Matching Items (22)
Description
Virtual Patient Simulations (VPS) are web-based exercises involving simulated patients in virtual environments. This study investigates the utility of VPS for increasing medical student clinical reasoning skills, collaboration, and engagement. Many studies indicate that VPS provide medical students with essential practice in clinical decision making before they encounter real life patients. The utility of a recursive, inductive VPS for increasing clinical decision-making skills, collaboration, or engagement is unknown. Following a design-based methodology, VPS were implemented in two phases with two different cohorts of first year medical students: spring and fall of 2013. Participants were 108 medical students and six of their clinical faculty tutors. Students collaborated in teams of three to complete a series of virtual patient cases, submitting a ballpark diagnosis at the conclusion of each session. Student participants subsequently completed an electronic, 28-item Exit Survey. Finally, students participated in a randomized controlled trial comparing traditional (tutor-led) and VPS case instruction methods. This sequence of activities rendered quantitative and qualitative data that were triangulated during data analysis to increase the validity of findings. After practicing through four VPS cases, student triad teams selected accurate ballpark diagnosis 92 percent of the time. Pre-post test results revealed that PPT was significantly more effective than VPS after 20 minutes of instruction. PPT instruction resulted in significantly higher learning gains, but both modalities supported significant learning gains in clinical reasoning. Students collaborated well and held rich clinical discussions; the central phenomenon that emerged was "synthesizing evidence inductively to make clinical decisions." Using an inductive process, student teams collaborated to analyze patient data, and in nearly all instances successfully solved the case, while remaining cognitively engaged. This is the first design-based study regarding virtual patient simulation, reporting iterative phases of implementation and design improvement, culminating in local theories (petite generalizations) about VPS design. A thick, rich description of environment, process, and findings may benefit other researchers and institutions in designing and implementing effective VPS.
ContributorsMcCoy, Lise (Author) / Wetzel, Keith (Thesis advisor) / Ewbank, Ann (Thesis advisor) / Simon, Harvey (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2014
Description
The purpose of this mixed methods research study was to assess the impact and influence of a pre-international experience course on Arizona State University (ASU) students before they study or intern abroad. Currently, the study abroad pre-departure orientation for ASU participants consists of online modules and a two-hour face-to-face orientation. In this action research study, the practitioner-researcher re-designed an ASU School of Politics and Global Studies (SPGS), one-credit course that focused exclusively on cross-cultural awareness and sensitivity. A needs assessment was distributed to a sample of 800 returning study abroad participants and was used to influence the study, along with an extensive literature review and two cycles of action research. The dissertation research and study was conducted during the ASU fall 2013 semester. Quantitative data and qualitative data were collected using eight different measures. To better understand the impact of a pre-international experience curriculum for ASU study abroad and international internship participants before they go abroad, this research study investigated the following research questions: (1) What cultural impact does a pre-international experience course have on students who complete the course before studying or interning abroad? (2) What specific cultural competencies are gained by the participants after participating in the pre-international experience course? (3) How has developing the curriculum, teaching the curriculum and implementing the innovation influenced and informed my practice as an international educator and the Assistant Director of the Arizona State Study Abroad Office? The following five assertions were identified within the quantitative and qualitative analysis of the collected data to answer the three research questions: (1) Students are more confident in their abilities to cross cultures after successfully completing taking the new course; (2) Students are more aware of other cultures and their own culture after successfully completing taking the new course; (3) Students gained important knowledge about understanding others' worldviews after successfully completing taking the new course; (4) Students gained general openness toward intercultural learning and to people from cultures different from their own after successfully completing the new course; (5) Developing and implementing a pre-international experience course changed me as a leader, instructor and researcher. Implications for future implementation and research are discussed.
ContributorsHenry, Adam (Author) / Wetzel, Keith (Thesis advisor) / Ewbank, Ann (Committee member) / LePore, Paul (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2014
Description
ABSTRACT Education policymakers at the national level have initiated reforms in K-12 education for that past several years that have focused on teacher quality and teacher evaluation. More recently, reforms have included legislation that focuses on administrator quality as well. Included in far-reaching recent legislation in Arizona is a requirement that administrators be evaluated on a standards-based evaluation system that is linked to student outcomes. The end result is an annual summative measure of administrator effectiveness that impacts job retention. Because of this, Arizona administrators have become concerned about rapidly becoming proficient in the new evaluation systems. Administrators rarely have the explicit professional development opportunities they need to collaborate on a shared understanding of these new evaluation systems. This action research study focused on a group of eight administrators in a small urban district grappling with a new, complex, and high-stakes administrator evaluation that is a component of an all-encompassing Teacher Incentive Fund Grant. An existing professional learning time was engaged to assist administrators in lessening their concerns and increasing their understanding and use of the evaluation instrument. Activities were designed to engage the administrators in dynamic, contextualized learning. Participants interacted in a group to interpret the meaning of the evaluation instrument share practical knowledge and support each other's acquisition understanding. Data were gathered with mixed methods. Administrators were given pre-and post-surveys prior to and immediately after this six-week innovation. Formal and informal interviews were conduct throughout the innovation. Additionally, detailed records in the form of meeting records and a researcher journal were kept. Qualitative and quantitative data were triangulated to validate findings. Results identified concerns and understanding of administrators as they attempted to come to a shared understanding of the new evaluation instrument. As a result of learning together, their concerns about the use of the instrument lessened. Other concerns however, remained or increased. Administrators found the process of the Administrator Learning Community valuable and felt their understanding and use of the instrument had increased. Intense concerns about the competing priorities and initiatives led to the administrators to consider a reevaluation of the competing initiatives. Implications from this study can be used to help other administrators and professional development facilitators grappling with common concerns.
ContributorsEsmont, Leah W (Author) / Wetzel, Keith (Thesis advisor) / Ewbank, Ann (Thesis advisor) / McNeil, David (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2014
Description
ABSTRACT
This study examines validity evidence of a state policy-directed teacher evaluation system implemented in Arizona during school year 2012-2013. The purpose was to evaluate the warrant for making high stakes, consequential judgments of teacher competence based on value-added (VAM) estimates of instructional impact and observations of professional practice (PP). The research also explores educator influence (voice) in evaluation design and the role information brokers have in local decision making. Findings are situated in an evidentiary and policy context at both the LEA and state policy levels.
The study employs a single-phase, concurrent, mixed-methods research design triangulating multiple sources of qualitative and quantitative evidence onto a single (unified) validation construct: Teacher Instructional Quality. It focuses on assessing the characteristics of metrics used to construct quantitative ratings of instructional competence and the alignment of stakeholder perspectives to facets implicit in the evaluation framework. Validity examinations include assembly of criterion, content, reliability, consequential and construct articulation evidences. Perceptual perspectives were obtained from teachers, principals, district leadership, and state policy decision makers. Data for this study came from a large suburban public school district in metropolitan Phoenix, Arizona.
Study findings suggest that the evaluation framework is insufficient for supporting high stakes, consequential inferences of teacher instructional quality. This is based, in part on the following: (1) Weak associations between VAM and PP metrics; (2) Unstable VAM measures across time and between tested content areas; (3) Less than adequate scale reliabilities; (4) Lack of coherence between theorized and empirical PP factor structures; (5) Omission/underrepresentation of important instructional attributes/effects; (6) Stakeholder concerns over rater consistency, bias, and the inability of test scores to adequately represent instructional competence; (7) Negative sentiments regarding the system's ability to improve instructional competence and/or student learning; (8) Concerns regarding unintended consequences including increased stress, lower morale, harm to professional identity, and restricted learning opportunities; and (9) The general lack of empowerment and educator exclusion from the decision making process. Study findings also highlight the value of information brokers in policy decision making and the importance of having access to unbiased empirical information during the design and implementation phases of important change initiatives.
This study examines validity evidence of a state policy-directed teacher evaluation system implemented in Arizona during school year 2012-2013. The purpose was to evaluate the warrant for making high stakes, consequential judgments of teacher competence based on value-added (VAM) estimates of instructional impact and observations of professional practice (PP). The research also explores educator influence (voice) in evaluation design and the role information brokers have in local decision making. Findings are situated in an evidentiary and policy context at both the LEA and state policy levels.
The study employs a single-phase, concurrent, mixed-methods research design triangulating multiple sources of qualitative and quantitative evidence onto a single (unified) validation construct: Teacher Instructional Quality. It focuses on assessing the characteristics of metrics used to construct quantitative ratings of instructional competence and the alignment of stakeholder perspectives to facets implicit in the evaluation framework. Validity examinations include assembly of criterion, content, reliability, consequential and construct articulation evidences. Perceptual perspectives were obtained from teachers, principals, district leadership, and state policy decision makers. Data for this study came from a large suburban public school district in metropolitan Phoenix, Arizona.
Study findings suggest that the evaluation framework is insufficient for supporting high stakes, consequential inferences of teacher instructional quality. This is based, in part on the following: (1) Weak associations between VAM and PP metrics; (2) Unstable VAM measures across time and between tested content areas; (3) Less than adequate scale reliabilities; (4) Lack of coherence between theorized and empirical PP factor structures; (5) Omission/underrepresentation of important instructional attributes/effects; (6) Stakeholder concerns over rater consistency, bias, and the inability of test scores to adequately represent instructional competence; (7) Negative sentiments regarding the system's ability to improve instructional competence and/or student learning; (8) Concerns regarding unintended consequences including increased stress, lower morale, harm to professional identity, and restricted learning opportunities; and (9) The general lack of empowerment and educator exclusion from the decision making process. Study findings also highlight the value of information brokers in policy decision making and the importance of having access to unbiased empirical information during the design and implementation phases of important change initiatives.
ContributorsSloat, Edward F. (Author) / Wetzel, Keith (Thesis advisor) / Amrein-Beardsley, Audrey (Thesis advisor) / Ewbank, Ann (Committee member) / Shough, Lori (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2015
Description
The State of Arizona mandates that students with superior intellect or abilities, or identified gifted students, receive appropriate gifted education and services in order to achieve at levels commensurate with their intellect and abilities. Additionally, the State of Arizona adopted the Arizona College and Career Ready Standards (AZCCRS) initiative. This investigation explores if, according to the perceptions of gifted educators, the AZCCRS support a gifted mathematic curriculum and pedagogy at the elementary level which is commensurate with academic abilities, potential, and intellect of these mathematically gifted students, what the relationships are between exemplary gifted curriculum and pedagogy and the AZCCRS, and exactly how the gifted education specialists charged with meeting the academic and intellectual needs and potential of their gifted students interpret, negotiate, and implement the AZCCRS.
This study utilized a qualitative approach and a variety of instruments to gather data, including: profile questionnaires, semi-structured pre-interviews, reflective journals, three group discussion sessions, and semi-structured post interviews. The pre- and post interviews as well as the group discussion sessions were audiotape recorded and transcribed. A three stage coding process was utilized on the questionnaires, interviews, discussion sessions, and journal entries.
The results and findings demonstrated that AZCCRS clearly support exemplary gifted mathematic curriculum and practices at the elementary level, that there are at least nine distinct relationships between the AZCCRS and gifted pedagogy, and that the gifted education specialists interpret, negotiate, and implement the AZCCRS uniquely in at least four distinct ways, in their mathematically gifted pullout classes.
This study utilized a qualitative approach and a variety of instruments to gather data, including: profile questionnaires, semi-structured pre-interviews, reflective journals, three group discussion sessions, and semi-structured post interviews. The pre- and post interviews as well as the group discussion sessions were audiotape recorded and transcribed. A three stage coding process was utilized on the questionnaires, interviews, discussion sessions, and journal entries.
The results and findings demonstrated that AZCCRS clearly support exemplary gifted mathematic curriculum and practices at the elementary level, that there are at least nine distinct relationships between the AZCCRS and gifted pedagogy, and that the gifted education specialists interpret, negotiate, and implement the AZCCRS uniquely in at least four distinct ways, in their mathematically gifted pullout classes.
ContributorsDohm, Dianna (Author) / Carlson, David L. (Thesis advisor) / Barnard, Wendy (Committee member) / Moses, Lindsey (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2014
Description
This mixed methods participatory action research study explored how an instructional coach influenced a state mandated curriculum adoption at a Title 1 urban middle school. The purpose of this study was to identify ways in which an instructional coach supported a veteran staff during the adoption of new curriculum standards. The instructional coach/action researcher employed a three pronged coaching approach that incorporated individual and team coaching sessions and increased networking to encourage and support the development of social capital. This study was informed using Vygotsky's Social Learning Theory, Wenger's Communities of Practice, Coleman's Social Capital Theory, and Hall and Horde's Concerns-Based Adoption Model. The study is heavily weighted in favor of qualitative data which includes participant reflections, coach individual session and team session reflections, field-notes, team meeting videos, and exit interviews. Several themes emerged supporting the use of a differentiated coaching approach, the promotion of social capital, and the identification of initiative overload as a barrier to curriculum adoption. The quantitative data analysis, pre and post study Stages of Concern Questionnaires, produced evidence that participants experienced minor shifts in their concerns relating to the adoption of Common Core State Standards. Results were used to inform coaching decisions based on individual participant needs as well as to augment the qualitative findings. Ideas for further research are discussed.
ContributorsSchwarting, Joann (Author) / Wetzel, Keith (Thesis advisor) / Ewbank, Ann (Thesis advisor) / Johnson, Lynda (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2014
Description
The critical-thinking skill of problem solving needs to be part of the curriculum for all students, including those with learning disabilities living in poverty; yet, too often this is not the case. Too often students in poverty and students with learning disabilities are provided a curriculum that is watered down, focused on the basics, and aimed at managing their behaviors instead of helping them learn to think critically about their world. Despite their challenges, these students can learn to problem solve. Educators need to help students make connections between the critical-thinking skills learned in school and the problem-solving skills needed for life. One solution might be to use literature with characters facing similar problems, hold grand conversations, and teach them a problem solving method. Together, these three parts have the potential to motivate and lead students to better thinking. This action research study explored whether literature with characters facing similar problems to the study's participants, grand conversations, and the I SOLVE problem solving method would help students with disabilities living in poverty in the Southwestern United States develop the problem-solving skills they need to understand and successfully navigate their world. Data were collected using a mixed methods approach. The Motivation to Read Profile, I SOLVE problem-solving survey, thought bubbles, student journals, transcripts from grand conversations, and researcher's journal were tools used. To understand fully how and to what extent literature and grand conversations helped students gain the critical thinking skill of problem solving, data were mixed in a convergence model. Results show the I SOLVE problem-solving method was an effective way to teach problem-solving steps. Scores on the problem-solving survey rose pre- to post-test. Grand conversations focused on literature with character's facing problems led to an increase in students' motivation to read, and this population of students were able to make aesthetic connections and interpretations to the texts read. From these findings implications for teachers are provided.
ContributorsWells, Sheila (Author) / Zambo, Debby (Thesis advisor) / Hansen, Cory (Committee member) / Davidson, Carter (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2012
Description
ABSTRACT Professional Development (PD) is an important tool in the field of education. Successful PD programs are those that include adult learning methods and opportunities for experiential learning and discussion. The university where this action research was conducted does not offer formal training to adjunct instructors. The adjunct instructors are hired based primarily on their content knowledge. This research was conducted to understand, if the application of a blended training model for adjuncts influences the adjunct's perception of meeting their student's educational needs and the student's perception that their personal education needs are met. The blended learning included the delivery of a framework that incorporated Andragogy, Content Knowledge and Technology (ACKT). The purpose of the ACKT framework is to supplement adjunct's content knowledge expertise with adult learning methods and technology. The effectiveness of the framework was measured by using a quasi-experimental, pre to post intervention assessment. The treatment group and control group each contained twenty-two adjunct instructors from the university. The treatment group received training on the framework prior to commencing the class and participated in two focus groups during the semester. In addition, the treatment group was observed teaching in their classroom. The control group did not receive training, or participate in focus groups; however they were observed teaching in their classroom. The results of the action research showed significant improvement for the adjunct instructors in the treatment group. Specifically, knowledge of and application of andragogy showed a large improvement. In addition, the social influence of the adjuncts in the treatment group showed a large improvement. Less significant was the improvement in the efficacy of the students in the treatment group classes compared to those in the control group classes. However, the data suggests that the students in the treatment group better applied the content learned and they were more aware of other's educational needs than their peers in the control group. The study supports the need for adjunct instructor PD. Through a PD program adjunct instructors increase their own efficacy and this improvement translates into increased content transfer for the students in the classroom. Based on the strong evidence for adjunct instructor improvement this research will continue by expanding the blended learning model to more of the adjunct instructors at the university, and continuing to evaluate the effectiveness of the model in meeting student's educational needs.
ContributorsSantos, Roberta (Author) / Wetzel, Keith (Thesis advisor) / Ewbank, Ann (Committee member) / Diggs, La Verne (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2012
Description
This action research project explores masters level graduate student writing and academic identity during one semester in an interdisciplinary masters program. Informing this study is a two part theoretical framework including the Academic Literacy Model (Lea and Street) and Wenger's concept of identity. The purpose of this exploration was to understand how first semester graduate students experienced academic writing and what characteristics of their academic identity emerged. A mixed-methods approach was used to collect both quantitative and qualitative data. Quantitative data included results from the Inventory of Processes in Graduate Writing (Lavelle and Bushrow, 2007) and the Graduate Student Identity Survey. Qualitative data was collected through researcher observations, student blog entries, writing group transcripts, and individual interviews. The following themes emerge from the data: a) graduate students attribute their successes in writing to previous experiences, b) graduate students experience struggles related primarily to academic quality and faculty expectations, c) graduate students negotiate ways of being in the academy through figuring out expectations of faculty and program, d) work done in the writing group meetings shows evidence of meaning-making for the graduate students, e) the focus of the MA program was critically important to graduate students in the graduate writing project, e) participants' role as graduate students felt most strongly in contexts that include academic activity, and f) students acknowledge change and increasingly identify themselves as writers. Ideas for future cycles of research are discussed.
ContributorsRuggles, Tosha M (Author) / Wetzel, Keith (Thesis advisor) / Ewbank, Ann (Committee member) / Friedrich, Patricia (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2012
Description
How hard should the books be in elementary small-group reading? This study explored text difficulty for bilingual students reading below grade level in third grade. Using a convergent parallel mixed methods design, I used qualitative methods to analyze students’ engagement and discussion during small groups and single case design to evaluate students’ fluency and reading comprehension after reading and discussing texts in small groups.
Six Spanish-English bilingual students, split into two groups of three, participated in twelve, 30-minute, small-group reading sessions. Students in Group 1 read approximately one year below grade level, and students in Group 2 read approximately a year and a half below grade level. In six of the twelve sessions, students read and discussed texts matched to their reading levels, and in the other six they read and discussed texts one year ahead of their reading levels. I assigned matched and difficult texts across the twelve days by blocked randomization.
I analyzed video transcripts of each session to understand students’ engagement (focus of engagement, strategies, and interaction) and discussion (inferential vs. literal responses, instances of verbal participation). At the end of each session, students reread and retold the book the group had read and discussed that day to produce a fluency (words correct per minute) and comprehension (ideas correctly retold) score.
Findings were complex and revealed that different levels of texts have both advantages and drawbacks. Key findings included: For fluency, half of the students benefited from matched texts. The other half read difficult texts with similar fluency to matched texts. For comprehension, text difficulty did not matter for anyone except one student, and for him it only had an effect on 3 of 12 days. Group 2 engaged much more with texts and ideas in difficult books and with pictures in matched books. Group 1 had more inferential/interpretive responses with matched texts, and Group 2 had more inferential and interpretive responses with difficult texts. Most students participated evenly regardless of the difficulty of the text under discussion. However, two students talked more when discussing matched texts.
Six Spanish-English bilingual students, split into two groups of three, participated in twelve, 30-minute, small-group reading sessions. Students in Group 1 read approximately one year below grade level, and students in Group 2 read approximately a year and a half below grade level. In six of the twelve sessions, students read and discussed texts matched to their reading levels, and in the other six they read and discussed texts one year ahead of their reading levels. I assigned matched and difficult texts across the twelve days by blocked randomization.
I analyzed video transcripts of each session to understand students’ engagement (focus of engagement, strategies, and interaction) and discussion (inferential vs. literal responses, instances of verbal participation). At the end of each session, students reread and retold the book the group had read and discussed that day to produce a fluency (words correct per minute) and comprehension (ideas correctly retold) score.
Findings were complex and revealed that different levels of texts have both advantages and drawbacks. Key findings included: For fluency, half of the students benefited from matched texts. The other half read difficult texts with similar fluency to matched texts. For comprehension, text difficulty did not matter for anyone except one student, and for him it only had an effect on 3 of 12 days. Group 2 engaged much more with texts and ideas in difficult books and with pictures in matched books. Group 1 had more inferential/interpretive responses with matched texts, and Group 2 had more inferential and interpretive responses with difficult texts. Most students participated evenly regardless of the difficulty of the text under discussion. However, two students talked more when discussing matched texts.
ContributorsKelly, Laura Beth (Author) / Jimenez-Silva, Margarita (Thesis advisor) / Moses, Lindsey (Thesis advisor) / Restrepo, Laida (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2018