More Like this

1. When do the effects of single‐session interventions persist? Testing the mindset + supportive context hypothesis in a longitudinal randomized trial

   https://doi.org/10.1002/jcv2.12191  

   Hecht, Cameron A.; Gosling, Samuel D.; Bryan, Christopher J.; Jamieson, Jeremy P.; Murray, Jared S.; Yeager, David S. (August 2023, JCPP Advances)

   Abstract BackgroundSingle‐session interventions have the potential to address young people's mental health needs at scale, but their effects are heterogeneous. We tested whether themindset + supportive contexthypothesis could help explain when intervention effects persist or fade over time. The hypothesis posits that interventions are more effective in environments that support the intervention message. We tested this hypothesis using the synergistic mindsets intervention, a preventative treatment for stress‐related mental health symptoms that helps students appraise stress as a potential asset in the classroom (e.g., increasing oxygenated blood flow) rather than debilitating. In an introductory college course, we examined whether intervention‐consistent messages from instructors sustained changes in appraisals over time, as well as impacts on students' predisposition to try demanding academic tasks that could enhance learning. MethodsWe randomly assigned 1675 students in the course to receive the synergistic mindsets intervention (or a control activity) at the beginning of the semester, and subsequently, to receive intervention‐supportive messages from their instructor (or neutral messages) four times throughout the term. We collected weekly measures of students' appraisals of stress in the course and their predisposition to take on academic challenges. Trial‐registration: OSF.io; DOI: 10.17605/osf.io/fchyn. ResultsA conservative Bayesian analysis indicated that receiving both the intervention and supportive messages led to the greatest increases in positive stress appraisals (0.35SD; 1.00 posterior probability) and challenge‐seeking predisposition (2.33 percentage points; 0.94 posterior probability), averaged over the course of the semester. In addition, intervention effects grew larger throughout the semester when complemented by supportive instructor messages, whereas without these messages, intervention effects shrank somewhat over time. ConclusionsThis study shows, for the first time, that supportive cues in local contexts can be the difference in whether a single‐session intervention's effects fade over time or persist and even amplify. 

   more » « less
2. How drawing prompts can increase cognitive engagement in an active learning engineering course

   https://doi.org/10.1002/jee.20354  

   Wu, Sally P. W.; Van Veen, Barry; Rau, Martina A. (September 2020, Journal of Engineering Education)

   Abstract BackgroundRecent engineering education research has found improved learning outcomes when instructors engage students actively (e.g., through practice problems) rather than passively (e.g., in lectures). As more instructors shift toward active learning, research needs to identify how different types of activities affect students' cognitive engagement with concepts in the classroom. In this study, we investigate the effects of prompting novice students to draw when solving problems, a professional practice of engineers. PurposeWe investigate whether implementing instructional prompts to draw in an active learning classroom (a) increases students' use and value of drawing as a problem‐solving strategy and (b) enhances students' problem‐solving performance. MethodWe compared survey data and exam scores collected in one undergraduate class that received prompts to draw in video lectures and in‐class problems (drawing condition) and one class that received no drawing prompts (control condition). ResultsAfter drawing prompts were implemented, students' use and value of drawing increased, and these effects persisted to the end of the semester. Students were more likely to draw when provided drawing prompts. Furthermore, students who received prompts outperformed students who did not on exam questions that target conceptual understanding. ConclusionsOur findings reveal how implementing drawing prompts in an active learning classroom may help students engage in drawing and solve problems conceptually. This study contributes to our understanding of what types of active learning activities can improve instructional practices in engineering education. Particularly, we show how prompts that foster authentic engineering practices can increase cognitive engagement in introductory‐level engineering courses. 

   more » « less
3. Linked classroom communities can increase student success: Lessons learned from a randomized controlled trial

   Ramsey, Laura; Kling, Thomas (January 2024, AAC&U)

   Many campuses have utilized linked-course communities, wherein students take two or more courses with the same peers, in an effort to enhance learning and build community among students. Previous research on the effectiveness of linked-course communities have utilized quasi-experimental designs that are subject to selection bias – the communities may be effective due to which students volunteered to join the communities. This research session reports findings from a randomized controlled trial that eliminated selection bias by randomly assigning first-time first-year College of Science and Math students to linked-course communities or a control group. Findings demonstrate that students in the communities earned higher GPAs and more STEM credits in their first semester than students in the control group. Session participants will identify a curricular intervention and consider the feasibility of conducting a randomized controlled trial to assess effectiveness. 

   more » « less
4. Let’s talk posters: a novel role-playing activity to prepare undergraduate researchers for poster presentations

   https://doi.org/10.1128/jmbe.00178-23  

   Dillon, Meghan; Gerstman, Julia; Scarcella, Alexandria; Mantz, Meghan; Kleeschulte, Courtney; Light, Caitlin J (April 2024, Journal of Microbiology & Biology Education)

   Wessner, David R (Ed.)

   ABSTRACT Calls to increase undergraduate involvement in research have led to a significant increase in student participation via course-based undergraduate research experiences (CUREs). These CUREs provide students an authentic research experience, which often involves dissemination of research by public speaking. For instance, the First-year Research Immersion (FRI) program at Binghamton University is a three-semester CURE sequence that prepares students for scientific research and effective communication of their findings. After one semester of research, students from the FRI program are tasked with presenting their research to hundreds of faculty members, staff, friends, and family at the annual FRI poster session. However, our students, and undergraduates in general, report high anxiety and fear around public speaking such as this. To better prepare our students for public speaking at a research poster session, we developed a workshop that includes a novel role-play activity to mimic a fast-paced poster session or conference in order to address students' fears and increase confidence levels. The role-play activity gives students iterative practice such that they are prepared for the realities of a poster session including variation of poster attendees. During the activity, students switch roles between presenter and audience member. In the role of an audience member, students are given Pokèmon-like role-playing cards that explain the traits and abilities of various types of poster-goers that students might come across (faculty in and out of discipline, staff, family, friends, etc.). Students improvise and enact their card-assigned role as they engage with their classmates who are practicing their poster presentations. To assess student outcomes, students were given three surveys: pre-activity, post-activity, and post-poster presentation. Immediately following the activity, 64% of students reported the highest level of confidence, and following the poster session, 93% of students reported extreme confidence in their poster presentation abilities. These data show that this role-play activity can help address student confidence and better prepare students to communicate their research. 

   more » « less
5. How are undergraduate STEM instructors leveraging student thinking?

   https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-022-00336-0  

   Gehrtz, Jessica; Brantner, Molly; Andrews, Tessa C. (February 2022, International Journal of STEM Education)

   Abstract BackgroundSTEM instructors who leverage student thinking can positively influence student outcomes and build their own teaching expertise. Leveraging student thinking involves using the substance of student thinking to inform instruction. The ways in which instructors leverage student thinking in undergraduate STEM contexts, and what enables them to do so effectively, remains largely unexplored. We investigated how undergraduate STEM faculty leverage student thinking in their teaching, focusing on faculty who engage students in work during class. ResultsFrom analyzing interviews and video of a class lesson for eight undergraduate STEM instructors, we identified a group of instructors who exhibited high levels of leveraging student thinking (high-leveragers) and a group of instructors who exhibited low levels of leveraging student thinking (low-leveragers). High-leveragers behaved as if student thinking was central to their instruction. We saw this in how they accessed student thinking, worked to interpret it, and responded in the moment and after class. High-leveragers spent about twice as much class time getting access to detailed information about student thinking compared to low-leveragers. High-leveragers then altered instructional plans from lesson to lesson and during a lesson based on their interpretation of student thinking. Critically, high-leveragers also drew on much more extensive knowledge of student thinking, a component of pedagogical content knowledge, than did low-leveragers. High-leveragers used knowledge of student thinking to create access to more substantive student thinking, shape real-time interpretations, and inform how and when to respond. In contrast, low-leveragers accessed student thinking less frequently, interpreted student thinking superficially or not at all, and never discussed adjusting the content or problems for the following lesson. ConclusionsThis study revealed that not all undergraduate STEM instructors who actively engage students in work during class are also leveraging student thinking. In other words, not all student-centered instruction is student-thinking-centered instruction. We discuss possible explanations for why some STEM instructors are leveraging student thinking and others are not. In order to realize the benefits of student-centered instruction for undergraduates, we may need to support undergraduate STEM instructors in learning how to learn from their teaching experiences by leveraging student thinking. 

   more » « less