ratings of instruction reveal an improvement for faculty who reflect on their approach to instruction through the completion of the FTA curriculum. Results: Research Question Two Research question two queries, do the compare, on the change scores “How two factors of (a) completion and FTA and (b) discipline completers non-participants – – and A Two Way ANOVA was used to evaluate the effects of STEM non-STEM?” completion status and academic disciplines on as well as the effect of the change scores, interaction between the two. The effect of completions was significant (F(1) = 8.61, = p 0.005), though the effects of both discipline (STEM vs. and the interaction non-STEM) were not significant (F(1) = 0.98, = 0.33 and = 0.93, = 0.34, respectively). p F(1) p Table 4.4. Average Change Scores by Completion Status and Academic Discipline Completion Status Academic Discipline N M SD 21 3.86 8.49 Completers non-STEM 16 3.81 7.57 Completers STEM 21 .38 7.06 Non-participants non-STEM 16 -3.06 6.64 Non-participants STEM Table 4.4. shows that the greatest mean value loss belongs to the FTA who belong within the discipline. Minimal gains for FTA STEM within academic disciplines were also found. Overall, the non-STEM within the and academic disciplines both showed almost completers non-STEM STEM four point gains in their student ratings over time. These results give only partial support for hypothesis 2, that difference in will yield a greater average for change scores “The within fields than in the remaining three groups: (1) within completers STEM completers fields, (2) FTA within fields, and (3) FTA non-STEM non-participants STEM within fields.” non-STEM
ratings of instruction reveal an improvement for faculty who reflect on their approach to instruction through the completion of the FTA curriculum. Results: Research Question Two Research question two queries, “How do the change scores compare, on the two factors of (a) completion – completers and FTA non-participants and (b) discipline – STEM and non-STEM?” A Two Way ANOVA was used to evaluate the effects of completion status and academic disciplines on change scores, as well as the effect of the interaction between the two. The effect of completions was significant (F(1) = 8.61, p = 0.005), though the effects of both discipline (STEM vs. non-STEM) and the interaction were not significant (F(1) = 0.98, p = 0.33 and F(1) = 0.93, p = 0.34, respectively). Table 4.4. Average Change Scores by Completion Status and Academic Discipline Completion Status Academic Discipline N M SD Completers non-STEM 21 3.86 8.49 Completers STEM 16 3.81 7.57 Non-participants non-STEM 21 .38 7.06 Non-participants STEM 16 -3.06 6.64 Table 4.4. shows that the greatest mean value loss belongs to the FTA who belong within the STEM discipline. Minimal gains for FTA within non-STEM academic disciplines were also found. Overall, the completers within the non-STEM and STEM academic disciplines both showed almost four point gains in their student ratings over time. These results give only partial support for hypothesis 2, that “The difference in change scores will yield a greater average for completers within STEM fields than in the remaining three groups: (1) completers within non-STEM fields, (2) FTA non-participants within STEM fields, and (3) FTA within non-STEM fields.”
Dissertation-Gebb-WORD-FORMAT.docx