Student Response to a Corequisite Pilot Program: A Retrospective

Elizabeth J. Threadgill
{"title":"Student Response to a Corequisite Pilot Program: A Retrospective","authors":"Elizabeth J. Threadgill","doi":"10.36896/1.2fa2","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This retrospective article presents the results of a pilot study on student perceptions of a corequisite model for devel- opmental writing. Qualitative survey data was collected at the beginning, middle, and end of Fall 2013 at a large public university in central Texas. A total of 21 students participated in this study. Eleven students who were near the cut-off for the placement exam were enrolled in a first-semester composition course with other students who placed directly into first-semester composition. These 11 students also agreed to meet outside of the composition classroom at a set time for the corequisite course. Another ten students who were near the cut-off for the placement exam were placed in a tra- ditional 16-week developmental writing course that served as a control. Responses were analyzed using coding practices outlined by Saldaña (2009), including initial coding, categorizing, and theming. Themes that emerged in the responses of students enrolled in the traditional 16-week developmental writing course included the following: (a) this course is pointless/a waste, (b) mismatch between placement and self-perception, and (c) transferability. Themes that emerged in the responses of students enrolled in the corequisite model included the following: (a) a lot is riding on success in the corequisite composition course, (b) unsure/nervous about expectations, and (c) improved self-efficacy at the end of the course. The major implication of this study is the importance of including student voices in the implementation of models for developmental education.","PeriodicalId":254667,"journal":{"name":"Journal of College Academic Support Programs","volume":"463 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of College Academic Support Programs","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.36896/1.2fa2","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

This retrospective article presents the results of a pilot study on student perceptions of a corequisite model for devel- opmental writing. Qualitative survey data was collected at the beginning, middle, and end of Fall 2013 at a large public university in central Texas. A total of 21 students participated in this study. Eleven students who were near the cut-off for the placement exam were enrolled in a first-semester composition course with other students who placed directly into first-semester composition. These 11 students also agreed to meet outside of the composition classroom at a set time for the corequisite course. Another ten students who were near the cut-off for the placement exam were placed in a tra- ditional 16-week developmental writing course that served as a control. Responses were analyzed using coding practices outlined by Saldaña (2009), including initial coding, categorizing, and theming. Themes that emerged in the responses of students enrolled in the traditional 16-week developmental writing course included the following: (a) this course is pointless/a waste, (b) mismatch between placement and self-perception, and (c) transferability. Themes that emerged in the responses of students enrolled in the corequisite model included the following: (a) a lot is riding on success in the corequisite composition course, (b) unsure/nervous about expectations, and (c) improved self-efficacy at the end of the course. The major implication of this study is the importance of including student voices in the implementation of models for developmental education.
学生对必要试点计划的反应:回顾
这篇回顾性的文章提出了一项初步研究的结果,该研究是关于学生对发展性写作的共同条件模型的看法。定性调查数据是在2013年秋季开始、中期和结束时在德克萨斯州中部的一所大型公立大学收集的。共有21名学生参与了本研究。11名接近分班考试分数线的学生被选入第一学期的写作课程,其他学生则直接选入第一学期的写作课程。这11名学生还同意在一个固定的时间在作文课室外见面,学习必修课程。另外10名接近分班考试分班的学生被安排参加传统的16周发展性写作课程,作为对照。使用Saldaña(2009)概述的编码实践对响应进行分析,包括初始编码、分类和主题化。在参加传统的16周发展性写作课程的学生的回答中出现的主题包括:(a)这门课程毫无意义/浪费,(b)位置和自我感知之间的不匹配,以及(c)可转移性。在参加共同要求模式的学生的回答中出现的主题包括:(a)在共同要求的作文课程中取得成功,(b)对期望不确定/紧张,(c)在课程结束时提高自我效能。本研究的主要含义是在实施发展性教育模式时包括学生声音的重要性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信