This study examined students?? and Supplemental Instruction leaders?? perceptions of teaching, teaching practices, and faculty teaching effectiveness. This study also examined the impact of the SI leader??s role on those perceptions and subsequent behaviors on end-of-course evaluations and sought to determine whether differences existed between the two groups in order to determine whether or not SI leaders?? perceptions should be included in a comprehensive evaluation system. A purposive sample of 17 SI leaders, who had been employed during the spring 2002 semester and returned for the fall 2002 semester, and 17 students, who had attended at least 10 SI sessions during the fall 2002 semester, were selected to participate in this study.Data for the study were collected through individual interviews using a protocol designed to collect their perceptions regarding the following: 1) definitions of teaching and its activities; 2) descriptions of good and bad teaching or good and bad teachers; 3) definitions and descriptions of faculty teaching effectiveness; 4) role of the SI leader; 5) impact of SI leader??s role on perceptions of teaching, its activities, and faculty teaching effectiveness; and 6) impact of SI leader??s role on behaviors on end-of-course evaluations. A major finding of this study is that SI leaders and students define teaching and its activities in a similar fashion. SI leaders, unlike students, however, report that learning is tied to teaching effectiveness, or lack thereof. This study has three major results: 1) SI leaders end up teaching, rather than facilitating; 2) the SI leader??s role impacts views on teaching; and 3) the SI leaders?? role impacts behaviors on end-of-course evaluations. A review of the literature on student ratings of instruction and regular attendance at SI indicate that both correlate, to a small degree, with mean end-of-course grades. Claims of validity with respect to both may be somewhat suspect, in light of SI leader??s claims that they teach, rather than facilitate. Investigation of the impact of regular attendance at SI on end-of-course grades and end-of-course evaluations may result in the need to draw new conclusions with respect to validity of student ratings of instruction and SI.

The purpose of this study was to determine how cognitive, demographic, and motivational factors can be used to understand help-seeking behavior in college students. Specifically, the study examined engagement in Supplemental Instruction (SI) of undergraduate students at Texas A&M University. An additional purpose of the study was to determine the efficacy of SI. The sample for the study was 2,407 undergraduate students who were enrolled in eight randomly selected courses at Texas A&M University in the spring 2004 semester. Students enrolled in multiple course sections were eliminated from the study. The revised sample consisted of 2,297 students. Data collected for all students in the sample included student demographic information, SI attendance and participation, and final course grades. Students were also requested to complete an on-line survey instrument containing a modified version of the Motivated Strategies for Learning Questionnaire (MSLQ) and questions related to parent education and household income. Ultimately, 1,003 students from the revised sample submitted surveysfor a response rate of 43.7%. Based on attendance data and participation ratings, students were classified into three engagement groups for subsequent data analysis: high engagement, low engagement, and non-SI. The following were among the major findings from the study: ?? Hispanic students were significantly more engaged in SI than their White peers. ?? Engagement in SI was inversely related to grade level classification. ?? SI participants had significantly lower mean SAT math and verbal scores than students who did not attend SI. ?? The motivational variables as a set had a statistically significant relationship with SI engagement. ?? Extrinsic motivation, organization, academic self-efficacy, control beliefs, help-seeking, and peer learning were the motivational scales which best predicted SI engagement. ?? Students who were highly engaged in SI had significantly higher mean final course grades than either non-participants or low engagement students even controlling for differences in SAT scores, cumulative grade point average, and motivation. The study helps provide some insight into the dynamics of academic help-seeking. It also contributes to the growing body of evidence which shows that SI is an effective intervention for improving student success in traditionally difficult courses.

This study examined students?? and Supplemental Instruction leaders?? perceptions of teaching, teaching practices, and faculty teaching effectiveness. This study also examined the impact of the SI leader??s role on those perceptions and subsequent behaviors on end-of-course evaluations and sought to determine whether differences existed between the two groups in order to determine whether or not SI leaders?? perceptions should be included in a comprehensive evaluation system. A purposive sample of 17 SI leaders, who had been employed during the spring 2002 semester and returned for the fall 2002 semester, and 17 students, who had attended at least 10 SI sessions during the fall 2002 semester, were selected to participate in this study.Data for the study were collected through individual interviews using a protocol designed to collect their perceptions regarding the following: 1) definitions of teaching and its activities; 2) descriptions of good and bad teaching or good and bad teachers; 3) definitions and descriptions of faculty teaching effectiveness; 4) role of the SI leader; 5) impact of SI leader??s role on perceptions of teaching, its activities, and faculty teaching effectiveness; and 6) impact of SI leader??s role on behaviors on end-of-course evaluations. A major finding of this study is that SI leaders and students define teaching and its activities in a similar fashion. SI leaders, unlike students, however, report that learning is tied to teaching effectiveness, or lack thereof. This study has three major results: 1) SI leaders end up teaching, rather than facilitating; 2) the SI leader??s role impacts views on teaching; and 3) the SI leaders?? role impacts behaviors on end-of-course evaluations. A review of the literature on student ratings of instruction and regular attendance at SI indicate that both correlate, to a small degree, with mean end-of-course grades. Claims of validity with respect to both may be somewhat suspect, in light of SI leader??s claims that they teach, rather than facilitate. Investigation of the impact of regular attendance at SI on end-of-course grades and end-of-course evaluations may result in the need to draw new conclusions with respect to validity of student ratings of instruction and SI.

This dissertation consists of three distinct yet inter-related research papers in labor economics, each with relevance for public policy. The first chapter examines the role of wage differentials for caring work in explaining the gender wage gap. We find that both women and men face caring penalties that are small, about 2% for one standard deviation difference in caring. While women disproportionately work in caring jobs, it is unlikely that policies governing wages in the care sector could achieve pay equity between men and women. The second chapter evaluates the impact of state legislation on bullying in schools. I employ a difference-in-differences approach exploiting variation across states in the timing and type of law adopted using nationally representative surveys at the student and school levels. While I find no impact of the laws on bullying in high schools, bullying occurs most often in middle school. And impacts might vary by school type and legislation type. I also discuss current challenges to evaluating bullying legislation and provide recommendations for facilitating a conclusive assessment of whether state bullying laws work. The third chapter uses a field experiment to evaluate an intervention aimed at increasing participation in an academic assistance program. Supplemental Instruction (SI) is a widely used, but poorly evaluated, peer-tutoring program with low participation rates. We randomize encouragements to attend SI across a large student population. The resulting boost in participation allows us to estimate the per-session average causal impact of SI on grades for a subpopulation under certain assumptions.

The purpose of this qualitative study was to examine the learning styles of supplemental instruction leaders at a large, public university during the fall 2010 semester and determine whether or not their personal learning styles influenced the way they designed and developed out-of-class study sessions. The total population of supplemental instruction leaders was 37, of which 24 were eligible to participate in the study. Of the 24 eligible supplemental instruction leaders, 20 completed the entire study. Participants in the study included nine male and 11 female supplemental instruction leaders with a median age of 22.25 years-old. Seventeen participants indicated their classification as senior, two as junior, and one as sophomore. Of the participants, 16 indicated white as a race or ethnicity, one indicated Asian, two indicated African American, and one indicated both American Indian/Alaska Native and white. Supplemental instruction leader learning style was assessed using the Kolb Learning Style Inventory. Leaders were then interviewed, and their study sessions were analyzed. Through triangulation of data from learning style, interviews and actual study session documents, four major themes emerged. The four themes were: 1) incorporation of personal experience into study session design, 2) the sense of impact on student learning, 3) a feeling of the need to incorporate varied activities into study session design, and 4) the concept that students must take ownership over their own learning. No consistent pattern emerged among the themes; however, the results attributed out-of-class study session design to both the incorporation of personal learning style preferences as identified through the Kolb Learning Style Inventory and training conducted by the institution. Implications for future research include the need for continued research addressing how and if supplemental instruction leader learning style influences out-of-class study session design. Also, as institutions of higher education seek to expand academic support services to all students, future research should explore supplemental instruction leader training and the impact such training has on students seeking support from the supplemental instruction program.

This research project sought to measure how students in large-classroom environments respond to supplemental, out-of-class learning options. Is their performance positively impacted by tutoring or by online, always-accessible lessons? Above and beyond demographics and skills, what motivates students to engage in use of supplemental learning options? Responding to theories of ?just-in-time? learning and the learner-centered philosophy of distributed learning, this study put three out-of-class tools in place during the course of a fall semester to allow the learner to decide what form of out-of-class aid he or she would rely upon. Those three options included tutoring services, streaming voice-over-PowerPoint lessons, and short YouTube.com-hosted videos featuring the instructor. Over the course of the fall 2008 semester, students responded to two surveys intended to (1) capture their motivational approach and preferred study strategies and learning styles; and (2) capture measures of their usage of these tools and their reported perception of the tools. In tests of data to determine what led to the most improvement in student scores and what led to students? highest reported levels of satisfaction and perceived value with the course, the short, lab instructor-created videos hosted on YouTube.com were the only significant predictor among all three supplemental learning options. This finding provides broad-based support for ?just-in-time? theories of learning, in which information and help are readily available just as students are seeking that information and extra guidance. Therefore, instructors seeking to improve student performance may serve their students well by preparing materials to facilitate any-time access to course content needed to complete major assignments or prepare for exams. But there is a caveat to simply making any form of content available online or available any-time, any-place. This study advances the theory of always-available resources and learner-centered environments by further refining what type of media stimulates the most improvement in performance. The answer, in part, seems to hinge on what is most appealing to students (video plus audio, shorter material, content geared toward assignment specifics rather than broad-based lectures), and warrants future study.

This quasi-experimental study examined the effects of participation in a Supplemental Instruction (SI) program on student test performance in a second-level developmental mathematics class in a four-year university setting. This research deviated from past research on Supplemental Instruction in that it examined effects of the program at the end of each test block rather than at the end of the course only. The quasi-experimental design was precipitated by an inability to control factors of participation and limited sample size. Test data were analyzed using analysis of variance; final course grades were analyzed using chi-square.

Due to its unsupervised nature, undergraduate education requires students to manage their own learning. They need to use self-regulated learning (SRL) strategies in order to achieve academic success. However, college students often have insufficient regulatory skills and strategies, suggesting the need for substantive and practical support. Supplemental Instruction (SI) is a well-recognized academic intervention that utilizes peer-led study groups for difficult college courses, through which students can develop their SRL abilities. This study focuses on the role of the SI program in college students’ development of SRL from a person-centered perspective. First, this study examines the heterogeneous effects of the SI intervention on students’ development of SRL by combining latent profile modeling and propensity score matching. Second, it explores the changes in student SRL profiles over the intervention period and determines factors affecting the prediction of such changes using latent transition modeling. Results identify three distinct student profiles: competent regulator, self-confident regulator, and goal-oriented regulator. Within the competent regulator profile, both SI and non-SI attendees’ overall SRL scores significantly decreased over time, though non- SI attendees showed a greater downturn. For the self-confident regulator profile, only SI attendees’ overall SRL scores increased. Both SI and non-SI attendees in the goal-oriented regulator profile had small decreases in scores, which were not statistically significant. Regarding students’ longitudinal transitions between SRL profiles, students in the most desirable profile (competent regulator) remained most stable over time. Students’ SRL in the goal-oriented regulator profile was most malleable in a positive way; approximately 40% of these students moved into the competent regulator profile. In addition, students whose decision to attend the SI sessions was more mastery-oriented tended to fall into more positive transition groups. Furthermore, students whose levels of self-confidence in learning, critical thinking skills, and group work skills increased as a result of their participation in SI sessions were more likely to become members of more positive transition groups. The findings of this study extend previous work by longitudinally examining individual differences in college students’ SRL development. They also provide significant implications for the future design of more targeted interventions.

Many scholars have sought to measure the effectiveness of diverse supplemental instruction programs. Nevertheless, it is difficult to generalize about supplemental instruction or compare data, given methodological and statistical incongruities and diverse approaches and student populations at various institutions. Quantitative and qualitative data suggest that supplemental instruction and embedded tutoring programs facilitate learning and success in all disciplines. We describe best practices for embedded tutoring and supplemental instruction across disciplines and course modalities, evaluate metrics used to assess community college embedded tutoring and supplemental instruction programs, and suggest mixed methods models for assessing these programs.

Embedded tutoring and Supplemental Instruction have the potential to benefit all students, helping to even the playing field in terms of college preparedness and academic skill development