We found 14 results that contain "survey"
Posted on: Reading Group for Student Engagement and Success
Posted by
almost 4 years ago
Hello again everyone! Our reading group on Student Engagement and Success is slated to meat for 90 minutes this Friday morning (October 22nd) at 10am. Hope to see you then. For your convenience, here are the questions we'll discuss (or use as jumping off points) related to Chapter One in our book Student Engagement in Higher Education, Third Edition:
Questions on Pendakur, Quaye, and Harper (Ch. 1)
1) What is your view of Pendakur, Quaye, and Harper’s assertion that U.S. higher education, in general, is obligated to do more to foster student engagement within and beyond the classroom? What might be some practical challenges to do that?
2) In the Preface, Pendakur, Quaye, and Harper suggest that there is something temporally specific about the crisis of engagement they and their contributors describe. How would you describe engagement as a timely matter? In other words - what shape(s) does the issue of engagement take in 2021?
3) At the micro level (within our own teaching, advising, or other close work with students), how might we address the issue? What are some concrete steps we might take?
4) Describe your reaction(s) to the approach advocated at the bottom of p. 6, “Faculty and student affairs educators must foster the conditions to enable diverse populations of students to be engaged, persist, and thrive.” Where do you see difficulties with that aim? How might you nevertheless integrate that goal into your own practices? What might you change or adapt?
5) What makes PQH’s intersectional and anti-deficit lens appealing for this type of research? In particular, how do you respond to the book’s organizational reliance upon identity-based systems of oppression (which, we should note, we’ve proposed to use as an organizing principle for our discussions as well)?
6) What are some concrete ways we might be more intentional in our teaching/advising practices or other close work with students when it comes to cultivating their engagement. How do we help them to help themselves?
7) Pendakur, Quaye, and Harper discuss Tinto’s assertion that academic (and social) communities are key to student engagement, performance, and retention (4-5). What is your own view? How might the use of academic communities (student learning teams) nevertheless present challenges of one kind or another? What might be some concrete steps we could take to ease or avoid potential issues?
8) Near the end of Chapter One, Pendakur, Quaye, and Harper acknowledge that “Linking theory and practice is not simple” (12). Realistically, how might we achieve at least some of what they call for? How could we maximize results -- “the amount of time and effort students put into their [Gen. Ed. or Prereq.] studies” -- without completely redesigning our courses and component classes/modules?
9) In the “Distinguishing Educationally Purposeful Engagement” section, PQH mention the National Survey of Student Engagement (NSSE), which has collected data on ten engagement indicators for approx. 4,000,000 college students since 2000. What, if any, familiarity do you have with the NSSE, and how do you respond to their engagement indicators (subcategorized under Academic Challenge, Learning with Peers, Experiences with Faculty, Campus Environment) and High-Impact Practices (service learning, study abroad, research with faculty, internships)?
10) PQH deride the so-called “magical thinking” philosophy that undergirds much traditional scholarship of engagement and insist, instead, that “educators must facilitate structured opportunities for these dialogues to transpire” (8). What experience have you had with this type of facilitation? How did it seem to benefit the students involved?
11) For your own courses, what would you prioritize when it comes to fostering greater student engagement? How might you create or improve conditions that could facilitate that?
Questions on Pendakur, Quaye, and Harper (Ch. 1)
1) What is your view of Pendakur, Quaye, and Harper’s assertion that U.S. higher education, in general, is obligated to do more to foster student engagement within and beyond the classroom? What might be some practical challenges to do that?
2) In the Preface, Pendakur, Quaye, and Harper suggest that there is something temporally specific about the crisis of engagement they and their contributors describe. How would you describe engagement as a timely matter? In other words - what shape(s) does the issue of engagement take in 2021?
3) At the micro level (within our own teaching, advising, or other close work with students), how might we address the issue? What are some concrete steps we might take?
4) Describe your reaction(s) to the approach advocated at the bottom of p. 6, “Faculty and student affairs educators must foster the conditions to enable diverse populations of students to be engaged, persist, and thrive.” Where do you see difficulties with that aim? How might you nevertheless integrate that goal into your own practices? What might you change or adapt?
5) What makes PQH’s intersectional and anti-deficit lens appealing for this type of research? In particular, how do you respond to the book’s organizational reliance upon identity-based systems of oppression (which, we should note, we’ve proposed to use as an organizing principle for our discussions as well)?
6) What are some concrete ways we might be more intentional in our teaching/advising practices or other close work with students when it comes to cultivating their engagement. How do we help them to help themselves?
7) Pendakur, Quaye, and Harper discuss Tinto’s assertion that academic (and social) communities are key to student engagement, performance, and retention (4-5). What is your own view? How might the use of academic communities (student learning teams) nevertheless present challenges of one kind or another? What might be some concrete steps we could take to ease or avoid potential issues?
8) Near the end of Chapter One, Pendakur, Quaye, and Harper acknowledge that “Linking theory and practice is not simple” (12). Realistically, how might we achieve at least some of what they call for? How could we maximize results -- “the amount of time and effort students put into their [Gen. Ed. or Prereq.] studies” -- without completely redesigning our courses and component classes/modules?
9) In the “Distinguishing Educationally Purposeful Engagement” section, PQH mention the National Survey of Student Engagement (NSSE), which has collected data on ten engagement indicators for approx. 4,000,000 college students since 2000. What, if any, familiarity do you have with the NSSE, and how do you respond to their engagement indicators (subcategorized under Academic Challenge, Learning with Peers, Experiences with Faculty, Campus Environment) and High-Impact Practices (service learning, study abroad, research with faculty, internships)?
10) PQH deride the so-called “magical thinking” philosophy that undergirds much traditional scholarship of engagement and insist, instead, that “educators must facilitate structured opportunities for these dialogues to transpire” (8). What experience have you had with this type of facilitation? How did it seem to benefit the students involved?
11) For your own courses, what would you prioritize when it comes to fostering greater student engagement? How might you create or improve conditions that could facilitate that?
Pedagogical Design
Posted on: GenAI & Education
Posted by
8 months ago
AI Commons Bulletin 1/15/2025
Human-curated news about generative AI for Teaching and Learning in Higher Education.
🧬 Use Case: A Structured Framework Requiring ChatGPT Use
Graduate students used ChatGPT for a project, following specific steps and justifying their choices. The assessment emphasized critical thinking. Students appreciated the structured framework, which helped them learn ChatGPT’s use and weaknesses effectively.
Learn More: https://doi.org/10.1080/0142159X.2024.2421997
🔍 Explore a Self-Directed Learning Bot
Did you know you can create a customized version of ChatGPT for your students? An example is LearnGuide, created to add self-directed learning to a problem-based learning (PBL) medical curriculum. Students learned as well as or better than those who did not use the tool.
Learn More: https://chatgpt.com/g/g-oZ8zdPaKp-learnguide
✏️ Writing Improved When Assisted by AI
Subjects wrote stories with ChatGPT-3’s assistance. Those who modified AI suggestions produced higher-quality, less biased writing than those who accepted or rejected them outright. Researchers attribute this to higher-order thinking during modification.
Learn More: https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2412.07200
🚫 Why Academics Don’t Use AI
A survey of UK academics found half did not use AI tools in their work because:
They didn’t know how to use AI or if it was allowed
Ethical issues relating to how AI works
Lack of time and interest
They prefer to do work themselves
Reject AI as dehumanizing
AI is inaccurate and can’t be trusted
Learn More: https://doi.org/10.1007/s42438-024-00524-x
Bulletin items compiled by MJ Jackson and Sarah Freye with production assistance from Lisa Batchelder. Get the AI-Commons Bulletin on our Microsoft Teams channel, at aicommons.commons.msu.edu, or by email (send an email to aicommons@msu.edu with the word “subscribe”).
Human-curated news about generative AI for Teaching and Learning in Higher Education.
🧬 Use Case: A Structured Framework Requiring ChatGPT Use
Graduate students used ChatGPT for a project, following specific steps and justifying their choices. The assessment emphasized critical thinking. Students appreciated the structured framework, which helped them learn ChatGPT’s use and weaknesses effectively.
Learn More: https://doi.org/10.1080/0142159X.2024.2421997
🔍 Explore a Self-Directed Learning Bot
Did you know you can create a customized version of ChatGPT for your students? An example is LearnGuide, created to add self-directed learning to a problem-based learning (PBL) medical curriculum. Students learned as well as or better than those who did not use the tool.
Learn More: https://chatgpt.com/g/g-oZ8zdPaKp-learnguide
✏️ Writing Improved When Assisted by AI
Subjects wrote stories with ChatGPT-3’s assistance. Those who modified AI suggestions produced higher-quality, less biased writing than those who accepted or rejected them outright. Researchers attribute this to higher-order thinking during modification.
Learn More: https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2412.07200
🚫 Why Academics Don’t Use AI
A survey of UK academics found half did not use AI tools in their work because:
They didn’t know how to use AI or if it was allowed
Ethical issues relating to how AI works
Lack of time and interest
They prefer to do work themselves
Reject AI as dehumanizing
AI is inaccurate and can’t be trusted
Learn More: https://doi.org/10.1007/s42438-024-00524-x
Bulletin items compiled by MJ Jackson and Sarah Freye with production assistance from Lisa Batchelder. Get the AI-Commons Bulletin on our Microsoft Teams channel, at aicommons.commons.msu.edu, or by email (send an email to aicommons@msu.edu with the word “subscribe”).
Posted on: #iteachmsu
Posted by
almost 3 years ago
Here is a downloadable file of the Center for Teaching and Learning Innovation (CTLI) mid-semester feedback survey sample questions. You can also access the Google Doc here: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1bvWBucqNfRfc938QekLlealPf4XbIbBCg1Bz5UgwUjY/edit?usp=sharing
Please note that there are colleges and units across MSU's campus that are already offering support to their instructors in collecting formative feedback. This effort is to complement these services and make them accessible to the broader MSU instructor community. Feel free to use these questions verbatim, or tailor to best suit your course(s).
Please note that there are colleges and units across MSU's campus that are already offering support to their instructors in collecting formative feedback. This effort is to complement these services and make them accessible to the broader MSU instructor community. Feel free to use these questions verbatim, or tailor to best suit your course(s).
Posted on: #iteachmsu
Posted by
over 2 years ago
"Posttraumatic Stress Among Students After the Shootings at Virginia Tech" (Hughes et al., 2011) provides a discussion of findings from a cross-sectional survey of Virginia Tech students the summer/fall following the April 16, 2007 shooting of 49 students and faculty using the Trauma Screening Questionnaire to assess PTSD symptoms. The 9-page PDF article from Volume 3, Number 4, of Psychological Trauma: Theory, Research, Practice, and Policy is attached below.
This artifact is one of a collection of evidence-based resources for educators coming back to class after collective tragedy was compiled by Spartans:
Jason Moser (Professor of Clinical Science, Cognition, and Cognitive Neuroscience in MSU's Department of Psychology & PhD Psychology | Clinical Science)
Jon Novello (Director of MSU Employee Assistant Program & Licensed Clinical Social Worker)
Mark Patishnock (Director of MSU Counseling and Psychiatric Services [CAPS] & Licensed Psychologist)
Joshua Turchan (Assistant Director of Training, Assessment and Planning at MSU CAPS & Licensed Psychologist)
Karen Stanley-Kime (Assistant Director of Intensive Clinical Services at MSU CAPS & Licensed Psychologist)
and more throughout University Health and Wellness departments.
This artifact is one of a collection of evidence-based resources for educators coming back to class after collective tragedy was compiled by Spartans:
Jason Moser (Professor of Clinical Science, Cognition, and Cognitive Neuroscience in MSU's Department of Psychology & PhD Psychology | Clinical Science)
Jon Novello (Director of MSU Employee Assistant Program & Licensed Clinical Social Worker)
Mark Patishnock (Director of MSU Counseling and Psychiatric Services [CAPS] & Licensed Psychologist)
Joshua Turchan (Assistant Director of Training, Assessment and Planning at MSU CAPS & Licensed Psychologist)
Karen Stanley-Kime (Assistant Director of Intensive Clinical Services at MSU CAPS & Licensed Psychologist)
and more throughout University Health and Wellness departments.
Posted on: GenAI & Education
Posted by
6 months ago
AI Commons Bulletin 3/12/2025
🔊 MSU IT Announces ChatGPT and Gemini “Coming Soon”
The new AI page on tech.msu.edu teases that Gemini and ChatGPT are “coming soon” But it is unclear if the applications will be available for purchase or if the campus community will have free access of the latest foundational models.
Learn More: https://tech.msu.edu/technology/ai/
✍️ Departments at Johns Hopkins Integrated AI into their Curriculum Development Process
It’s like experiential learning for faculty – integrate AI into a standard task that you need to do anyway. Also has a list of very concrete bite-sized learning objectives for learning to use AI, like: name 3 chatbots, start a chat, list 3 ways to make a better prompt.
Learn More: Khamis, N., et al. (2025). More intelligent faculty development: Integrating GenAI in curriculum development programs. Medical Teacher, 1–3.
⚙️ AI Tools Are Being Used for All Stages of the Scientific Research Process
This working paper gives quite in-depth description of several AI tools being used for each of step of the research cycle: (1) lit review, (2) generating research ideas, (3) conducting experiments, (4) generating multimodal content, and (5) conducting peer-review. Recommended to get a good lay of the land.
Learn More: Eger, S., et al. (2025). Transforming Science with Large Language Models: A Survey on AI-assisted Scientific Discovery, Experimentation, Content Generation, and Evaluation.
📈 Grammarly Acquires Coda: From Writing Assistant to AI Productivity
Grammarly, popular with students and educators as a writing assistant software, just purchased the AI productivity company Coda. While Grammarly has previously positioned itself as a teaching tool for writing, this acquisition signals a move towards an AI productivity platform.
Learn More: https://www.grammarly.com/blog/company/grammarly-acquires-coda/
Bulletin items compiled by MJ Jackson and Sarah Freye with production assistance from Lisa Batchelder. Get the AI-Commons Bulletin on our Microsoft Teams channel, at aicommons.commons.msu.edu, or by email (send an email to aicommons@msu.edu with the word “subscribe”).
🔊 MSU IT Announces ChatGPT and Gemini “Coming Soon”
The new AI page on tech.msu.edu teases that Gemini and ChatGPT are “coming soon” But it is unclear if the applications will be available for purchase or if the campus community will have free access of the latest foundational models.
Learn More: https://tech.msu.edu/technology/ai/
✍️ Departments at Johns Hopkins Integrated AI into their Curriculum Development Process
It’s like experiential learning for faculty – integrate AI into a standard task that you need to do anyway. Also has a list of very concrete bite-sized learning objectives for learning to use AI, like: name 3 chatbots, start a chat, list 3 ways to make a better prompt.
Learn More: Khamis, N., et al. (2025). More intelligent faculty development: Integrating GenAI in curriculum development programs. Medical Teacher, 1–3.
⚙️ AI Tools Are Being Used for All Stages of the Scientific Research Process
This working paper gives quite in-depth description of several AI tools being used for each of step of the research cycle: (1) lit review, (2) generating research ideas, (3) conducting experiments, (4) generating multimodal content, and (5) conducting peer-review. Recommended to get a good lay of the land.
Learn More: Eger, S., et al. (2025). Transforming Science with Large Language Models: A Survey on AI-assisted Scientific Discovery, Experimentation, Content Generation, and Evaluation.
📈 Grammarly Acquires Coda: From Writing Assistant to AI Productivity
Grammarly, popular with students and educators as a writing assistant software, just purchased the AI productivity company Coda. While Grammarly has previously positioned itself as a teaching tool for writing, this acquisition signals a move towards an AI productivity platform.
Learn More: https://www.grammarly.com/blog/company/grammarly-acquires-coda/
Bulletin items compiled by MJ Jackson and Sarah Freye with production assistance from Lisa Batchelder. Get the AI-Commons Bulletin on our Microsoft Teams channel, at aicommons.commons.msu.edu, or by email (send an email to aicommons@msu.edu with the word “subscribe”).