3 6 V olu m e 9 ł 2 0 1 4
Usin g t h e Com for t a b ilit y- in - Le a r n in g Sca le t o En h a n ce
Posit ive Cla ssr oom Le a r n in g En vir on m e n t s
Michael Kiener, PhD, CRC School of Healt h Pr ofessions
Mar y v ille Univ ersit y
Pet er Gr een, PhD College of Ar t s and Sciences
Mar y v ille Univ ersit y
Kelly Ahuna, PhD School of Educat ion
Medaille College
A goal of higher educat ion is to adv ance lear ning. This st udy ex am ined t he r ole “ com for t abilit y ” plays in t hat process. Defined as t he lev el of com for t st udent s ex per ience w it h t heir classm at es, inst r uct or , and cour se m at er ial, com for t abilit y
addresses how secur e a st udent feels in t he classroom . Com for t abilit y w as assessed m ult iple t im es dur ing one sem est er w it h under gr aduat e st udent s and
found st udent com for t abilit y significant ly incr eased acr oss the cour se of t he sem est er and significant ly pr edict ed affect iv e lear ning. These findings suggest t he
im por t ance of t he classroom envir onm ent in t he lear ning process and suppor t t he need for facult y t o consider “ non- academ ic” fact or s in addit ion t o cour se cont ent .
Const r uct s such as engagem ent , com m unit y , r elat edness, and connect ion ar e com m on in higher educat ion. Mult iple st udies hav e dem onst r at ed w hen st udent s w er e m or e engaged, aw ar e, and com for t able w it h t heir envir onm ent s t hey w ould becom e m or e act iv e in t heir lear ning ( Tinnesz, Ahuna, & Kiener , 2006) , had a posit iv e per cept ion of lear ning and perfor m ance ( McKinney , McKinney , Fr aniuk , & Schw eit zer , 2006) and persist ed unt il gr aduat ion ( Cheng, 2004; Har r is, 2003) . There are at least t w o underly ing t hem es am ong t hese const r uct s t hat support posit iv e lear ning env ironm ents, int ellect ual safet y and affect iv e lear ning. Schr ader ( 2004) defined int ellect ual safet y as a lear ning at m osphere in w hich st udent s feel secur e in challenging and st r engt hening ideas t o deepen lear ning. Affect iv e lear ning exam ines st udent int r insic and ext r insic m ot ivat ion, m et hods st udent s use t o int er act w it h cont ent , and how st udent s receive, r espond to, and int egr at e infor m at ion to form an int ellect ual disposit ion ( Delcour t , Cor nell, & Goldberg, 2007; Holt & Hannon, 2006) . I t is feasible t o believe a fur ther ex am inat ion of t he int er act ion of int ellect ual safet y or lear ning env ir onm ent and affect iv e lear ning w ill lead t o addit ional insight s on em phasizing st udent lear ning.
at t it ude t ow ar ds his or her inst r uct or . The st udy em ploy ed 279 under gr aduat es and found com m unicat iv e st y le and inst r uct or cr edibilit y predict ed affect ive lear ning. The findings fr om t hese st udies expand t he im port ance of verbal and nonv er bal com m unicat ion on lear ning env ir onm ent s and affect ive learning.
Sidelinger , Bolen, Fr isby , and McMullen ( 2011) inv est igat ed how negat ive inst r uct or behavior s ( being r ude, insult ing or
sar cast ic) im pact ed st udent connect edness and affect iv e lear ning w it h 187 undergr aduat e com m unicat ion st udent s. The aut hor s found w hen st udent s dev eloped a sense of connect ion t o each ot her , negat ive inst r uct or behavior s did not alt er st udent cour se engagem ent . How ev er , inst r uct or m isbehavior s did inhibit affect iv e lear ning t ow ar d t he inst r uct or and cour se
cont ent . St udent connect edness and affect iv e lear ning w as also ex am ined by Johnson ( 2009) w it h 197 undergr aduat e st udent s. The r esearcher found w hen st udent s per ceived t hey w ere connect ed w it h each ot her it pr edict ed affect ive lear ning, specifically int ent t o enr oll in sim ilar courses and t o engage in ideas discussed in t he cour se. This r esear ch speaks t o t he im por t ance of st udents cr eat ing an env ir onm ent t o benefit t heir lear ning and how t heir engagem ent can ov er r ide negat iv e inst r uct ional behav iors.
Sim ilar ly, inst r uct or s can also posit ively im pact t he lear ning environm ent . Mazer and Hunt ( 2008) st udied t he effect s of inst r uct or posit ive and negat ive slang on affect iv e lear ning, m ot iv at ion, and classr oom clim at e wit h 175 undergr aduat es. Posit iv e slang w as inform al language used t o engage w it h st udent s w her eas negat ive slang w as verbal obscenit ies deem ed inappr opriat e by st udent s. The r esear cher s found posit ive and no slang com m unicat ion had sim ilar effect s on affect iv e lear ning and m ot ivat ion, but negat ive slang had a significant negat ive im pact on classr oom clim at e. Goodboy and My er s ( 2008) inv est igat ed how inst r uct or com m unicat ion behavior s im pact ed cognit iv e and affect ive lear ning. Posit iv e com m unicat ion behav ior s include ey e cont act , head nodding, and acknow ledging responses; w her eas negat ive com m unicat ion behaviors include int er r upt ing, avoiding, and discredit ing answ ers. The r esear cher s found w hen st udent s per ceived inst r uct or s t o exhibit posit ive com m unicat ion behavior s t hey had m ore posit iv e st udent com m unicat ion behav iors and lear ning out com es. Adding t o t he st udent s’ r ole in cr eat ing posit iv e lear ning env ir onm ent s, inst r uct or v er bal and nonv er bal behav ior s can be em phasized t o benefit lear ning.
Ar guably , incr easing a sense of com m unit y and affect iv e lear ning m ay hav e significant im por t ance in professional pr ogr am s w here st udent s ar e t aught t o cr eate t her apeut ic env ironm ent s t o benefit pr act ice. Mor eover , Shulm an descr ibed professional educat ion as m ore t han an academ ic pr ocess and st at ed,
( T) o becom e a professional, one m ust lear n not only t o t hink in cer t ain w ay s but also t o per for m par t icular sk ills, and t o pr act ice or act in w ay s consist ent w it h t he nor m s, values, and conv ent ions of t he pr ofession. ( 2004, pp. 67- 68)
I n ot her w or ds, affect iv e learning has an im por t ant r ole in developing a pr ofessional w or ldv iew and disposit ion.
Based on t his ev idence it w ould be difficult t o ignor e t he r ole posit iv e lear ning env ir onm ent s hav e on higher educat ion as a m eans of incr easing st udent affect iv e lear ning. As a r esult it w ould be advant ageous for inst r uct or s t o invest igat e individual cour ses and pr ogr am s t o m axim ize t he pot ent ial of posit ive lear ning env ironm ent s. How ever , for m any facult y m em ber s, st udy ing one’s t eaching t o im prove lear ning is a new endeav or ( Huber & Hut chings, 2005) .
The scholar ship of t eaching and lear ning ( SoTL) is a nat ur al fit as a philosophy for inst r uct or s t o st udy t heir t eaching, st udent lear ning, and docum ent ing out com es. SoTL view s t he classroom as a research sit e and calls for
…w h e n st ude nt s pe r ce iv e d in st r u ct or s t o e x h ibit posit iv e com m un ica t ion be h a v ior s t h e y h a d m or e posit iv e st ude nt
3 8 V olu m e 9 ł 2 0 1 4 r igor ous m et hodology t o rev iew and im prove t eaching and st udent lear ning ( Huber & Hut chings, 2005) .
As w it h ot her form s of scholar ship, SoTL requires a quest ion t o be invest igat ed, dat a t o be collect ed and analyzed, and findings t o be im plem ent ed. An equally im por t ant SoTL t hem e is m ak ing qualit y t eaching public for ot her s to cr it ique and build t heory ( Huber & Hut chings, 2005) .
I n an at t em pt t o ex pand t he v alue of ident ify ing posit iv e lear ning env ir onm ent s, t he Com for t abilit y in Lear ning Sur v ey ( CLS) w as cr eat ed ( Kiener , Gr een, Ahuna, & McClusk ey , 2013) . Com for t abilit y em erged as a cor e cat egory in a grounded t heor y st udy designed t o bet t er under st and how counseling st udent s lear n and is concept ualized as a dual pr ocess st udent s and inst r uct or em ploy t o for m a posit iv e lear ning env ironm ent ( Kiener , 2007) . Com for t abilit y is defined as t he lev el of com for t st udent s ex per ience w it h t heir classm at es, inst r uct or , and course m at er ial. Mor eov er , com for t abilit y is relat ed t o st udent self- efficacy in t heir lear ning and abilit y t o com plet e cour sew or k . When st udent s and inst r uct or s est ablish com for t abilit y st udent s hav e t he capabilit y t o becom e m ore act iv e in t heir lear ning and int egr at e infor m at ion t hat m ay hav e been perceiv ed as difficult or challenging pr ior t o t he st ar t of t he cour se ( Kiener et al., 2013) . Allow ing st udent s to prov ide feedback r egarding how t hey best lear n and in cr eat ing assignm ent s is one av enue t o incr ease t he capacit y of com for t abilit y .
An assum pt ion w it h t he CLS is w hen st udent s ar e ask ed t o ov er t ly r at e t heir com for t abilit y t hey have t he pot ent ial t o becom e m or e aw ar e and act iv e in t heir lear ning. One goal in t he cr eat ion of t he CLS w as t o provide a t ool of ongoing assessm ent t hat inst r uct or s could adm inist er in t heir ow n classr oom s w it h r esult ing dat a t hat could be used to im prov e and docum ent st udent lear ning.
Per haps t he gr eat est pot ent ial of t he CLS is adm inist er ing it m ult iple t im es in a single cour se or acr oss m ult iple cour ses in a pr ogr am t o m easure t he developm ent ( or non- dev elopm ent ) of com for t abilit y . Based on t he r esult s of each adm inist r at ion, inst r uct or s can m ake pedagogical changes t o im pr ov e t eaching and lear ning. I n addit ion, r esult s can be shar ed w it h st udent s for anot her oppor t unit y for t hem to “ see” t heir com for t abilit y in lear ning and prov ide feedback to st udents and inst r uct or .
Thus, t he pur pose of t his st udy w as t o ex t end t he ut ilit y of t he CLS as a progr am m easur e. By adm inist er ing t he CLS m ult iple t im es in a professional progr am , dat a can be analy zed t o bet t er collect iv ely gauge st udent s’ com for t abilit y in lear ning. A secondary pur pose w as t o inv est igat e if scores on t he CLS could pr edict affect ive lear ning. I ncr easing affect iv e lear ning in professional pr ogr am s is inst r um ent al because st udent s w ill not only hav e t o t hink but also act and behav e as pr ofessionals. Ther efor e, t he r esear ch quest ions for t his st udy were: 1) Would com for t abilit y significant ly incr ease ov er t he cour se of the sem est er ; 2) Would scor es on t he CLS significant ly pr edict affect iv e lear ning t ow ar d cont ent and inst r uct or ; and 3) Would quest ions seven, 15, and 16 on t he CLS significant ly incr ease over t he cour se of t he sem est er . The t hr ee quest ions wer e: “ The inst r uct or in t his class uses assessm ent pr ocedur es that ar e appropr iat e t o dem onst r at e st udent lear ning” ; “ I use infor m at ion fr om t his class in ot her sit uat ions ( ot her classes or field ex per iences) ” ; and “ Mat er ial in t his class t hat init ially m ay hav e seem ed challenging has becom e m ore under st andable ov er t im e.” These quest ions w er e chosen because of t he pot ent ial t o pr ovide evidence of st udent com for t abilit y w it h t hink ing about and apply ing cour se cont ent .
M e t h odology
Pa r t icipa n t s & Cou r ses
Four facult y m em ber s in t he School of Healt h Professions agr eed t o
dist r ibut e t he CLS t o t heir under gr aduat e st udent s dur ing t he spr ing 2013 sem est er . Out of 46 st udent s in five cour ses, a t ot al of 26 individual st udent s consent ed to part icipat e in t he st udy. Twelve st udent s w ere enrolled in m ore t han one course and 14 st udent s w ere enrolled in one cour se. Thr ee st udent s w er e enrolled in four cour ses, t w o st udent s w er e enr olled in t hr ee courses, and seven st udent s w ere enr olled in t w o courses. All of t he st udent s wer e undergr aduat es from a pr iv at e Midw est er n liber al ar t s univer sit y . Thir t y - t hr ee st udent s w ere m aj or s in t he r ehabilit at ion ser v ices progr am and 13 w er e non- rehabilit at ion ser v ices m aj or s. Ther e w er e a t ot al of 18 st udent s in t he r ehabilit at ion ser v ices’ m aj or . The ot her m aj ors included psychology, occupat ional t her apy, and st udent s w ho w ere undeclared. The average age of t he st udent s w as 22 w it h a range from 17- 41. All of t he st udent s w er e fem ale ex cept for one, and all st udent s w ere Caucasian except for one w ho ident ified as African Am er ican. These dem ogr aphics w ere r epr esent at iv e of st udent s in t his pr ogr am at t his univ er sit y . Sev ent een st udent s had pr ior ex per ience w it h t heir inst r uct or . All of t he cour ses chosen for t his st udy w ere in t he r ehabilit at ion ser v ices progr am and wer e t aught by full- t im e facult y . Thr ee of t he facult y m em bers t aught one cour se and one facult y m em ber t aught t w o cour ses. The courses consist ed of one 200 level, one 300 lev el, and t hr ee 400 lev el cour ses. Rehabilit at ion serv ices is a hum an serv ice pr ofession and r ehabilit at ion ser v ice prov ider s work w it h indiv iduals w it h disabilit ies t o secur e em ploy m ent , liv e independently , and gain full inclusion int o societ y .
Pr oce du r e & M e a su r e s
I n weeks four , eight , and 12 of t he sem est er par t icipant s com plet ed t he Com for t abilit y in Lear ning Scale ( Kiener et al., 2013) and t he I nst r uct ional Affect Assessm ent I nstr um ent ( McCr osk ey , 1994) . The CLS is a 20- it em sur v ey asking st udent s t o r at e t heir com for t w it h t heir classm at es, inst r uct or , and cour se cont ent . Quest ions are answ er ed on a fiv e point Lik er t scale r anging from t ot ally disagr ee ( 1) t o t ot ally agr ee ( 5) . Sam ple quest ions include: “ Classm at es in t his class oft en help each ot her in under st anding difficult m at er ial” ; “ The inst r uct or has creat ed a r espect ful env ir onm ent t o shar e ideas in t his class” ; and “ Mat er ial in t his class t hat init ially m ay hav e seem ed challenging has becom e m or e underst andable ov er t im e” . The CLS has m ore t han adequat e r eliabilit y ; Cr onbach’s Alpha r ange fr om .863- .933 and split half coefficient s r ange from .811- .908. The CLS has a cr it er ion v alidit y coefficient of .737 and str ong face and cont ent v alidit y ( Kiener et al., 2013) . The I nst r uct ional Affect Assessm ent I nst r um ent has t w o eight - it em scales m easur ing affect for cont ent and affect for inst r uct or . Reliabilit y coefficient s r ange fr om .85-.90 and has sound face and predict iv e v alidit y ( McCrosk ey , 1994) .
Aft er each adm inist r at ion, dat a w er e analy zed by t he fir st aut hor and pr esent ed to t he ot her par t icipat ing inst r uct or s as a m et hod of ongoing assessm ent . Gr oup and individual dat a w ere present ed and individual cour se dat a w er e only seen by t he fir st aut hor and by t he inst r uct or t eaching t he course. The first aut hor w as also available t o discuss t he r esult s individually w it h each inst r uct or . As a m et hod t o incr ease com for t abilit y , t he fir st aut hor shar ed t he r esult s of his sur v ey at each adm inist r at ion w it h his st udent s and allowed t hem t o ask quest ions and m ak e t heir ow n int erpret at ions of t he data t o help im prov e t eaching and lear ning.
Re su lt s
4 0 V olu m e 9 ł 2 0 1 4 4.37, SD = .50) , and from w eek four t o w eek 12 ( M = 4.42, SD = .60) , but no significant differ ence bet w een w eek eight and week 12.
To det erm ine if com for t abilit y predict ed affect iv e lear ning t ow ar d cont ent and inst r uct or , corr elat ions w ere init ially analy zed t o det er m ine if a relat ionship exist ed. The r esear cher s exam ined t he final t im e per iod ( 12 Weeks) as t he second r esear ch quest ion w as int erest ed in det er m ining w het her com for t abilit y , as it developed ov er t he course of a sem est er , predict ed affect ive lear ning at t he end of t he class. CLS w as significant ly corr elat ed w it h bot h affect iv e lear ning t ow ar d cont ent ( r ( 39) = .709, p < .001) , and t ow ar d inst r uct or ( r ( 39) = .750, p < .001) . Sim ple linear r egr ession analyses indicat ed significant pr edict ion of affect ive cont ent ( t = 6.12, p < .001) , account ing for 50.3% of t he over all v ar iance. CLS also significant ly pr edict ed affect tow ard inst r uctor , ( t = 6.89) , p < .001, account ing for 56.2% of t he ov er all v ar iance.
Repeat ed m easur es ANOVAs w ere conduct ed on t he t hr ee individual CLS quest ions t o det er m ine if any incr ease in fr equency occurred dur ing t he sem est er . Result s indicat ed very lit t le change in t hese specific quest ions. Any differ ences ov er t he sem est er for it em s seven ( The inst r uct or in t his class uses assessm ent procedur es t hat ar e appropr iat e t o dem onst r at e st udent lear ning) and 15 ( I use infor m at ion from t his class in ot her sit uat ions [ ot her classes or field ex per iences] ) w ere clear ly not significant , F’s < 1.0. I t em 16 ( Mat er ial in t his class t hat init ially m ay hav e seem ed challenging has becom e m or e under standable ov er t im e.) did VKRZ D PDUJLQDO LQFUHDVH ) S džS )ROORZ- up analyses indicat ed t he only significant incr ease occurr ed bet w een w eek 4 ( M = 3.96, SD = .74) and w eek 12 ( M = 4.25, SD = .84) for quest ion 16.
D iscu ssion
The pur pose of t his st udy w as t o ex pand t he use of t he CLS by adm inist er ing it m ult iple t im es t hr oughout a sem est er t o bet t er t r ack fact or s t hat cont r ibut e t o com for t abilit y and affect iv e lear ning. By assessing t he CLS m ult iple t im es and analy zing t he dat a it pr ov ided an oppor t unit y for inst r uct or s t o hav e a m et hod of ongoing assessm ent t o m onit or t heir
cour ses, incr ease st udent aw ar eness of t heir lear ning env ironm ent , and m ak e changes to enhance lear ning. By ex am ining m ult iple cour ses w it hin one progr am it allow ed for a m ore com pr ehensiv e assessm ent of t he pr ogr am ’s com for t abilit y and affect iv e lear ning.
The r esult s indicat ed t hat com for t abilit y did significant ly incr ease over t he course of t he
sem est er ; point ing t o t he pot ent ial for st udent s and inst r uct or s t o ov er t ly im plem ent st r at egies to m onit or and enhance t he lear ning envir onm ent . When st udent s hav e a m or e act iv e r ole in t heir lear ning t hey hav e t he abilit y t o m ove from passive recipient s to dy nam ic consum ers of k now ledge ( Tinnesz, Ahuna, & Kiener , 2006) . St udent s’ percept ion of com for t abilit y did significant ly predict affect iv e lear ning ( affect for inst r uct or and affect for cont ent ) . I t is possible w hen st udent s increase t heir affect iv e lear ning t hey are developing lear ning char act er ist ics such as ent husiasm , persist ence, and cur iosit y ( Ahuna & Tinnesz, 2006) . Mor eov er , because affect iv e lear ning deals w it h at t aining posit iv e at t it udes t ow ard a t eacher and or subj ect , it is plausible t o believe st udent s w er e developing an incr eased m indset tow ar d t heir pr ofession ( Rodr íguez et al., 1996) .
As for t he t hir d resear ch quest ion, t w o out of t he t hr ee indiv idual quest ions ( seven & 15) did not show a significant incr ease t hr ough t he sem est er and t he r em aining quest ion ( 17) had a significant incr ease only bet w een w eek s four and 12. A closer ex am inat ion of all t he m eans ov er t he adm inist r at ions indicat e a low m ean of 3.97 ( quest ion six fir st adm inist r at ion) and a high m ean of 4.37 ( quest ion 15 fir st adm inist r at ion) . Based on these scor es, it is feasible t o conclude st udent s felt
com for t able t hr oughout t he sem est er w it h classm at es helping each ot her w it h difficult m at er ial, using infor m at ion in ot her sit uat ions, and difficult m at er ial becom ing m ore under st andable ov er t im e. I n tot al, t hese r esult s indicat e t he benefit of using an assessm ent , such as t he CLS, as a m eans of ongoing assessm ent t o m onit or t he lear ning env ironm ent and infor m t eaching and st udent lear ning.
Fut u r e Re se a r ch & Lim it a t ion s of t h e St udy
Addit ional resear ch w ould benefit fr om fur t her ex am inat ion of dem ogr aphic differ ences bet w een st udent s and inst r uct or s. For ex am ple, w ill com for t abilit y develop differ ent ly for non- m aj or s and st udent s
w it hout pr ior ex per ience w it h inst r uct or s com par ed t o st udent s w ho ar e m aj ors and w it h st udent s w ho have pr ior exper ience w it h inst r uct or s? Repeat ing t his
st udy w it h m ult iple pr ogr am s m ay r ev eal differences in how pr ogr am s v iew lear ning env ir onm ent s as a m eans t o incr ease lear ning. I t w ould also be int er est ing t o invest igat e how inst r uctors could im plem ent changes to cour ses based on dat a fr om each adm inist r at ion of t he CLS. Adding open ended quest ions t o t he CLS for st udent s and inst r uct ors m ay shed addit ional insight on learning. St udent s could be ask ed t o descr ibe how t heir com for t abilit y w it h classm at es, inst r uct or , and course cont ent changed t hroughout t he sem est er and inst r uctor s could be asked t o descr ibe how t hey used t he dat a for m t he CLS to infor m t heir t eaching.
Alt hough t he r esult s ar e r epr esent at ive of t he progr am s’ st udent s, and possibly ot her hum an serv ices pr ogr am s at sm all liber al art s inst it ut ions, t he sm all sam ple size does decrease the st udy’s ex t er nal validit y to a broader populat ion. I ncr easing t he div ersit y of the st udent s, pr ogr am s, and inst it ut ions w ould help generalize t he value of using t he CLS as a learning out com e m easur e. I n addit ion, w it hout a com par ison group, it is difficult t o st at e for cer t ain t hat t he effect s w ere t he r esult of t he pr ogr am ’s sense of com for t abilit y and not anot her ex t er nal factor causing t he change.
Applica t ion t o a Br oa de r Au die n ce
Adding t o t he m ilieu of higher educat ion is t he r ising dem and for inst it ut ions t o be account able and dem onst r at e st udent lear ning out com es. Accredit ing agencies ar e r equir ing inst it ut ions t o do a bet t er j ob of ident ify ing, t r ack ing, and dem onst r at ing st udent out com es. I nst it ut ions t hat im plem ent a cult ur e of assessm ent and use dat a t o im prove t eaching and lear ning w ill hav e a dist inct adv ant age in at t r act ing and gr aduat ing st udent s.
Regardless of academ ic ar ea, t hese findings ex em plify t he posit ive benefit of cr eat ing a secure classr oom env ir onm ent . Par t icular ly in healt h and hum an serv ice fields in w hich st udent s w ill becom e fut ur e pr ofessionals serv icing t he com m unit y , it is im per at ive t o m axim ize lear ning. This r esear ch show s t hat incr eased com for t abilit y leads t o incr eased affect iv e lear ning. As a r esult , st udent s get m ore from t heir classes and t he com m unit y get s m ore fr om it s pr ofessionals. Teaching is an ar t as opposed t o a science. I nst r uct or s at all levels can cont inually im pr ov e t heir pr act ice, and a new at t ent ion t o com for t abilit y is one facet t hat can be addressed.
Con clu sion
This st udy sought t o bet t er under st and if st udent per cept ion of a posit iv e lear ning env ironm ent could be developed in a r ehabilit at ion ser v ices pr ogr am over t he cour se of a sem est er and if a posit ive lear ning envir onm ent could predict affect iv e lear ning. The r esult s indicat ed a sense of com for t abilit y did incr ease in t he progr am , and com for t abilit y did pr edict affect ive lear ning. I ncr easing affect ive lear ning for st udent s in pr ofessional progr am s has t he pot ent ial t o indicat e st udent s ar e t r ansit ioning t o t heir new pr ofessional r oles. One of the st r engt hs of t he st udy
4 2 V olu m e 9 ł 2 0 1 4 is em br acing ongoing assessm ent t o im pr ov e inst r uct ion and st udent lear ning. When inst r uct ors collect dat a on t heir t eaching and st udent lear ning t hey hav e t he abilit y t o bet t er dem onstr at e they ar e achiev ing st udent learning out com es.
Re fe r e n ce s Ahuna, K. H., & Tinnesz, C. G.
( 2006) .Met hods of inquiry applied cr it ical t hinking( 2nd ed.) . Dubuque, I A: Kendall/ Hunt .
Cheng, D. X. ( 2004) . St udent s’ sense of cam pus com m unit y : What it m eans, and w hat t o do about it .
NASPA Jour nal,41, 216- 234.
Delcour t , M. A. D., Cor nell, D. G, & Goldberg, M. D. ( 2007) . Cognit iv e and affect ive lear ning out com es of gift ed elem ent ary school st udent s.
The Gift ed Child Quar t er ly,51, 259-282.
Goodboy , A. K., & My er s, S. A. ( 2008) . The effect of t eacher confirm at ion on st udent com m unicat ion and lear ning out com e. Com m unicat ion Educat ion,
57, 153- 179.
Har r is, B. A. ( 2003) . The power of cr eat ing a spir it ual lear ning com m unit y . Adult Lear ning, 12, 22-23.
Henning, Z. ( 2010) . Teaching w it h st yle t o m anage st udent s
percept ions: The effect s of socio-com m unicat ive st yle and t eacher cr edibilit y on st udent affect iv e lear ning. Com m unicat ion Resear ch Repor t s,27, 58- 67.
Holt , B. J., & Hannon, J. ( 2006) . Teaching- lear ning in t he affect iv e dom ain.Str at egies, 20, 11- 13.
Huber , M. T., & Hut chings, P. ( 2005) .
The adv ancem ent of lear ning building t he t eaching com m ons. San
Fr ancisco, Califor nia: Jossey - Bass.
Johnson, D. I . ( 2009) . Connect ed classroom clim at e: A v alidit y st udy .
Com m unicat ion Resear ch Repor t s,
26, 146- 157.
Kiener , M. S. ( 2007) . Scholar ship of t eaching in r ehabilit at ion counseling pr act icum . Rehabilit at ion Educat ion,
21, 169- 178.
Kiener , M. S., Green, P., Ahuna, K., & McCluskey, J. ( 2013) . Creat ion of t he com for t abilit y in lear ning scale.
Tr ansfor m at ive Dialogue: Teaching and Learning Journal,6( 3) . Ret rieved fr om ht t p: / / www .kpu.ca/ t d/ past - issues/ 6- 3
Mazer , J.P., & Hunt , S. K. ( 2008) . The effect s of inst r uct or use of posit iv e and negat iv e slang on st udent m ot iv at ion, affect iv e lear ning, and classroom clim at e.
Com m unicat ion Resear ch Repor t s,
25, 44- 55.
McCroskey, J.C. ( 1994) . Assessm ent of affect t ow ar ds com m unicat ion and affect t ow ard inst r uct ion in
com m unicat ion. I n S. Morr eale & M. Br ooks ( Eds.) , 1994 SCA sum m er confer ence proceedings and pr epar ed r em ar ks: Assessing college student s com pet ence in speech
com m unicat ion. Annandale, VA: Speech Com m unicat ion Associat ion.
McKinney , J. P., McKinney , K. G., Fr aniuk , R., & Schw eit zer , J. ( 2006) . The college classroom as a
com m unit y . College Teaching,54, 281- 284.
Rodr íguez, J. I ., Plax , T. G., & Kear ney , P. ( 1996) . Clar ify ing t he r elat ionship bet w een t eacher nonv er bal im m ediacy and st udent cognit iv e lear ning: Affect ive lear ning as t he cent r al causal m ediat or.
Com m unicat ion Educat ion, 45( 4) , 293- 305.
Schr ader , D. E. ( 2004) . I nt ellect ual safet y , m or al at m ospher e and epist em ology in college classroom s.
Shulm an, L. S. ( 2004) . Teaching as com m unit y proper t y essays on higher educat ion. San Fr ancisco, CA: Jossey -Bass.
Sidelinger , R. J., Bolen, D. M., Fr isby , B. N., & McMullen A. L. ( 2011) . When inst r uct or s m isbehave: An exam inat ion of st udent - t o- st udent connectedness as a m ediat or in t he college classr oom .
Com m unicat ion Educat ion, 60, 340- 361.
Tinnesz, C. G., Ahuna, K. H., & Kiener , M. ( 2006) . Tow ar d college success: I nt er nalizing act iv e and dy nam ic st r at egies. College Teaching,54, 302-306.
Michael Kiener is an associat e professor and dir ect or of t he Rehabilit at ion Counseling and Serv ices progr am s. Michael has co- aut hor ed a book on str engt h based counseling, published ar t icles on career decision m aking, act iv e and dy nam ic lear ning st r at egies, counseling pedagogy , and act ion r esear ch. I n 2012 he r eceiv ed t he Out st anding Facult y Aw ard and t he Pr esident ’s Aw ard for Str at egic Ex cellence: Civ ic Engagem ent fr om Maryville Univ er sit y .
Pet er J. Gr een is t he Assist ant Dean of Social Sciences, Pr ogr am Direct or and Associat e Professor of Psy chology at Mary v ille Univ ersit y St . Louis. I n addit ion t o conduct ing resear ch relat ed t o t he Scholarship of Teaching and Lear ning, he also int er est ed in ex plor ing social nor m s in t w o dist inct fields. The first ex am ines t he im pact t hese norm s, oft en incorr ect , have on t he healt h- r elat ed behaviors and at t it udes of college st udent s, including alcohol consum ption and safe sex . The second explor es t he r ole social nor m s m ay hav e in biases t hat perm eat e t he cr im inal j ust ice sy st em .
