfect.” Frequently mentioned skills: Thesis, research skill (citation, finding articles and proper sources), argument (evidence), structure and organization skills, writing as a (often long and arduous) process, using a mentor text, confidence.
What do you want to learn more about after this course?
“How culture(s) and science coexist, and . . . how different cultures view science”
“Gender and minority disparities in STEM” “minority groups in science and how their cultures impact how they conduct science” “different cultures in science instead of just the United States” “how to write scientific essays”
Authored by:
Marisa Brandt & June Oh
Posted on: #iteachmsu
Reimagining First-Year Writing for STEM Undergraduates as Inquiry-Based Learning in Science Studies
How can a first-year writing course help to create 21st century STE...
Authored by:
PEDAGOGICAL DESIGN
Thursday, May 6, 2021
Posted on: Educator Stories
PEDAGOGICAL DESIGN
Featured Educator: Kate Sonka
This week, we are featuring, Kate Sonka, Assistant Director of Inclusion & Academic Technology in the College of Arts and Letters. Kate was recognized via iteach.msu.edu's Thank and Educator Initiative! We encourage MSU community members to nominate high impact Spartan educators (via our Thank an Educator form) regularly!
Read more about Kate's perspectives below. #iteachmsu's questions are bolded below, followed by Kate's responses!
In one word, what does being an educator mean to you?
Connection
Share with me what this word/quality looks like in your practice?
This looks like connections between educators and students, connections between learners and course content, connections among students, connections among faculty, and so forth. In that way, I continually keep these possibilities for connections and collaborations in my mind as I work to support teaching and learning in the College of Arts & Letters (CAL) and the broader MSU community. Some of this appears through faculty professional development opportunities I help create and facilitate and it also appears through the grad and undergrad courses I teach. And in a broader sense, it very much features in the work I do as Executive Director of Teach Access.
Have your ideas on this changed over time? if so how?
If anything each day I find more and expansive ways to connect people to ideas and to each other. I’m definitely a life-long learner myself, so as I take in and learn new information or new pedagogies I want to share those out.
Tell me more about your educational “setting.” This can include, but not limited to departmental affiliations, community connections, co-instructors, and students.
I’m situated in the CAL Dean’s office and I report to both the Assistant Dean for Academic and Research Technology AND the Associate Dean of Academic Personnel and Administration. Beyond that, I spend a lot of my time working with colleagues in a variety of colleges and units across MSU.
What is a challenge you experience in your educator role?
A challenge I experience is one we all face – how do we meet students where they are and ensure we’re creating inclusive learning spaces for everyone in our class.
Any particular “solutions” or “best practices” you’ve found that help you support student success at the university despite/in the face of this?
Making sure we take the time to actually listen to students. I always include surveys to collect anonymous feedback before the semester, mid-way through, and at the end asking about how inclusive (or not) I’ve been as an educator and recommendations on how to help them meet their learning goals. And wherever I can, I try to incorporate that feedback while I still have students in the class, and/or use that feedback to improve the course the next time I teach it.
What are practices you utilize that help you feel successful as an educator?
Certainly the student surveys I mentioned above help me understand if I’m being successful, but also any sort of additional feedback I can get from students or colleagues also helps.
What topics or ideas about teaching and learning would you like to see discussed on the iteach.msu.edu platform? Why do you think this conversation is needed at msu?
I would love to see more conversations about how people are creating accessible learning environments and how considering students with disabilities improves their overall teaching practice. We’ve made some progress in this area since I’ve been at MSU, but the more we could share with each other, the more I think other educators would be energized to try in their own classes.
What are you looking forward to (or excited to be a part of) next semester?
I’ve been doing more work with the CAL Inclusive Pedagogy Initiative, and we were just considering a two-part workshop series on topics of inclusion. Excited to see how this work expands in our college and beyond!
Don't forget to celebrate individuals you see making a difference in teaching, learning, or student success at MSU with #iteachmsu's Thank an Educator initiative. You might just see them appear in the next feature! Follow the MSU Hub Twitter account to see other great content from the #iteachmsu Commons as well as educators featured every week during #ThankfulThursdays.
Read more about Kate's perspectives below. #iteachmsu's questions are bolded below, followed by Kate's responses!
In one word, what does being an educator mean to you?
Connection
Share with me what this word/quality looks like in your practice?
This looks like connections between educators and students, connections between learners and course content, connections among students, connections among faculty, and so forth. In that way, I continually keep these possibilities for connections and collaborations in my mind as I work to support teaching and learning in the College of Arts & Letters (CAL) and the broader MSU community. Some of this appears through faculty professional development opportunities I help create and facilitate and it also appears through the grad and undergrad courses I teach. And in a broader sense, it very much features in the work I do as Executive Director of Teach Access.
Have your ideas on this changed over time? if so how?
If anything each day I find more and expansive ways to connect people to ideas and to each other. I’m definitely a life-long learner myself, so as I take in and learn new information or new pedagogies I want to share those out.
Tell me more about your educational “setting.” This can include, but not limited to departmental affiliations, community connections, co-instructors, and students.
I’m situated in the CAL Dean’s office and I report to both the Assistant Dean for Academic and Research Technology AND the Associate Dean of Academic Personnel and Administration. Beyond that, I spend a lot of my time working with colleagues in a variety of colleges and units across MSU.
What is a challenge you experience in your educator role?
A challenge I experience is one we all face – how do we meet students where they are and ensure we’re creating inclusive learning spaces for everyone in our class.
Any particular “solutions” or “best practices” you’ve found that help you support student success at the university despite/in the face of this?
Making sure we take the time to actually listen to students. I always include surveys to collect anonymous feedback before the semester, mid-way through, and at the end asking about how inclusive (or not) I’ve been as an educator and recommendations on how to help them meet their learning goals. And wherever I can, I try to incorporate that feedback while I still have students in the class, and/or use that feedback to improve the course the next time I teach it.
What are practices you utilize that help you feel successful as an educator?
Certainly the student surveys I mentioned above help me understand if I’m being successful, but also any sort of additional feedback I can get from students or colleagues also helps.
What topics or ideas about teaching and learning would you like to see discussed on the iteach.msu.edu platform? Why do you think this conversation is needed at msu?
I would love to see more conversations about how people are creating accessible learning environments and how considering students with disabilities improves their overall teaching practice. We’ve made some progress in this area since I’ve been at MSU, but the more we could share with each other, the more I think other educators would be energized to try in their own classes.
What are you looking forward to (or excited to be a part of) next semester?
I’ve been doing more work with the CAL Inclusive Pedagogy Initiative, and we were just considering a two-part workshop series on topics of inclusion. Excited to see how this work expands in our college and beyond!
Don't forget to celebrate individuals you see making a difference in teaching, learning, or student success at MSU with #iteachmsu's Thank an Educator initiative. You might just see them appear in the next feature! Follow the MSU Hub Twitter account to see other great content from the #iteachmsu Commons as well as educators featured every week during #ThankfulThursdays.
Authored by:
Kristen Surla
Posted on: Educator Stories
Featured Educator: Kate Sonka
This week, we are featuring, Kate Sonka, Assistant Director of Incl...
Authored by:
PEDAGOGICAL DESIGN
Monday, Feb 15, 2021
Posted on: #iteachmsu
NAVIGATING CONTEXT
5 Things to do on #iteachmsu
Welcome to the #iteachmsu Commons! We’re excited you’ve joined us here and want to make sure you feel comfortable with the basic ways you can engage in this space; because after all, engagement is what it’s all about!
Here are five easy ways to get started on iteach.msu.edu!
Log-in
Iteach.msu.edu is a website that is publicly accessible, so anyone can visit to consume content. The opportunities grow exponentially if you’re affiliated with Michigan State University. By clicking the “Log In” button in the upper right corner of the home screen, you can enter your MSU netID (the same information you’d use for your Spartan Mail or EBS) and be logged in as an active user. Logging in is a great first step that opens a lot of #iteachmsu doors!
Profile
For example, after logging in, you can click on the arrow next to your name in the upper right corner and select “Profile”. Here you can add some basic information about yourself, your role, and your interests/areas of expertise (this helps the site search connect others with you based on keywords).
Join the Conversation
Once logged in, you can also engage with content shared in the space… You could comment on a post in the feed or on an article you find interesting by writing a response in the text box and clicking the green “comment” button. (You can also reply to comments made by others. Iteach.msu.edu is the space for educator conversations!)
Share
Do you have a question you’d like to pose to the broader MSU community of educators? Maybe you’re facing a particular challenge, or you have an idea of an activity but aren’t sure how to put it into action. You can share content like this, plus upload artifacts like PDFs, via “posts”! If you have longer reflections or insights you’d like to share, an “article” gives you more formatting options in addition to the ability to embed photos and videos!
Connect
If you’re looking to connect with other educators who share a common interest as you, join a group! Groups function as informal learning communities or communities of practice, with the same functions as the broader site. You can engage in a discussion on a post in the group feed, share articles, and “connect” with other members! (By clicking the “connect” button on a user’s profile or the connections page, you can send the direct messages.)
Bonus: Thank an Educator
Clicking “Thank an Educator” in the left navigation bar will take you to a page with a short survey where you can submit an MSU educator for recognition from #iteachmsu. Who have you noticed stepping up? Who has made a positive impact on your MSU experience? Anyone can be thanked via this initiative, so start celebrating others today! Learn more about Thank an Educator here.
The #iteachmsu Commons is a space “for educators, by educators”. But what does that mean? Please read more about the history of this platform on Medium here.
Here are five easy ways to get started on iteach.msu.edu!
Log-in
Iteach.msu.edu is a website that is publicly accessible, so anyone can visit to consume content. The opportunities grow exponentially if you’re affiliated with Michigan State University. By clicking the “Log In” button in the upper right corner of the home screen, you can enter your MSU netID (the same information you’d use for your Spartan Mail or EBS) and be logged in as an active user. Logging in is a great first step that opens a lot of #iteachmsu doors!
Profile
For example, after logging in, you can click on the arrow next to your name in the upper right corner and select “Profile”. Here you can add some basic information about yourself, your role, and your interests/areas of expertise (this helps the site search connect others with you based on keywords).
Join the Conversation
Once logged in, you can also engage with content shared in the space… You could comment on a post in the feed or on an article you find interesting by writing a response in the text box and clicking the green “comment” button. (You can also reply to comments made by others. Iteach.msu.edu is the space for educator conversations!)
Share
Do you have a question you’d like to pose to the broader MSU community of educators? Maybe you’re facing a particular challenge, or you have an idea of an activity but aren’t sure how to put it into action. You can share content like this, plus upload artifacts like PDFs, via “posts”! If you have longer reflections or insights you’d like to share, an “article” gives you more formatting options in addition to the ability to embed photos and videos!
Connect
If you’re looking to connect with other educators who share a common interest as you, join a group! Groups function as informal learning communities or communities of practice, with the same functions as the broader site. You can engage in a discussion on a post in the group feed, share articles, and “connect” with other members! (By clicking the “connect” button on a user’s profile or the connections page, you can send the direct messages.)
Bonus: Thank an Educator
Clicking “Thank an Educator” in the left navigation bar will take you to a page with a short survey where you can submit an MSU educator for recognition from #iteachmsu. Who have you noticed stepping up? Who has made a positive impact on your MSU experience? Anyone can be thanked via this initiative, so start celebrating others today! Learn more about Thank an Educator here.
The #iteachmsu Commons is a space “for educators, by educators”. But what does that mean? Please read more about the history of this platform on Medium here.
Authored by:
Makena Neal
Posted on: #iteachmsu
5 Things to do on #iteachmsu
Welcome to the #iteachmsu Commons! We’re excited you’ve joined us h...
Authored by:
NAVIGATING CONTEXT
Monday, Feb 15, 2021
Posted on: #iteachmsu
PEDAGOGICAL DESIGN
Creating a Collaborative Learning Environment in a Synchronous, Flipped Course
The move to online learning in response to COVID-19 brought both challenges and opportunities. An off-campus, flipped section of ANTR 350 has been offered in Grand Rapids during the summer since 2017. When Michigan State University moved to online learning for summer 2020, the class was adapted to a Zoom-based, synchronous model. Students were required to complete online learning modules as preparation for each class. During class, students worked in small groups to complete application activities in Zoom breakout rooms.
Groups were assigned and reconfigured for each unit. The instructor provided recommendations for working effectively in a group and students received feedback after the first and third units regarding their teamwork skills and class performance. Unit exams were two-stage examinations, consisting of an individual exam followed immediately by a group exam. These examinations were timed and proctored over Zoom by faculty and staff.
Students and faculty faced many technological, health, and personal challenges during the semester. However, students demonstrated tremendous resilience and flexibility. Overall, the course was a very positive experience; student performance and SIRS ratings were higher than during previous iterations of the course. The instructor observed improved group work skills, which was mirrored by student feedback. Overall, we were able to retain the flipped approach and emphasis on group work by using Zoom breakout rooms to simulate a collaborative learning environment comparable to that of the in-person experience.
To access a PDF of the "Creating a Collaborative Learning Environment in a Synchronous, Flipped Course" poster, click here.
Description of the Poster
Creating a Collaborative Learning Environment in a Synchronous, Flipped Course
Ryan Maureen Tubbs, Department of Radiology, Division of Human Anatomy, College of Human Medicine
Alexis Amos, Michigan State University, Psychology Major, Senior
ANTR 350 Goes Virtual
ANTR 350, Human Gross Anatomy for Pre-Health Professionalsis an undergraduate course traditionally offered as large, in-person lecture sections on main campus and as a flipped, in-person section in Grand Rapids during summer semesters.
When Michigan State University moved to online learning for summer 2020, the class was adapted to a Zoom-based, synchronous model. Students were required to complete online learning modules as preparation for each class. During class, students worked in small groups to complete application activities in Zoom breakout rooms. The move to online learning in response to COVID-19 brought both challenges and opportunities in terms of creating a collaborative learning environment.
An online preparatory assignment was due at start of each class
Readings interspersed with videos, interactive models, and questions
Guided by specific learning objectives
Variable number of questions but each assignment worth 2pts (total 11.2% of grade)
Image: screenshot of a portion of a Top Hat Assignment titled "Preparatory Reading June 9". Some of the learning objectives and headings are shown.
During class, students primarily collaborated in Zoom breakout rooms to review and apply the content covered in the preparatory assignment. The instructor moved between rooms to check on group progress and answer questions. Most in-class activities utilized Google docs or Top Hat, so the instructor could also observe group progress in real time. For most activities, keys were available during class so that groups did not end up stuck on any questions.
10:00-10:03 Application prompt while people logged in, answers entered in zoom chat
10:04-10:15 Synchronous, Top Hat-based Readiness Quiz, 5 questions
10:15-11:45 Groupwork and mini-lectures*
11:45-11:50 Post-class survey soliciting feedback on activities & overall session
Image: screenshot of example application exercise using Google Docs. A CT is shown on the right side of the image and a series of questions is shown on the left. Students answers to the questions are shown in blue.
Creating a Collaborative Learning Environment
The importance of developing teamwork skills was emphasized in the syllabus and during the course overview presentation. Students were given descriptions of five different group roles (leader, learner, time-keeper, recorder, and summarizer) and asked to try moving between the roles. Students were asked to read and agree to expectations for student interactions, including keeping camera on when possible, actively engaging with the group, agreeing not to take screenshots or record the session, and guidelines about private chats. The instructor acknowledged the awkwardness of working with strangers over zoom and asked all students to be generous of spirit with each other.
A brief ice-breaker activity was assigned at the start of each unit to give students an opportunity to develop their collaborative learning relationships. After each unit, students were asked to give honest feedback to the instructor about each of their groupmates’ collaborative learning skills. Students received feedback summaries and recommendations about how to improve their collaborative skills at the end of units 1 and 3. Groups were also asked to set ground rules and group goals at the start of units 2 and 3.
Image: screenshot of June 9 Top Hat In-Class Page. Activity 1 is an ice breaker for new groups. Activity 2 is an axial muscles google doc groupwork exercise. Activity 3 is the review of that google doc as a whole class and Activity 4 is setting Unit 2 goals.
The importance of collaborative learning was emphasized by the inclusion of collaborative testing. Unit exams consisted of an individual exam followed immediately by the same exam taken in their groups. The group exam contributed 16.67% to each unit exam score.
Student feedback was collected in SIRS, post-class, and post-course surveys
Student Feedback
Image: bar chart showing responses to "How many of your classmates that you did not know previously did you communicate with outside of class during the semester?"
Fall 2019 (in-person section): Average of 1.3125
Spring 2020 (Fall 2019 (in-person section until COVID moved asynchronous): Average of 1.2181
Summer 2020 (sychronous zoom) 1.5625
Fall 2020 (asynchronous online) 0.8082
Image: bar chart showing response to "Overall, did you have someone you could reach out to if you struggled with content during this course?"
Fall 2019 (in-person):
Yes for all units 79.2%
Yes, for 3 or 4 units 0%
Yes, for 1 or two units 12.5%
No, I never really did 8.3%
Spring 2020 (mostly in-person)
Yes for all units 67.3%
Yes, for 3 or 4 units 5.4%
Yes, for 1 or two units 16.3%
No, I never really did 10.9%
Summer 2020 (synchronous, virtual)
Yes for all units 81.3%
Yes, for 3 or 4 units 0%
Yes, for 1 or two units 6.2%
No, I never really did 12.5%
Fall 2020 (asychronous, virtual)
Yes for all units 60.8%
Yes, for 3 or 4 units 5.4%
Yes, for 1 or two units 14.9%
No, I never really did 18.9%
Spring 2021 (asychronous, current course)
Yes for all units 54.7%
Yes, for 3 or 4 units 4.7%
Yes, for 1 or two units 16.1%
No, I never really did 24.5%
Image: 100% Stacked Column Chart showing student responses to "How comfortable did you feel reaching out to a course instructor if you struggled with content?"
Fall 2019
Extremely Comfortable 54%
Somewhat comfortable 29%
Neither comfortable nor uncomfortable 8%
Somewhat uncomfortable 4%
Extremely uncomfortable 4%
Spring 2020
Extremely Comfortable 36%
Somewhat comfortable 29%
Neither comfortable nor uncomfortable 20%
Somewhat uncomfortable 15%
Extremely uncomfortable 0%
Summer 2020
Extremely Comfortable 87%
Somewhat comfortable 0%
Neither comfortable nor uncomfortable 13%
Somewhat uncomfortable 0%
Extremely uncomfortable 0%
Fall 2020
Extremely Comfortable 39%
Somewhat comfortable 32%
Neither comfortable nor uncomfortable 18%
Somewhat uncomfortable 8%
Extremely uncomfortable 3%
Spring 2021
Extremely Comfortable 35%
Somewhat comfortable 30%
Neither comfortable nor uncomfortable 30%
Somewhat uncomfortable 4%
Extremely uncomfortable 2%
Image: Pie Chart Titled "Overall, how supported did you feel during this course compared to other courses you have taken?” (Summer 2020)
Far above average is shown as 81%, Somewhat above average is shown as 13%, Average is shown as 6%. Somewhat below average and far below average are listed in the legend but not represented in the chart as they are 0%
Conclusions
Summer 2020 was a hard semester for everyone. We all faced many technological, health, and personal challenges during the semester. Despite these challenges, students demonstrated tremendous resilience and we were able to create a collaborative learning environment using Zoom breakout rooms. Overall, the course was a very positive experience; student performance and SIRS ratings were higher than during previous Summer iterations of the course. In addition, students felt more connected compared to the asynchronous Fall sections.
Image: Table “Student Performance”
Number of students enrolled in course:
Summer 2019: 22
Spring 2020: 338
Summer 2020: 52
Number of students withdrawn from course:
Summer 2019: 0
Spring 2020: 1
Summer 2020: 0
Mean percent score overall:
Summer 2019: 82.85%
Spring 2020: 90.19%
Summer 2020: 89.03%
Number of students with passing scores (2.0 or higher):
Summer 2019: 20
Spring 2020: 332
Summer 2020: 50
Number of students with failing scores (1.5 of lower):
Summer 2019: 2
Spring 2020: 4
Summer 2020: 2
Percentage of students with failing scores:
Summer 2019: 9%
Spring 2020: 1%
Summer 2020: 3.8%
Image: Results of MSU Student Instructional Rating System (SIRS)
Summer 2019 SIRS
Course Organization
Superior 33.3%
Above Average 55.5%
Average 11.1%
Below Average 0%
Inferior 0%
Adequacy of the outlined direction of the course
Superior 33.3%
Above Average 55.5%
Average 11.1%
Below Average 0%
Inferior 0%
Your general enjoyment of the course
Superior 33.3%
Above Average 44.4%
Average 22.2%
Below Average 0%
Inferior 0%
Summer 2020 SIRS
Course Organization
Superior 70.9%
Above Average 19.3%
Average 6.45%
Below Average 3.22%
Inferior 0%
Adequacy of the outlined direction of the course
Superior 77.4%
Above Average 16.1%
Average 6.45%
Below Average 0%
Inferior 0%
Your general enjoyment of the course
Superior 54.8%
Above Average 38.7%
Average 6.45%
Below Average 0%
Inferior 0%
References
Gaillard, Frank. “Acute Maxillary Sinusitis: Radiology Case.” Radiopaedia Blog RSS, radiopaedia.org/cases/acute-maxillary-sinusitis?lang=us.
ANTR 350 Top Hat Course. www.tophat.com
Acknowledgments
A giant thank you to the ANTR 350 Summer Class of 2020!
Groups were assigned and reconfigured for each unit. The instructor provided recommendations for working effectively in a group and students received feedback after the first and third units regarding their teamwork skills and class performance. Unit exams were two-stage examinations, consisting of an individual exam followed immediately by a group exam. These examinations were timed and proctored over Zoom by faculty and staff.
Students and faculty faced many technological, health, and personal challenges during the semester. However, students demonstrated tremendous resilience and flexibility. Overall, the course was a very positive experience; student performance and SIRS ratings were higher than during previous iterations of the course. The instructor observed improved group work skills, which was mirrored by student feedback. Overall, we were able to retain the flipped approach and emphasis on group work by using Zoom breakout rooms to simulate a collaborative learning environment comparable to that of the in-person experience.
To access a PDF of the "Creating a Collaborative Learning Environment in a Synchronous, Flipped Course" poster, click here.
Description of the Poster
Creating a Collaborative Learning Environment in a Synchronous, Flipped Course
Ryan Maureen Tubbs, Department of Radiology, Division of Human Anatomy, College of Human Medicine
Alexis Amos, Michigan State University, Psychology Major, Senior
ANTR 350 Goes Virtual
ANTR 350, Human Gross Anatomy for Pre-Health Professionalsis an undergraduate course traditionally offered as large, in-person lecture sections on main campus and as a flipped, in-person section in Grand Rapids during summer semesters.
When Michigan State University moved to online learning for summer 2020, the class was adapted to a Zoom-based, synchronous model. Students were required to complete online learning modules as preparation for each class. During class, students worked in small groups to complete application activities in Zoom breakout rooms. The move to online learning in response to COVID-19 brought both challenges and opportunities in terms of creating a collaborative learning environment.
An online preparatory assignment was due at start of each class
Readings interspersed with videos, interactive models, and questions
Guided by specific learning objectives
Variable number of questions but each assignment worth 2pts (total 11.2% of grade)
Image: screenshot of a portion of a Top Hat Assignment titled "Preparatory Reading June 9". Some of the learning objectives and headings are shown.
During class, students primarily collaborated in Zoom breakout rooms to review and apply the content covered in the preparatory assignment. The instructor moved between rooms to check on group progress and answer questions. Most in-class activities utilized Google docs or Top Hat, so the instructor could also observe group progress in real time. For most activities, keys were available during class so that groups did not end up stuck on any questions.
10:00-10:03 Application prompt while people logged in, answers entered in zoom chat
10:04-10:15 Synchronous, Top Hat-based Readiness Quiz, 5 questions
10:15-11:45 Groupwork and mini-lectures*
11:45-11:50 Post-class survey soliciting feedback on activities & overall session
Image: screenshot of example application exercise using Google Docs. A CT is shown on the right side of the image and a series of questions is shown on the left. Students answers to the questions are shown in blue.
Creating a Collaborative Learning Environment
The importance of developing teamwork skills was emphasized in the syllabus and during the course overview presentation. Students were given descriptions of five different group roles (leader, learner, time-keeper, recorder, and summarizer) and asked to try moving between the roles. Students were asked to read and agree to expectations for student interactions, including keeping camera on when possible, actively engaging with the group, agreeing not to take screenshots or record the session, and guidelines about private chats. The instructor acknowledged the awkwardness of working with strangers over zoom and asked all students to be generous of spirit with each other.
A brief ice-breaker activity was assigned at the start of each unit to give students an opportunity to develop their collaborative learning relationships. After each unit, students were asked to give honest feedback to the instructor about each of their groupmates’ collaborative learning skills. Students received feedback summaries and recommendations about how to improve their collaborative skills at the end of units 1 and 3. Groups were also asked to set ground rules and group goals at the start of units 2 and 3.
Image: screenshot of June 9 Top Hat In-Class Page. Activity 1 is an ice breaker for new groups. Activity 2 is an axial muscles google doc groupwork exercise. Activity 3 is the review of that google doc as a whole class and Activity 4 is setting Unit 2 goals.
The importance of collaborative learning was emphasized by the inclusion of collaborative testing. Unit exams consisted of an individual exam followed immediately by the same exam taken in their groups. The group exam contributed 16.67% to each unit exam score.
Student feedback was collected in SIRS, post-class, and post-course surveys
Student Feedback
Image: bar chart showing responses to "How many of your classmates that you did not know previously did you communicate with outside of class during the semester?"
Fall 2019 (in-person section): Average of 1.3125
Spring 2020 (Fall 2019 (in-person section until COVID moved asynchronous): Average of 1.2181
Summer 2020 (sychronous zoom) 1.5625
Fall 2020 (asynchronous online) 0.8082
Image: bar chart showing response to "Overall, did you have someone you could reach out to if you struggled with content during this course?"
Fall 2019 (in-person):
Yes for all units 79.2%
Yes, for 3 or 4 units 0%
Yes, for 1 or two units 12.5%
No, I never really did 8.3%
Spring 2020 (mostly in-person)
Yes for all units 67.3%
Yes, for 3 or 4 units 5.4%
Yes, for 1 or two units 16.3%
No, I never really did 10.9%
Summer 2020 (synchronous, virtual)
Yes for all units 81.3%
Yes, for 3 or 4 units 0%
Yes, for 1 or two units 6.2%
No, I never really did 12.5%
Fall 2020 (asychronous, virtual)
Yes for all units 60.8%
Yes, for 3 or 4 units 5.4%
Yes, for 1 or two units 14.9%
No, I never really did 18.9%
Spring 2021 (asychronous, current course)
Yes for all units 54.7%
Yes, for 3 or 4 units 4.7%
Yes, for 1 or two units 16.1%
No, I never really did 24.5%
Image: 100% Stacked Column Chart showing student responses to "How comfortable did you feel reaching out to a course instructor if you struggled with content?"
Fall 2019
Extremely Comfortable 54%
Somewhat comfortable 29%
Neither comfortable nor uncomfortable 8%
Somewhat uncomfortable 4%
Extremely uncomfortable 4%
Spring 2020
Extremely Comfortable 36%
Somewhat comfortable 29%
Neither comfortable nor uncomfortable 20%
Somewhat uncomfortable 15%
Extremely uncomfortable 0%
Summer 2020
Extremely Comfortable 87%
Somewhat comfortable 0%
Neither comfortable nor uncomfortable 13%
Somewhat uncomfortable 0%
Extremely uncomfortable 0%
Fall 2020
Extremely Comfortable 39%
Somewhat comfortable 32%
Neither comfortable nor uncomfortable 18%
Somewhat uncomfortable 8%
Extremely uncomfortable 3%
Spring 2021
Extremely Comfortable 35%
Somewhat comfortable 30%
Neither comfortable nor uncomfortable 30%
Somewhat uncomfortable 4%
Extremely uncomfortable 2%
Image: Pie Chart Titled "Overall, how supported did you feel during this course compared to other courses you have taken?” (Summer 2020)
Far above average is shown as 81%, Somewhat above average is shown as 13%, Average is shown as 6%. Somewhat below average and far below average are listed in the legend but not represented in the chart as they are 0%
Conclusions
Summer 2020 was a hard semester for everyone. We all faced many technological, health, and personal challenges during the semester. Despite these challenges, students demonstrated tremendous resilience and we were able to create a collaborative learning environment using Zoom breakout rooms. Overall, the course was a very positive experience; student performance and SIRS ratings were higher than during previous Summer iterations of the course. In addition, students felt more connected compared to the asynchronous Fall sections.
Image: Table “Student Performance”
Number of students enrolled in course:
Summer 2019: 22
Spring 2020: 338
Summer 2020: 52
Number of students withdrawn from course:
Summer 2019: 0
Spring 2020: 1
Summer 2020: 0
Mean percent score overall:
Summer 2019: 82.85%
Spring 2020: 90.19%
Summer 2020: 89.03%
Number of students with passing scores (2.0 or higher):
Summer 2019: 20
Spring 2020: 332
Summer 2020: 50
Number of students with failing scores (1.5 of lower):
Summer 2019: 2
Spring 2020: 4
Summer 2020: 2
Percentage of students with failing scores:
Summer 2019: 9%
Spring 2020: 1%
Summer 2020: 3.8%
Image: Results of MSU Student Instructional Rating System (SIRS)
Summer 2019 SIRS
Course Organization
Superior 33.3%
Above Average 55.5%
Average 11.1%
Below Average 0%
Inferior 0%
Adequacy of the outlined direction of the course
Superior 33.3%
Above Average 55.5%
Average 11.1%
Below Average 0%
Inferior 0%
Your general enjoyment of the course
Superior 33.3%
Above Average 44.4%
Average 22.2%
Below Average 0%
Inferior 0%
Summer 2020 SIRS
Course Organization
Superior 70.9%
Above Average 19.3%
Average 6.45%
Below Average 3.22%
Inferior 0%
Adequacy of the outlined direction of the course
Superior 77.4%
Above Average 16.1%
Average 6.45%
Below Average 0%
Inferior 0%
Your general enjoyment of the course
Superior 54.8%
Above Average 38.7%
Average 6.45%
Below Average 0%
Inferior 0%
References
Gaillard, Frank. “Acute Maxillary Sinusitis: Radiology Case.” Radiopaedia Blog RSS, radiopaedia.org/cases/acute-maxillary-sinusitis?lang=us.
ANTR 350 Top Hat Course. www.tophat.com
Acknowledgments
A giant thank you to the ANTR 350 Summer Class of 2020!
Authored by:
Ryan Tubbs, Alexis Amos
Posted on: #iteachmsu
Creating a Collaborative Learning Environment in a Synchronous, Flipped Course
The move to online learning in response to COVID-19 brought both ch...
Authored by:
PEDAGOGICAL DESIGN
Monday, Apr 26, 2021
Posted on: #iteachmsu
PEDAGOGICAL DESIGN
Entering Research Online: Developing a Virtual Course to Support Undergraduate Research Assistants
EGR 193: Introduction to Engineering Research was piloted in Fall 2020 as a fully online, entirely asynchronous course to introduce first-year, first-semester undergraduates to engineering research. All of the course materials for the entire semester were available on the first day of class, and students could “choose their own course” by selecting activities and assignments that matched their own experiences and goals. The design and content of this course were evaluated using anonymous feedback and a review of reflective discussion posts in order to determine whether the course supported the stated learning goals. Results indicated that students found the course helpful in understanding their role as undergraduate research assistants and in learning the professional skills (communications, teamwork, organization, etc.) necessary for success. While most students opted to follow the suggested schedule, about 15% of students chose to delay participation until later in the semester. This varying pace of engagement had an unexpected impact on some of the most dedicated students, who found it difficult to engage in productive discussions online when not all of their classmates were working as quickly through the materials. A number of other interesting themes emerged from the discussion boards, which offer areas for future study.To access a PDF of the "Entering Research Online: Developing a Virtual Course to Support Undergraduate Research Assistants" poster, click here.
Description of the Poster
Background Image Description:
A light green background with an imprint of the Spartan helmet logo; the words Michigan State University College of Engineering appear in the top right.
Poster Title:
Entering Research Online: Developing a Virtual Course to Support Undergraduate Research Assistants
Authors:
Katy Luchini Colbry, Candyce Hill
Learning Goals:
By participating in this course, students will:
Learn about research mentoring styles and build skills for communicating about goals and expectations with research mentors
Examine and apply time management skills for balancing academic, research and personal goals during college
Gain an understanding of the structure of research literature and develop skills for identifying and organizing appropriate references within their field of research
Explore methods for documenting and disseminating research results in engineering
Learn about ethical practices for research, and be able to articulate key principles for conducting research responsibly within engineering domains
Gain experience in working in research teams and communicating with individuals from different backgrounds, cultures, and research disciplines
Reflect on their initial research experience and develop goals for the remainder of their undergraduate research appointment
Suggested Timeline for Course Activities:
Week
Topic
Assignments
1
Welcome
Introduction Survey
2
Introduction to Research
Mentoring Styles Worksheet
3
Establishing Goals and Expectations with your Mentor
Mentor-Mentee Contract
4
Time Management
Time Log / Timeline
5
Library Resources & Citation Management Systems
Install Citation Management
6
Tools and Techniques for Literature Reviews
Article Review Worksheet
7
Developing Research Abstracts and Posters
Poster Review Worksheet
8
Responsible Conduct of Research (RCR)
CITI Module 1 (RCR Training)
9
Understanding Graduate School
CITI Module 2 (RCR Training)
10
Academic Resumes
CITI Module 3 (RCR Training)
11
Planning the Rest of Your Research Experience
CITI Module 4 (RCR Training)
12
Nothing. Happy Thanksgiving!
13-15
Wrap Up / Catch Up: Final deadline to submit assignments and/or earn points is 5:00pm Eastern (GMT -5) on Friday of exam week
Lessons Learned:
Overall, student feedback and review of discussion posts indicate that the design and implementation of the course was effective in meeting the established learning goals
Online, asynchronous delivery and “choose your own course” structure allowed students to focus on activities that were of most benefit to them
Students who kept pace with the suggested timeline experienced frustration with later discussion boards, when fewer students were posting in a timely manner
Asynchronous discussion boards can be good places for reflection and synthesis, but real-time feedback and encouragement is important for activities where students might feel vulnerable, such as self-assessments of their skills and abilities
Future Work:
Students expressed preference for email communications so as not to “interrupt” their advisors, entirely missing the idea that many research questions are more effectively asked in real time; this may be an artifact of the all-virtual experience in Fall 2020, and would be interesting to compare with experiences of future cohorts
Students demonstrated an understanding of authorship as important academic “currency” and that different levels of research input merited different types of authorship or acknowledgement; what was missing was any discussion of paid compensation as sufficient remuneration for research in at least some contexts
Acknowledgments:
We are grateful for support from the MSU HUB Faculty Fellowship Program, the MSU College of Engineering, The Center for Spartan Engineering, and the MSU Honors College.
Description of the Poster
Background Image Description:
A light green background with an imprint of the Spartan helmet logo; the words Michigan State University College of Engineering appear in the top right.
Poster Title:
Entering Research Online: Developing a Virtual Course to Support Undergraduate Research Assistants
Authors:
Katy Luchini Colbry, Candyce Hill
Learning Goals:
By participating in this course, students will:
Learn about research mentoring styles and build skills for communicating about goals and expectations with research mentors
Examine and apply time management skills for balancing academic, research and personal goals during college
Gain an understanding of the structure of research literature and develop skills for identifying and organizing appropriate references within their field of research
Explore methods for documenting and disseminating research results in engineering
Learn about ethical practices for research, and be able to articulate key principles for conducting research responsibly within engineering domains
Gain experience in working in research teams and communicating with individuals from different backgrounds, cultures, and research disciplines
Reflect on their initial research experience and develop goals for the remainder of their undergraduate research appointment
Suggested Timeline for Course Activities:
Week
Topic
Assignments
1
Welcome
Introduction Survey
2
Introduction to Research
Mentoring Styles Worksheet
3
Establishing Goals and Expectations with your Mentor
Mentor-Mentee Contract
4
Time Management
Time Log / Timeline
5
Library Resources & Citation Management Systems
Install Citation Management
6
Tools and Techniques for Literature Reviews
Article Review Worksheet
7
Developing Research Abstracts and Posters
Poster Review Worksheet
8
Responsible Conduct of Research (RCR)
CITI Module 1 (RCR Training)
9
Understanding Graduate School
CITI Module 2 (RCR Training)
10
Academic Resumes
CITI Module 3 (RCR Training)
11
Planning the Rest of Your Research Experience
CITI Module 4 (RCR Training)
12
Nothing. Happy Thanksgiving!
13-15
Wrap Up / Catch Up: Final deadline to submit assignments and/or earn points is 5:00pm Eastern (GMT -5) on Friday of exam week
Lessons Learned:
Overall, student feedback and review of discussion posts indicate that the design and implementation of the course was effective in meeting the established learning goals
Online, asynchronous delivery and “choose your own course” structure allowed students to focus on activities that were of most benefit to them
Students who kept pace with the suggested timeline experienced frustration with later discussion boards, when fewer students were posting in a timely manner
Asynchronous discussion boards can be good places for reflection and synthesis, but real-time feedback and encouragement is important for activities where students might feel vulnerable, such as self-assessments of their skills and abilities
Future Work:
Students expressed preference for email communications so as not to “interrupt” their advisors, entirely missing the idea that many research questions are more effectively asked in real time; this may be an artifact of the all-virtual experience in Fall 2020, and would be interesting to compare with experiences of future cohorts
Students demonstrated an understanding of authorship as important academic “currency” and that different levels of research input merited different types of authorship or acknowledgement; what was missing was any discussion of paid compensation as sufficient remuneration for research in at least some contexts
Acknowledgments:
We are grateful for support from the MSU HUB Faculty Fellowship Program, the MSU College of Engineering, The Center for Spartan Engineering, and the MSU Honors College.
Authored by:
Katy Colbry, Candyce Hill
Posted on: #iteachmsu
Entering Research Online: Developing a Virtual Course to Support Undergraduate Research Assistants
EGR 193: Introduction to Engineering Research was piloted in Fall 2...
Authored by:
PEDAGOGICAL DESIGN
Monday, Apr 26, 2021
Posted on: #iteachmsu
NAVIGATING CONTEXT
What is the Activities Profile of our Fall 2021 First-Year Class?
For years, the Office of Admissions has provided our campus with an academic profile of each incoming class. Admissions is now positioned to provide a similar profile of admitted students' co-curricular activities. The data-informed profile provides opportunities to assess how many such activities were tied to areas such as athletics or find more narrow measures, such as the scale of first-year Lyman Briggs College student involvement within the fine arts. Additionally, our institution can identify involvements in areas such as research activity, with such involvements potentially providing students with a foundation for future involvement in high-impact experiences at the undergraduate level.To access a PDF of the "What is the Activities Profile of our Fall 2021 First-Year Class?" poster, click here.
Description of the Poster
What is the Activities Profile of our Fall 2021 First-Year Class?
Terence Brown
Abstract
For years, the Office of Admissions has provided our campus with an academic profile of each incoming class. Admissions is now positioned to provide a similar profile of admitted students’ cocurricular activities. The data-informed profile provides opportunities to assess how many such activities were tied to areas such as athletics or find more narrow measures, such as the scale of first-year Lyman Briggs College student involvement within the fine arts. Additionally, our institution can identify involvements in areas such as research activity, with such involvements potentially providing students with a foundation for future involvement in high-impact practices at the undergraduate level. [The abstract is accompanied by word cloud that forms a two-dimensional Spartan helmet from the Common Application’s categories for student co-curriculars.]
Introduction
MSU’s adoption of the Common Application, now allows Admissions for to collect descriptive information for applicants’ cocurricular activities. The additional information includes applicant descriptions of their high school cocurriculars, categories assigned to each activity and whether a student wishes to continue participation in the activity during their collegiate years. Currently, approximately 71% of first-year students apply to MSU via the Common Application. This assessment fundamentally asks two questions:
What does the profile look in the aggregate and by college?
Can the profile information support our institution’s efforts in the realm of offering high-impact practices (Kuh et al., 2008; AACU, 2018) to our students?
Results
In assessing the 204,672 admitted student activity entries as of April 19, 2021, there were a few general findings. First was that students wished to continue with approximately 66% percent of these activities. Second was that the leading activity categories were athletics, community service and work. The collective of academic activities was ranked fourth, with the category having been in the top three in the two preceding years. The test case of Lyman Briggs majors with fine arts experiences was a significant (378 total) but small 5.5%. A full review of results across colleges is pending, but early findings only showed occasional reordering of the established top four categories. This data must be viewed with the understanding that many applications are completed by the parents of applicants (Jaschik, 2017). However, the data still provides a good foundation for identifying activities that can serve as a gateway to high-impact practices at MSU. There were lower rankings for high school activities categories covering involvements that would most-readily prepare students for Internships, Diversity/Global Understanding and Research. [The “results” section includes an Excel chart that lists the total activities reported by category, the Common Application’s activity categories, high impact experience categories and MSU Student Activities categories for student organizations.]
Methods
During the three most-recent admissions cycles, an iterative process has been used to collect and organized the cocurricular data from applications submitted via the Common Application platform. The Common Application is one of three platforms available to students, but was used by the majority of applicants in each of the last three admission cycles. Summary data was compiled and applied to a matrix that incorporates all 30 Common Application categories for activities, five of the 11 high-impact practice categories and 12 of MSU’s Student Activities Office’s applicable student organization categories. Additional keywork searches were conducted, identifying student involvement in popular activities such as DECA and rare research areas such as CRISPR, but the activity profile’s assessment mainly focused on the broader categories. [This section includes seven small, unconnected circles that are collectively placed in an array that forms a larger circle. Each circle includes text that describes a different step in the process used to gather, compile and share the data used in this poster presentation.]
Conclusions
The dominant application categories have largely held steady for three admission cycles. There was a notable change with the emergence of work moving into the top three. Incidentally, the top three categories have slightly varied in previous comparisons between MSU college cohorts. A similar assessment will be made after the closing of our MSU’s deposit deadline. Future work in this area can be supported through use of the Educational Development Plan which Michigan schools maintain starting in middle school. To determine whether a particular high school activity helps prepare for high-impact involvement, the assessment portion of the EDP (Michigan Department of Education) could be used to identify traits that George Kuh associates with high-impact practices. Were the EDP to identify activities that provide students with sustained involvement, advisor involvement or a relevant coaching philosophy, such data could be inputted into the Slate CRM, and shared with appropriate campus partners prior to admitted student matriculation.
Citations
Association of American Colleges & Universities (2018). High-impact educational practices. Retrieved from https://www.aacu.org/node/4084
Jaschik, S. (July 26, 2017). Survey: Parents finishing parts of college applications. From Inside Higher Education
Kuh, G. D., Schneider, C. G., & Association of American Colleges and Universities. (2008). High-impact educational practices: What they are, who has access to them, and why they matter. Washington, DC: Association of American Colleges and Universities
Michigan Department of Education (n.d.). The Educational Development Plan, p. 3. Retrieved from https://www.michigan.gov/documents/mde/EDP_Fundamentals_ADA2017_570694_7.pdf
Description of the Poster
What is the Activities Profile of our Fall 2021 First-Year Class?
Terence Brown
Abstract
For years, the Office of Admissions has provided our campus with an academic profile of each incoming class. Admissions is now positioned to provide a similar profile of admitted students’ cocurricular activities. The data-informed profile provides opportunities to assess how many such activities were tied to areas such as athletics or find more narrow measures, such as the scale of first-year Lyman Briggs College student involvement within the fine arts. Additionally, our institution can identify involvements in areas such as research activity, with such involvements potentially providing students with a foundation for future involvement in high-impact practices at the undergraduate level. [The abstract is accompanied by word cloud that forms a two-dimensional Spartan helmet from the Common Application’s categories for student co-curriculars.]
Introduction
MSU’s adoption of the Common Application, now allows Admissions for to collect descriptive information for applicants’ cocurricular activities. The additional information includes applicant descriptions of their high school cocurriculars, categories assigned to each activity and whether a student wishes to continue participation in the activity during their collegiate years. Currently, approximately 71% of first-year students apply to MSU via the Common Application. This assessment fundamentally asks two questions:
What does the profile look in the aggregate and by college?
Can the profile information support our institution’s efforts in the realm of offering high-impact practices (Kuh et al., 2008; AACU, 2018) to our students?
Results
In assessing the 204,672 admitted student activity entries as of April 19, 2021, there were a few general findings. First was that students wished to continue with approximately 66% percent of these activities. Second was that the leading activity categories were athletics, community service and work. The collective of academic activities was ranked fourth, with the category having been in the top three in the two preceding years. The test case of Lyman Briggs majors with fine arts experiences was a significant (378 total) but small 5.5%. A full review of results across colleges is pending, but early findings only showed occasional reordering of the established top four categories. This data must be viewed with the understanding that many applications are completed by the parents of applicants (Jaschik, 2017). However, the data still provides a good foundation for identifying activities that can serve as a gateway to high-impact practices at MSU. There were lower rankings for high school activities categories covering involvements that would most-readily prepare students for Internships, Diversity/Global Understanding and Research. [The “results” section includes an Excel chart that lists the total activities reported by category, the Common Application’s activity categories, high impact experience categories and MSU Student Activities categories for student organizations.]
Methods
During the three most-recent admissions cycles, an iterative process has been used to collect and organized the cocurricular data from applications submitted via the Common Application platform. The Common Application is one of three platforms available to students, but was used by the majority of applicants in each of the last three admission cycles. Summary data was compiled and applied to a matrix that incorporates all 30 Common Application categories for activities, five of the 11 high-impact practice categories and 12 of MSU’s Student Activities Office’s applicable student organization categories. Additional keywork searches were conducted, identifying student involvement in popular activities such as DECA and rare research areas such as CRISPR, but the activity profile’s assessment mainly focused on the broader categories. [This section includes seven small, unconnected circles that are collectively placed in an array that forms a larger circle. Each circle includes text that describes a different step in the process used to gather, compile and share the data used in this poster presentation.]
Conclusions
The dominant application categories have largely held steady for three admission cycles. There was a notable change with the emergence of work moving into the top three. Incidentally, the top three categories have slightly varied in previous comparisons between MSU college cohorts. A similar assessment will be made after the closing of our MSU’s deposit deadline. Future work in this area can be supported through use of the Educational Development Plan which Michigan schools maintain starting in middle school. To determine whether a particular high school activity helps prepare for high-impact involvement, the assessment portion of the EDP (Michigan Department of Education) could be used to identify traits that George Kuh associates with high-impact practices. Were the EDP to identify activities that provide students with sustained involvement, advisor involvement or a relevant coaching philosophy, such data could be inputted into the Slate CRM, and shared with appropriate campus partners prior to admitted student matriculation.
Citations
Association of American Colleges & Universities (2018). High-impact educational practices. Retrieved from https://www.aacu.org/node/4084
Jaschik, S. (July 26, 2017). Survey: Parents finishing parts of college applications. From Inside Higher Education
Kuh, G. D., Schneider, C. G., & Association of American Colleges and Universities. (2008). High-impact educational practices: What they are, who has access to them, and why they matter. Washington, DC: Association of American Colleges and Universities
Michigan Department of Education (n.d.). The Educational Development Plan, p. 3. Retrieved from https://www.michigan.gov/documents/mde/EDP_Fundamentals_ADA2017_570694_7.pdf
Authored by:
Terence Brown
Posted on: #iteachmsu
What is the Activities Profile of our Fall 2021 First-Year Class?
For years, the Office of Admissions has provided our campus with an...
Authored by:
NAVIGATING CONTEXT
Monday, May 3, 2021