Affiliation:
1. University of Central Florida, Orlando
2. University of North Carolina at Charlotte
Abstract
Many institutions with Supplemental Instruction (SI) programs require that SI measure its various impacts and outcomes. Staffing and budget decisions are frequently made based on this information. For efficiency in general, the impact and outcome of every college and university department, program, and service should provide this kind of information. In reality, only a few departments, programs, and services in higher education are actually required to measure their impact. SI is one program where this expectation is high. Therefore, it is useful for SI Supervisors to understand a variety of methods which may be employed to assess the impacts of SI. Some of the ways to measure SI's impact are quantifiable while others are determined through anecdotal and descriptive means. This article presents three categories of approaches to assess the impact of SI on an institution: anecdotal information, descriptive statistics, and inferential statistics. For SI programs required to justify existence, the methods in this article will make that job easier as it presents a range of assessment devices from simple testimony to rigorous inferential statistical data.
Reference7 articles.
1. Arendale D. & Martin D. C. (1997). Review of research concerning the effectiveness of Supplemental Instruction from the University of Missouri-Kansas City and other institutions (pp. 58–59). Kansas City, MO: The University of Missouri-Kansas City. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 370 502).
2. National Center for Supplemental Instruction (1997). Review of research concerning the effectiveness of SI from the University of Missouri at Kansas City and other institutions from across the United States (pp. 14, 17–18). Kansas City: MO: National Center for Supplemental Instruction.
Cited by
10 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献