SI-PASS 对高风险课程的影响--随机对照试验

IF 4.7 1区 教育学 Q1 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH Learning and Instruction Pub Date : 2024-11-03 DOI:10.1016/j.learninstruc.2024.102042
Ninon Puttaert , Dylan Dachet , Ariane Baye , Etienne Quertemont , Laurent Leduc , Anne-Sophie Nyssen , Dominique Verpoorten
{"title":"SI-PASS 对高风险课程的影响--随机对照试验","authors":"Ninon Puttaert ,&nbsp;Dylan Dachet ,&nbsp;Ariane Baye ,&nbsp;Etienne Quertemont ,&nbsp;Laurent Leduc ,&nbsp;Anne-Sophie Nyssen ,&nbsp;Dominique Verpoorten","doi":"10.1016/j.learninstruc.2024.102042","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><div>SI-PASS is a structured academic support program employing successful later-year students to facilitate peer-learning sessions attached to high-risk courses, specifically here statistics for psychology at ULiège. The research translates as: How much does this method improve academic performance and impact socio-affective perceptions in first-year students?</div></div><div><h3>Aims</h3><div>This study compares academic performance and socio-affective variables of first-year students in the experimental condition and the control condition.</div></div><div><h3>Sample</h3><div>Participants were 245 freshmen for the experimental trial, and 985 for the quasi-experimental trial.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>Participants were assigned to either participate to the SI-PASS scheme or not during the first semester following a randomized controlled trial with stratified random assignment method. Then, the whole cohort enlisted for the course was analyzed to validate supplementary hypotheses.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>The first step of the study reveals no difference between both groups on academic performance, unless the level of attendance is considered; nor does it identify any significant impact on socio-affective variables. The second step consisted in the comparison of the experimental group and the group of students who chose not to volunteer for SI-PASS and resulted in significant improvement in academic performance in favor of SI-PASS.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>This delivered significant results in favor of the program but only when attendance is considered, thus offering empirical evidence that a genuine experimental design is likely to mitigate the effects found in a tradition of quasi-experimental designs. These results are valuable for the SI-PASS community, where randomized trials are still scarce, and for higher education institutions seeking evidence-based assistance.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48357,"journal":{"name":"Learning and Instruction","volume":"95 ","pages":"Article 102042"},"PeriodicalIF":4.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Effects of SI-PASS on a high-risk course – A randomized controlled trial\",\"authors\":\"Ninon Puttaert ,&nbsp;Dylan Dachet ,&nbsp;Ariane Baye ,&nbsp;Etienne Quertemont ,&nbsp;Laurent Leduc ,&nbsp;Anne-Sophie Nyssen ,&nbsp;Dominique Verpoorten\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.learninstruc.2024.102042\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Background</h3><div>SI-PASS is a structured academic support program employing successful later-year students to facilitate peer-learning sessions attached to high-risk courses, specifically here statistics for psychology at ULiège. The research translates as: How much does this method improve academic performance and impact socio-affective perceptions in first-year students?</div></div><div><h3>Aims</h3><div>This study compares academic performance and socio-affective variables of first-year students in the experimental condition and the control condition.</div></div><div><h3>Sample</h3><div>Participants were 245 freshmen for the experimental trial, and 985 for the quasi-experimental trial.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>Participants were assigned to either participate to the SI-PASS scheme or not during the first semester following a randomized controlled trial with stratified random assignment method. Then, the whole cohort enlisted for the course was analyzed to validate supplementary hypotheses.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>The first step of the study reveals no difference between both groups on academic performance, unless the level of attendance is considered; nor does it identify any significant impact on socio-affective variables. The second step consisted in the comparison of the experimental group and the group of students who chose not to volunteer for SI-PASS and resulted in significant improvement in academic performance in favor of SI-PASS.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>This delivered significant results in favor of the program but only when attendance is considered, thus offering empirical evidence that a genuine experimental design is likely to mitigate the effects found in a tradition of quasi-experimental designs. These results are valuable for the SI-PASS community, where randomized trials are still scarce, and for higher education institutions seeking evidence-based assistance.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48357,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Learning and Instruction\",\"volume\":\"95 \",\"pages\":\"Article 102042\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-03\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Learning and Instruction\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"95\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0959475224001695\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"教育学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Learning and Instruction","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0959475224001695","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景SI-PASS是一项结构化的学术支持计划,它聘用成绩优秀的后进生,为高风险课程(特别是ULiège的心理学统计)提供同伴学习课程。研究内容如下本研究比较了实验条件下和对照条件下一年级学生的学业成绩和社会情感变量。方法采用分层随机分配法进行随机对照试验,在第一学期将参与者分配到是否参加 SI-PASS 计划。结果研究的第一步显示,除非考虑出勤率,否则两组学生在学习成绩上没有差异;也没有发现对社会情感变量有任何显著影响。第二步是比较实验组和选择不自愿参加 SI-PASS 的学生组,结果有利于 SI-PASS 的学生的学习成绩有了显著提高。结论这项研究得出了有利于该计划的显著结果,但只有在考虑到出勤率的情况下才会如此,从而提供了经验证据,证明真正的实验设计有可能减轻传统的准实验设计所产生的影响。这些结果对于随机试验仍然稀缺的 SI-PASS 社区和寻求循证援助的高等教育机构都很有价值。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Effects of SI-PASS on a high-risk course – A randomized controlled trial

Background

SI-PASS is a structured academic support program employing successful later-year students to facilitate peer-learning sessions attached to high-risk courses, specifically here statistics for psychology at ULiège. The research translates as: How much does this method improve academic performance and impact socio-affective perceptions in first-year students?

Aims

This study compares academic performance and socio-affective variables of first-year students in the experimental condition and the control condition.

Sample

Participants were 245 freshmen for the experimental trial, and 985 for the quasi-experimental trial.

Methods

Participants were assigned to either participate to the SI-PASS scheme or not during the first semester following a randomized controlled trial with stratified random assignment method. Then, the whole cohort enlisted for the course was analyzed to validate supplementary hypotheses.

Results

The first step of the study reveals no difference between both groups on academic performance, unless the level of attendance is considered; nor does it identify any significant impact on socio-affective variables. The second step consisted in the comparison of the experimental group and the group of students who chose not to volunteer for SI-PASS and resulted in significant improvement in academic performance in favor of SI-PASS.

Conclusions

This delivered significant results in favor of the program but only when attendance is considered, thus offering empirical evidence that a genuine experimental design is likely to mitigate the effects found in a tradition of quasi-experimental designs. These results are valuable for the SI-PASS community, where randomized trials are still scarce, and for higher education institutions seeking evidence-based assistance.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
11.30
自引率
4.80%
发文量
109
期刊介绍: As an international, multi-disciplinary, peer-refereed journal, Learning and Instruction provides a platform for the publication of the most advanced scientific research in the areas of learning, development, instruction and teaching. The journal welcomes original empirical investigations. The papers may represent a variety of theoretical perspectives and different methodological approaches. They may refer to any age level, from infants to adults and to a diversity of learning and instructional settings, from laboratory experiments to field studies. The major criteria in the review and the selection process concern the significance of the contribution to the area of learning and instruction, and the rigor of the study.
期刊最新文献
Competitive and non-competitive school climate and students’ well-being Comparison effects on self- and external ratings: Testing the generalizability of the 2I/E model to parents and teachers of academic track school students Testing the CONIC model: The interplay of conscientiousness and interest in predicting academic effort Metacognitive scaffolding for digital reading and mind-wandering in adults with and without ADHD Retrieval supports word learning in children with Down syndrome
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1