Lucresse Tato Psych Paper 3 PDF

Preview

Summary

fun paper 3...

Description

Tato 1 Lucresse Tato Designing an At-Risk Prevention Study using Supplemental Instruction 1.

Introduction. 1a. There are students in college in today’s day and age who are predisposed to failing classes

compared to other students. A big risk factor in college retention and graduation is the socioeconomic status of the student’s family. Students who come from affluent families are more likely to graduate compared to their poor, working-class counterparts. Another risk factor is the education level of the student’s parents. If a student’s parents were not college graduates, they have a lower chance of graduating from college themselves. 1b. SAT scores cannot accurately predict college graduation, but they can be an indicator for how a student may perform in college. A reason why a student may have a low SAT score might have to do more with their socioeconomic status rather than their intelligence. A poor student with a high SAT scores is still less likely to graduate compared to a rich student with low SAT scores due to the difference in affluence. 1c. One intervention used at universities to address college failure and dropout of at-risk students is called TIP, or the Texas Interdisciplinary Plan. This intervention consisted of placing students who were struggling in a class being placed in their own smaller section of the class. These students faced similar adversities such as coming from a low socioeconomic background, having the same lower SAT scores, and coming from a less-educated background. The goal of TIP was to help these students master the same material that was taught in class, through a more intimate setting. The same material, tests, and lectures were used. TIP students were given two extra hours of instruction a week, advisors, and upperclassmen mentors. This helped the students feel less like they were a part of the school community. 1d. The hypothesis being addressed is that if students who are at risk of failing Dr. Steph’s introductory Psychology course attend SI, then their chances of passing will increase because they will be

Tato 2 internalizing the material in a more intimate setting. 2.

Method. 2a. (i) The participants of this study are students who are in Dr. Steph’s introductory psychology

class. The participants scored similar scores on the SATs, lower than their passing counterparts. They also come from lower socioeconomic status and they are first generation college students. The target population includes students who are at risk of failing the class. This will be determined by a screening of current grades held in the class. Those who are at a C average or below would be selected and recruited for the study. I would sample the target population randomly to avoid selection bias that may skew the results of the study. (ii) I plan on addressing Dr. Steph’s concerns about the reluctance of atrisk students to participate by suggesting that there be extra credit points added to the final grades of student who do take part in the study. I will test two groups, the control group and the experimental group. In each group I will test 40 people per group. It is a large enough sample for the population to be represented and a small enough sample that the results can be read easily. I would use random assignment of participants to groups as to avoid allocation bias that may disrupt the results of my study. 2b. (i) The SI intervention used in the experimental group consists of the 40 students being taught the same material at the same level as the regular lecture. The same lecture will be presented, the same homework will be assigned, the same textbook will be used, and the same tests and quizzes will be given. There will be a question and answer portion of the SI intervention so that the students may be able to interact with the information in a less intimidating setting. Those in the experimental group will also work with peer tutors who have previously passed the class and will also be supplied with practice tests before major exams. I would not give an intervention to the control group. The control group will not have access to peer tutors and practice tests. Both groups will not be aware of which group they are in making this a single blind study. I would address Dr. Steph’s concern about intentionally withholding

Tato 3 treatment from the participants in the control group by explaining that it will show if the SI intervention has a direct correlation to the passing rate of students at risk of failing the course. (ii) I plan on controlling for TA visits by making all the participants meet with the TA for half an hour once a week. A sign in sheet will be provided as attendance is mandatory. During the study, students in both groups will not be able to hold outside work positions, as that may be a confounding factor of their performance in the class. Inconsistency of attendance in SI sessions will be controlled by the rule that if students who have voluntarily signed up to be in the study skip any SI sessions, they will automatically fail the class. Another variable I would need to control in this study would be class time. Both the experimental and control group will be in regular lecture together at 10:00 am. The SI session will be right after the regular lecture so that those in the experimental group will be reinforcing what they have just learned. Another variable I would need to control for would be the commuter status of the participants. All participants must dorm at the residential hall on campus so that they all have the same walk to class in the morning. Free housing will be provided for the purpose of the study. 2c. I would operationally define the dependent variable as the measurable outcome, or the letter grade of the students in the course at the end of the study. Three possible outcome measures of attendance at SI sessions include, higher test scores as shown by the test average of the students, an increased understanding of the material as shown by participation, and higher class averages as shown by the students’ final letter grade. 2d. The independent variable is the group assignment of the participants. Whether or not they are in the experimental group or the control group will play the main role in their grade outcome. The control variables include the weekly half hour meeting with the TA, the same lectures, tests, quizzes, and homework being given, the fact that none of the participants can work during the study, and the fact that the participants are all living on campus. Other control variables include the fact that the participants scored around the same on the SAT, they come from a low

Tato 4 socioeconomic status, and they are all first-generation college students. 3. Results 3a. I would perform a statistical test on the experiment I designed for Dr. Steph by giving the experimental and control groups the same final exam. Within both groups there will be a variation as not everyone will score the same in their respective groups. I will calculate the difference between the groups by finding the mean of each group’s test scores. 3b. I would calculate the variation between the groups by taking an average of the students’ test scores and finding the standard deviations of the grades within both groups. 3c. Statistical significance refers to whether the outcome of a study or experiment happened solely due to chance. If the outcome of a study is not due to chance, it is said to be statistically significant and the outcome is due to a real cause. If the difference between the average test scores of the two groups is about twice as large as the variation within the groups, then the difference was not due to chance. 4. Conclusions 4a. Dr. Steph would be incorrect in finding that after undergoing SI any at-risk is at least as capable of passing her course as any student not at risk. This is because Dr. Steph’s small pilot study did not consist of a large enough sample size to represent the entire population of the at-risk students in her class. Using a sample this small can cause the results to show outcomes that would not hold true if a larger sample were used because it is very easy for other variables to skew the results. 4b. It is possible that the at-risk pilot participants have much better course performance than the comparison pilot participants because since there is only two students in the experimental group, the intervention is very intimate environment and is not a regular class size. They would be more encouraged to pass. 4c. There are extraneous variables that may have been the source of the difference between the groups. One variable may have been the fact that the sample was not randomly selected since Dr. Steph asked

Tato 5 students who already visited her every day to participate. Other variables to consider are the employment status of the students and if the students lived on campus or not. 4d. One recommendation for improving Dr. Steph’s pilot study would be to control for the confounding variables that may skew the results of her study. Another recommendation would be for Dr. Steph to randomly select the participants of her study rather than asking students she already sees to volunteer. This will avoid selection bias....