Department of Psychology

1
Department of Psychology

• Introduction to Psychology
• Northern Arizona University
• K. LAURIE DICKSON, MICHELLE MILLER, DERRICK
  WIRTZ
• Review of Goals and Parameters
• Large (2,000/year) foundational, survey-style
  class
• Traditionally, 8-11 uncoordinated sections per
  year
• Student engagement
• 63 study lt 2 hours per week 25 miss gt 5
  classes
• Student learning and achievement
• Enrollment pressure and cost issues
• Consistency of student experience
• Reliance on non-permanent staff
• Wide range of failure, withdraw rates across
  sections
• Faculty perceptions and participation

2
Department of Psychology

• Overview of the Redesign
• Supplemental approach
• Goals Promote learning and success, engagement,
  consistency, cost efficiency, faculty
  participation
• Assessment 25-item test of psychology
  knowledge student opinion survey, successful
  completion
• Large team-taught F2F section
• 400 students/section (back to back, for
  800/semester)
• Doubling of the largest traditional section
  sizes
• Pedagogical Features
• Web assignments
• Required, repeatable online quizzes
• SRS for required attendance, in-class assessment
• Early intervention system
• Organization and Staffing
• Coordinator
• Tenure-Track Instructors
• Team Approach to GTA Supervision

3
Department of Psychology

• Addition to the Redesign Plan
• Fully Online Introduction to Psychology
• Institutional need for web-only offering
• Cost effectiveness, staffing and course building
  have been the major barriers
• Prior assessment has demonstrated that student
  learning is NOT a barrier
• 22-person section taught in Winter 08-09 as a
  pilot, Spring 09 as full implementation (cap of
  100)
• Co-designed by experienced adjunct and TT faculty
• Master template created collaboratively
• Teaching done by adjunct

4
Department of Psychology

• Results Fall 2008
• Learning
• Mean performance in large redesigned section
  went from 31.2 (pre-test) to 40.2 (post-test),
  or .72 of one SD.
• Second best improvement ever recorded for F2F
  version of this course also note that the
  section that exceeded this had a much higher drop
  rate.
• Student Success
• D/F grades (25), drop rates (4) midway between
  comparison sections of traditional courses taught
  by full-time faculty
• Note increased demands on students, work
  completion pattern associated with D and F grades
• Student Engagement
• Self-reported study hours
• 46.8 1-2 hours 43 3-4 hours
• Participation/attendance averaged 72 (median
  81)

5
(No Transcript)
6
Department of Psychology

• Other Impacts
• Early Intervention
• Positive response to proactive email contact
• Study skills workshops
• Student Response System and Online Quizzes
• Perceptions radically improved from pilot to
  implementation
• Students endorsed SRS usefulness, promoting
  attention/connectedness
• Students strongly endorsed usefulness of quizzes
• Cost Savings
• Sections/year 11 -gt 8
• Number of instructors 7 -gt 4 (including
  coordinator)
• Cost per student 62 -gt 43
• Savings contribute to
• Honors
• Freshman Seminar
• Undergraduate Research Experience (3x increase)

7
Department of Psychology

• Lessons Learned and Future Directions
• Multi-method, incremental approach
• Grassroots input from GTAs
• Managing student communications
• Framing class features to students
• Team teaching and faculty buy-in
• Future impacts on students and NAU
• 90 of teaching will be done by full-time
  faculty
• Dramatic increase in richness, challenge level,
  consistency
• Impact on student expectations for later courses
• Creation of the NAU Course Redesign Team,
  directed by Michelle Miller with support from
  Karen Pugliesi, Vice Provost Academic Affairs