教学模式是否改变了课程应对校园性暴力的有效性?

IF 1.1 Q3 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH
Katherine M. Johnson, J. Liddell, Alyssa M. Lederer, Sydney Sheffield
{"title":"教学模式是否改变了课程应对校园性暴力的有效性?","authors":"Katherine M. Johnson, J. Liddell, Alyssa M. Lederer, Sydney Sheffield","doi":"10.1177/23733799211057531","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Online coursework is becoming a teaching and learning staple in higher education, especially since the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic. However, there is minimal literature regarding academic courses for campus sexual violence prevention, particularly comparing online versus face-to-face modalities. This study examined whether the effectiveness of a semester-long credit-bearing course (GESS 1900), designed to educate first year college students about correlates of sexual violence in order to ultimately reduce campus sexual violence, differed by instructional mode. Two cohorts had completed GESS 1900 in-person when the COVID-19 pandemic struck; the third cohort was taught entirely online through synchronous instruction and with the exact same faculty instructors and course materials. This created a natural experiment to compare outcomes by instructional mode. We used a quasi-experimental, pretest–posttest survey design to compare in-person (n = 92) versus online (n = 45) GESS 1900 students across eight previously validated attitudinal measures related to gender, sexuality, and sexual violence. Results from a two-way, mixed-factorial ANOVA showed no significant differences related to instructional mode on seven of the eight measures. Findings further showed change over time in the desired direction for all students, regardless of instructional mode; many measures showed different starting points for the two groups, but similar rates of change over time. Thus both in-person and synchronous online versions of GESS 1900 were effective in shaping positive student outcomes. The findings have important implications for educators seeking new or multiple delivery methods to educate college students about the pressing health concern of sexual violence.","PeriodicalId":29769,"journal":{"name":"Pedagogy in Health Promotion","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2021-12-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Does Instructional Mode Alter the Effectiveness of a Curricular Response to Campus Sexual Violence?\",\"authors\":\"Katherine M. Johnson, J. Liddell, Alyssa M. Lederer, Sydney Sheffield\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/23733799211057531\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Online coursework is becoming a teaching and learning staple in higher education, especially since the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic. However, there is minimal literature regarding academic courses for campus sexual violence prevention, particularly comparing online versus face-to-face modalities. This study examined whether the effectiveness of a semester-long credit-bearing course (GESS 1900), designed to educate first year college students about correlates of sexual violence in order to ultimately reduce campus sexual violence, differed by instructional mode. Two cohorts had completed GESS 1900 in-person when the COVID-19 pandemic struck; the third cohort was taught entirely online through synchronous instruction and with the exact same faculty instructors and course materials. This created a natural experiment to compare outcomes by instructional mode. We used a quasi-experimental, pretest–posttest survey design to compare in-person (n = 92) versus online (n = 45) GESS 1900 students across eight previously validated attitudinal measures related to gender, sexuality, and sexual violence. Results from a two-way, mixed-factorial ANOVA showed no significant differences related to instructional mode on seven of the eight measures. Findings further showed change over time in the desired direction for all students, regardless of instructional mode; many measures showed different starting points for the two groups, but similar rates of change over time. Thus both in-person and synchronous online versions of GESS 1900 were effective in shaping positive student outcomes. The findings have important implications for educators seeking new or multiple delivery methods to educate college students about the pressing health concern of sexual violence.\",\"PeriodicalId\":29769,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Pedagogy in Health Promotion\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-12-06\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Pedagogy in Health Promotion\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/23733799211057531\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Pedagogy in Health Promotion","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/23733799211057531","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

在线课程正在成为高等教育的主要教学内容,特别是自2019冠状病毒病大流行爆发以来。然而,关于校园性暴力预防的学术课程的文献很少,特别是比较在线和面对面的模式。本研究考察了一个学期的学分课程(GESS 1900)的有效性,该课程旨在教育一年级大学生性暴力的相关性,以最终减少校园性暴力,其教学模式是否不同。当COVID-19大流行来袭时,两个队列已亲自完成GESS 1900;第三批学生通过同步教学完全在线授课,教师和课程材料完全相同。这创造了一个自然的实验来比较不同教学模式的结果。我们采用准实验、前测后测的调查设计来比较面对面(n = 92)和在线(n = 45) GESS 1900学生对性别、性行为和性暴力的八项态度测量。双向、混合因子方差分析的结果显示,8项测量中有7项与教学模式没有显著差异。研究结果进一步表明,无论采用何种教学模式,随着时间的推移,所有学生的期望方向都会发生变化;许多测量显示,两组人的起点不同,但随着时间的推移,变化的速度相似。因此,GESS 1900的面对面和同步在线版本都有效地塑造了积极的学生成果。这些发现对寻求新的或多种教育方法的教育工作者具有重要意义,这些方法可以教育大学生关于性暴力的紧迫健康问题。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Does Instructional Mode Alter the Effectiveness of a Curricular Response to Campus Sexual Violence?
Online coursework is becoming a teaching and learning staple in higher education, especially since the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic. However, there is minimal literature regarding academic courses for campus sexual violence prevention, particularly comparing online versus face-to-face modalities. This study examined whether the effectiveness of a semester-long credit-bearing course (GESS 1900), designed to educate first year college students about correlates of sexual violence in order to ultimately reduce campus sexual violence, differed by instructional mode. Two cohorts had completed GESS 1900 in-person when the COVID-19 pandemic struck; the third cohort was taught entirely online through synchronous instruction and with the exact same faculty instructors and course materials. This created a natural experiment to compare outcomes by instructional mode. We used a quasi-experimental, pretest–posttest survey design to compare in-person (n = 92) versus online (n = 45) GESS 1900 students across eight previously validated attitudinal measures related to gender, sexuality, and sexual violence. Results from a two-way, mixed-factorial ANOVA showed no significant differences related to instructional mode on seven of the eight measures. Findings further showed change over time in the desired direction for all students, regardless of instructional mode; many measures showed different starting points for the two groups, but similar rates of change over time. Thus both in-person and synchronous online versions of GESS 1900 were effective in shaping positive student outcomes. The findings have important implications for educators seeking new or multiple delivery methods to educate college students about the pressing health concern of sexual violence.
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
3.10
自引率
33.30%
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