Matching Items (3)
Filtering by
- All Subjects: Self-efficacy
- All Subjects: Futures
- Creators: Wylie, Ruth
Description
This research aimed to analyze and ultimately understand the relationship between the four dimensions of the Technology Readiness Index (TRI) 2.0 (optimism, innovation, discomfort, and insecurity) when compared to self-efficacy and learning. The experiment design was a one-group pretest-posttest where a participant’s TRI 2.0 acted as a subject variable. This information was then correlated to changes in self-efficacy and content mastery (learning) from pre-/post-test scores pertaining to Google Sheets functions for introductory statistics. In-between the pre- and post-tests, a learning activity was presented which asked participants to analyze quantitative statistics using Google Sheets. Findings of this research demonstrated a statistically insignificant relationship between technology readiness and self-efficacy or learning. Alternatively, significance was observed in changes from pre- to post-test scores for both learning and self-efficacy where a relationship was found between the degree to which participants’ content mastery and self-efficacy change before and after a computer-supported learning activity is assigned. These findings directly contribute to current understanding of how and why individuals can effectively learn and perform in computer-supported learning environments.
ContributorsCervantes Villa, Sabrina Marie (Author) / Craig, Scotty D. (Thesis advisor) / Donner, Jodie (Committee member) / Roscoe, Rod (Committee member) / Wylie, Ruth (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2022
Description
The quality of support provided to students in higher education can have a powerful impact on the student’s experience, their perceptions of challenges, and their overall academic success, particularly retaining in and completing their degree. Though many universities create robust services to support undergraduate students, existing literature and efforts by universities may be lacking when it comes to doctoral student support. The purpose of this action research, mixed methods study was to evaluate academic support to first year doctoral students in the School of Life Sciences (SOLS) at Arizona State University, specifically addressing the following concepts related to their doctoral study: development of self-efficacy, awareness of requirements and policies, and sense of belonging. With Communities of Practice and self-efficacy theory providing a framework for this study, first year doctoral students in SOLS were invited to participate in a twelve-week, two-condition study during their first semester. The two-condition study involved a Personal Support and a Social Support condition, wherein Personal Support participants (n=8) received 1:1 academic advising and biweekly newsletters, while Social Support participants (n=14) engaged in biweekly advising sessions within groups of 3-6 students and an academic advisor. Results suggest Social Support significantly impacted SOLS doctoral student self-efficacy scores (z = -1.96, p = .05), it created an avenue for students to cultivate community with doctoral student peers thus benefiting sense of belonging, and collaborating with peers influenced awareness to the point of Social Support participants becoming a resource for other students not participating in the study. In contrast, Personal Support appeared to have less of an impact on self-efficacy, sense of belonging, and awareness. For students with vulnerable needs to disclose, Personal Support has the potential to reinforce self-efficacy, sense of belonging, and awareness, but the impacts are nominal otherwise. Furthermore, by the end of their first academic year Social Support participants had retained their self-efficacy and sense of belonging scores. Ultimately, the findings suggest the need for reevaluating how doctoral students are supported in and outside SOLS, with a specific discussion about incorporating Social Support as a permanent model for academic support.
ContributorsFranse, Kylie Rae (Author) / Wylie, Ruth (Thesis advisor) / Vogel, Joanne (Thesis advisor) / Farmer-Thompson, Antoinette (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2023
Description
Images are ubiquitous in communicating complex information about the future. From political messages to extreme weather warnings, they generate understanding, incite action, and inform expectations with real impact today. The future has come into sharp focus in recent years. Issues like climate change, gene editing, and smart cities are pushing policy makers, scientists, and designers to rethink how society plans and prepares for tomorrow. While academic and practice communities have increasingly turned their gaze toward the future, little attention is paid to how it is depicted and even less to the role visualization technologies play in depicting it. Visualization technologies are those that transform non-visual information into 2D or 3D imagery and generate depictions of certain phenomena, real or perceived. This research helps to fill this gap by examining the role visualization technologies play in how individuals know and make decisions about the future.
This study draws from three phases of research set in the context of urban development, where images of the future are generated by architects and circulated by built environment professionals to affect client and public decision-making. I begin with a systematic review of professional design literature to identify norms related to visualization. I then conduct in-depth interviews with expert architects to draw out how visualization technologies are used to influence client decision-making. I dive into how different tools manage the future and generate different forms of certainty, uncertainty, persuasion, and risk. Complementing the review and interviews is a case study on ASU at Mesa City Center, a development project aimed at revitalizing downtown Mesa, Arizona. Analysis highlights how project-specific visual tools affect decision-making and the role that client imagination and inference play in understanding and preference. This research unpacks the social, technical, and emotional knowledge embedded in visualization technologies and reveals how they affect decision-making. Information about the future is uniquely mediated by each technology with decision-making bound up in larger sociopolitical processes aimed at reducing uncertainty, building trust, and managing expectations. This suggests that the visual tools we use to depict the future are much more dynamic and influential than they are given credit for.
This study draws from three phases of research set in the context of urban development, where images of the future are generated by architects and circulated by built environment professionals to affect client and public decision-making. I begin with a systematic review of professional design literature to identify norms related to visualization. I then conduct in-depth interviews with expert architects to draw out how visualization technologies are used to influence client decision-making. I dive into how different tools manage the future and generate different forms of certainty, uncertainty, persuasion, and risk. Complementing the review and interviews is a case study on ASU at Mesa City Center, a development project aimed at revitalizing downtown Mesa, Arizona. Analysis highlights how project-specific visual tools affect decision-making and the role that client imagination and inference play in understanding and preference. This research unpacks the social, technical, and emotional knowledge embedded in visualization technologies and reveals how they affect decision-making. Information about the future is uniquely mediated by each technology with decision-making bound up in larger sociopolitical processes aimed at reducing uncertainty, building trust, and managing expectations. This suggests that the visual tools we use to depict the future are much more dynamic and influential than they are given credit for.
ContributorsSelkirk, Kaethe (Author) / Selin, Cynthia (Thesis advisor) / Wylie, Ruth (Committee member) / Boradkar, Prasad (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2019