A COMPENDIUM OF SCALES for use in the SCHOLARSHIP OF TEACHING AND LEARNING

Recommendations

Info

expected, though the LAI shared a stronger relationship with the PSRS than with the NIS. Further, the collaborative bond subscale significantly contributed to the students' self-reported learning and actual course grade even after controlling for the NIS and PSRS. Figure 1 provides a construct conceptualization of the relationships between immediacy behaviors, rapport, perceptions of a learning alliance, and positive student outcomes. Of note, several mediational relationships appear in the figure. For example, immediacy behaviors have direct effects on learning but also have indirect effects through their connections to rapport and the learning alliance (Rogers, 2015). Although Rogers provided an excellent validation of the Learning Alliance Inventory, its use in the SoTL literature is nascent. We recommend its incorporation in future research that examines rapport, professor-student relationships, and the effects of positive relationships on students' and professors' outcomes (e.g., grades for students, burnout for professors). Future Directions The study of professor-student relationships has come a long way since Mehrabian began operationalizing immediacy in the 60s. Hundreds of studies exist on the relationships between immediacy behaviors, instructors' use of humor, professor-student rapport, and perceptions of a learning alliance. Further, each one of these constructs predict positive student outcomes. Despite the vast attention given to the valid and reliable measurement of professor-student relationships, several important future directions exist. Given the increase in online classes email, learning management systems, and social media, students now frequently interact with professors over electronic modes. One disadvantage of the scales we described is that some of the items may not translate well in an online course (e.g., nonverbal immediacy items measuring eye contact and physical distance). At the present time, a computer-mediated-communication scale that assesses professor-student relationships does not exist, despite evidence that professor behaviors can hinder or help rapport building through online classes (Arbaugh, 2001) or through the use of electronic communication (Legg & Wilson, 2009). Future scales would benefit from including items that address online classes and electronic communication, for example: “Instructor responds within a reasonable amount of time to my electronic requests,” “My instructor shows s/he cares about me in the way s/he responds to my emails,” or “I can tell my instructor cares about students by the way s/he designed our Learning Management System (e.g., Blackboard).” The vast majority of research on professor-student relationships examines the relationship formed between undergraduate students and their professors. However, these findings may not generalize to the relationship formed and experienced by graduate students and their advisors. For example, the same amount of warmth and caring that may promote learning for undergraduate students who lack intrinsic motivation (Komarraju, 2013) may be seen as coddling or lacking in rigor within the context of graduate education. Compared to undergraduates' relationships with their professors, graduate students and their advisors may spend more time together, both in academic and casual settings. This added time may facilitate building learning alliances and rapport but may also pose some additional challenges that could 156
help or hinder the graduate students' success. In one rare study focusing on a graduate population, graduate students listed interest/support and characteristics such as sense of humor and empathetic as some of their top qualities in a good graduate mentor (Cronan-Hillix, Gensheimer, Cronan-Hillix, & Davidson, 1986). This study, however, did not compare graduate students' perceptions with those of undergraduates. We recommend that future research assess the similarities and differences between grad students and undergrads. In addition, future research can apply the existing validated measures to the graduate student-professor dyad or develop new measures to assess this unique relationship. Conclusion A large amount of research now points to the critical influence of positive professor-student relationships (A. Richmond et al., 2015; Rogers, 2015; Wilson & Ryan, 2013). Students learn best when they have caring and competent mentors to facilitate their learning, spark their motivation, and provide emotional and cognitive support. It is our hope that this chapter provides a resource and foundation for new SoTL researchers who wish to measure the predictors and outcomes of positive professor-student relationships. 157
Page 1 and 2:
A COMPENDIUM OF SCALES for use in t
Page 3 and 4:
Table of Contents Chapter 1: Introd
Page 5 and 6:
Chapter 1: Introduction Rajiv S. Jh
Page 7 and 8:
and boredom; whereas the former inc
Page 9 and 10:
References Bishop-Clark, C. & Dietz
Page 11 and 12:
Chapter 2: Best Practices in Scale
Page 13 and 14:
o Participants respond to items suc
Page 15 and 16:
- Be aware of whether the scale is
Page 17 and 18:
References References marked with a
Page 19 and 20:
*Wielkiewicz, R. M. & Meuwissen, A.
Page 21 and 22:
example, McCabe (2015) examined the
Page 23 and 24:
psychometrically sound tool. Howeve
Page 25 and 26:
a history of the authors’ work do
Page 27 and 28:
*Oleson, K. C., Poehlmann, K. M., Y
Page 29 and 30:
Chapter 4: A Primer on Scale Develo
Page 31 and 32:
scales or develop new ones. In eith
Page 33 and 34:
found their 40-item measure could b
Page 35 and 36:
eflect overall teacher behaviors or
Page 37 and 38:
Although there is some variability
Page 39 and 40:
and/or do not correlate with instru
Page 41 and 42:
Fraley, R. C., & Vazire, S. (2014).
Page 43 and 44:
Streiner, D. L. (2003). Starting at
Page 45 and 46:
Psychology, 36 of the 47 articles (
Page 47 and 48:
Assessing and Reporting Validity In
Page 49 and 50:
Grades Another common source of alr
Page 51 and 52:
Page 53 and 54:
model of collaborative undergraduat
Page 55 and 56:
Chapter 6: Measuring Learning and S
Page 57 and 58:
joins a new team to teach them abou
Page 59 and 60:
Summative Assessments Summative Rub
Page 61 and 62:
programs. In a national survey of p
Page 63 and 64:
Course Outcomes Scale Centra and Ga
Page 65 and 66:
discuss The Motivated Strategies fo
Page 67 and 68:
The Motivated Strategies for Learni
Page 69 and 70:
Page 71 and 72:
Hacker, D. J., Bol, L., & Bahbabani
Page 73 and 74:
Stoloff, M. L., & Feeney, K. J. (20
Page 75 and 76:
interpretation of analogies is an a
Page 77 and 78:
Similar difficulties in accurately
Page 79 and 80:
How do we balance the need for effi
Page 81 and 82:
Page 83 and 84:
*Halpern, D. F. (2010). Halpern Cri
Page 85 and 86:
Appendix: A Compendium of General C
Page 87 and 88:
Chapter 8: Student Engagement Towar
Page 89 and 90:
particular items. Indeed, a point o
Page 91 and 92:
employing the SCEQ have shown other
Page 93 and 94:
one of eight achievement emotions m
Page 95 and 96:
Recent efforts (Saddler, Sonnert, H
Page 97 and 98:
Page 99 and 100:
64, 847-860. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.
Page 101 and 102:
*Schaufeli, W.B., Salanova, M., Gon
Page 103 and 104:
course. Pretest and posttest survey
Page 105 and 106: Perceptions 7 Problem-Solving 1 Sat
Page 107 and 108: Culture and Issues Knowledge of Cur
Page 109 and 110: Civic Attitudes and Skills Question
Page 111 and 112: Scale of Service-Learning Involveme
Page 113 and 114: engagement and psychological measur
Page 115 and 116: Giles, D. E., & Eyler, J. (2013). T
Page 117 and 118: Appendix A: Research Measures for M
Page 119 and 120: Robby, M.A. -CASQ -SAT/9 Scores -¹
Page 121 and 122: Steinberg, K. S., Hatcher, J. A., B
Page 123 and 124: Chapter 10: Measuring Individual Di
Page 125 and 126: either unnecessary or is referenced
Page 127 and 128: Park, 2005). The merit of the instr
Page 129 and 130: Similar factor structures were prod
Page 131 and 132: References References marked with a
Page 133 and 134: Chapter 11: Measuring Well-Being in
Page 135 and 136: items, and the PANAS 44 items, and
Page 137 and 138: Meaning in Life The Meaning in Life
Page 139 and 140: future,” using a 5-point scale (1
Page 141 and 142: Domain-Specific Stress and Anxiety
Page 143 and 144: demonstrate peoples' varying levels
Page 145 and 146: Gehlbach, H. (2015). Seven survey s
Page 147 and 148: Ritchie, R. A., Meca, A., Madrazo,
Page 149 and 150: Chapter 12: Assessing Professor-Stu
Page 151 and 152: ends with some unanswered questions
Page 153 and 154: positively about their professors
Page 155: The PSRS underwent further validati
Page 159 and 160: Komarraju, M. (2013). Ideal teacher
Page 161 and 162: Chapter 13: Effective Tools for Ass
Page 163 and 164: offer guidance based on their exper
Page 165 and 166: The Original TBC Study Our approach
Page 167 and 168: student/faculty rating with critica
Page 169 and 170: eveals that five qualities (knowled
Page 171 and 172: References References marked with a
Page 173 and 174: *Wann, P.D. (2001, January). Facult
Page 175 and 176: Nessie the Mythical Loch Ness Monst
Page 177 and 178: components of knowledge of cognitio
Page 179 and 180: a cognitive activity (Cacioppo et a
Page 181 and 182: teacher? In other words, how do we
Page 183 and 184: Christopher (2015) also suggests th
Page 185 and 186: Kirk, C., Busler, J., Keeley, J., &
show all

A COMPENDIUM OF SCALES for use in the SCHOLARSHIP OF TEACHING AND LEARNING

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?