How do male and female faculty members view and use classroom strate-gies?

Lydia Ross, Eugene Judson, Stephen J. Krause, James A. Middleton, Casey Jane Ankeny, Ying Chih Chen, Robert J. Culbertson, Keith D. Hjelmstad, Yong Seok Park, Bethany B. Smith

Research output: Contribution to journalConference article

1 Citation (Scopus)

Abstract

Research indicates differences exist between male and female students regarding preferences for various pedagogical practices, such as collaborative learning. Additionally, we know that students may construe an instructor's gender as influencing their capacity to be role models, teach effectively, and produce scholarship. Less well known is how male and female instructors view specific classroom strategies, as well as how often they use those strategies. To aid understanding, the newly developed Value, Expectancy, and Cost of Testing Educational Reforms Survey (VECTERS) was applied. VECTERS was based on expectancy theory, implying instructor decisions to integrate, or not integrate, classroom strategies are based on (1) perceived value for both students and self, (2) expectation of success, and (3) perceived implementation costs (e.g., time, materials). Responses were collected from 286 engineering faculty members (207 male, 79 female) from 19 institutions. Responses indicated frequency of use, perceptions of value, expectation of success, and cost (e.g., use of TA's, materials) for these classroom strategies: 1. Formative feedback loops 2. Real-world applications 3. Facilitating student-to-student discussions Controlling for course enrollment and years of experience, several significant differences were found. Gender did not differentiate reported use of the strategies, but there were significant differences (p <.05) related to the expectation of success when integrating formative feedback and real-world applications. Women had significantly higher mean scores related to expectations of success for the implementation of formative feedback and real-world applications; however, effect sizes were small (partial eta-squared <.04). Similarly, women indicated that using the strategies of formative feedback and real-world applications had significantly greater value. Also, men were significantly more inclined to view the physical setup of their classroom as hindering implementing formative feedback or initiating student-to-student discussions. There were no differences in perception of costs for any of the strategies between male and female instructors.

Original languageEnglish (US)
JournalASEE Annual Conference and Exposition, Conference Proceedings
Volume2016-June
StatePublished - Jun 26 2016
Event123rd ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition - New Orleans, United States
Duration: Jun 26 2016Jun 29 2016

Fingerprint

Students
Feedback
Costs
Testing
Frequency response

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Engineering(all)

Cite this

Ross, L., Judson, E., Krause, S. J., Middleton, J. A., Ankeny, C. J., Chen, Y. C., ... Smith, B. B. (2016). How do male and female faculty members view and use classroom strate-gies? ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition, Conference Proceedings, 2016-June.
Ross, Lydia ; Judson, Eugene ; Krause, Stephen J. ; Middleton, James A. ; Ankeny, Casey Jane ; Chen, Ying Chih ; Culbertson, Robert J. ; Hjelmstad, Keith D. ; Park, Yong Seok ; Smith, Bethany B. / How do male and female faculty members view and use classroom strate-gies?. In: ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition, Conference Proceedings. 2016 ; Vol. 2016-June.
@article{5afd93d367b5478cac7401338300f601,
title = "How do male and female faculty members view and use classroom strate-gies?",
abstract = "Research indicates differences exist between male and female students regarding preferences for various pedagogical practices, such as collaborative learning. Additionally, we know that students may construe an instructor's gender as influencing their capacity to be role models, teach effectively, and produce scholarship. Less well known is how male and female instructors view specific classroom strategies, as well as how often they use those strategies. To aid understanding, the newly developed Value, Expectancy, and Cost of Testing Educational Reforms Survey (VECTERS) was applied. VECTERS was based on expectancy theory, implying instructor decisions to integrate, or not integrate, classroom strategies are based on (1) perceived value for both students and self, (2) expectation of success, and (3) perceived implementation costs (e.g., time, materials). Responses were collected from 286 engineering faculty members (207 male, 79 female) from 19 institutions. Responses indicated frequency of use, perceptions of value, expectation of success, and cost (e.g., use of TA's, materials) for these classroom strategies: 1. Formative feedback loops 2. Real-world applications 3. Facilitating student-to-student discussions Controlling for course enrollment and years of experience, several significant differences were found. Gender did not differentiate reported use of the strategies, but there were significant differences (p <.05) related to the expectation of success when integrating formative feedback and real-world applications. Women had significantly higher mean scores related to expectations of success for the implementation of formative feedback and real-world applications; however, effect sizes were small (partial eta-squared <.04). Similarly, women indicated that using the strategies of formative feedback and real-world applications had significantly greater value. Also, men were significantly more inclined to view the physical setup of their classroom as hindering implementing formative feedback or initiating student-to-student discussions. There were no differences in perception of costs for any of the strategies between male and female instructors.",
author = "Lydia Ross and Eugene Judson and Krause, {Stephen J.} and Middleton, {James A.} and Ankeny, {Casey Jane} and Chen, {Ying Chih} and Culbertson, {Robert J.} and Hjelmstad, {Keith D.} and Park, {Yong Seok} and Smith, {Bethany B.}",
year = "2016",
month = "6",
day = "26",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "2016-June",
journal = "ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition, Conference Proceedings",
issn = "2153-5965",

}

Ross, L, Judson, E, Krause, SJ, Middleton, JA, Ankeny, CJ, Chen, YC, Culbertson, RJ, Hjelmstad, KD, Park, YS & Smith, BB 2016, 'How do male and female faculty members view and use classroom strate-gies?', ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition, Conference Proceedings, vol. 2016-June.

How do male and female faculty members view and use classroom strate-gies? / Ross, Lydia; Judson, Eugene; Krause, Stephen J.; Middleton, James A.; Ankeny, Casey Jane; Chen, Ying Chih; Culbertson, Robert J.; Hjelmstad, Keith D.; Park, Yong Seok; Smith, Bethany B.

In: ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition, Conference Proceedings, Vol. 2016-June, 26.06.2016.

Research output: Contribution to journalConference article

TY - JOUR

T1 - How do male and female faculty members view and use classroom strate-gies?

AU - Ross, Lydia

AU - Judson, Eugene

AU - Krause, Stephen J.

AU - Middleton, James A.

AU - Ankeny, Casey Jane

AU - Chen, Ying Chih

AU - Culbertson, Robert J.

AU - Hjelmstad, Keith D.

AU - Park, Yong Seok

AU - Smith, Bethany B.

PY - 2016/6/26

Y1 - 2016/6/26

N2 - Research indicates differences exist between male and female students regarding preferences for various pedagogical practices, such as collaborative learning. Additionally, we know that students may construe an instructor's gender as influencing their capacity to be role models, teach effectively, and produce scholarship. Less well known is how male and female instructors view specific classroom strategies, as well as how often they use those strategies. To aid understanding, the newly developed Value, Expectancy, and Cost of Testing Educational Reforms Survey (VECTERS) was applied. VECTERS was based on expectancy theory, implying instructor decisions to integrate, or not integrate, classroom strategies are based on (1) perceived value for both students and self, (2) expectation of success, and (3) perceived implementation costs (e.g., time, materials). Responses were collected from 286 engineering faculty members (207 male, 79 female) from 19 institutions. Responses indicated frequency of use, perceptions of value, expectation of success, and cost (e.g., use of TA's, materials) for these classroom strategies: 1. Formative feedback loops 2. Real-world applications 3. Facilitating student-to-student discussions Controlling for course enrollment and years of experience, several significant differences were found. Gender did not differentiate reported use of the strategies, but there were significant differences (p <.05) related to the expectation of success when integrating formative feedback and real-world applications. Women had significantly higher mean scores related to expectations of success for the implementation of formative feedback and real-world applications; however, effect sizes were small (partial eta-squared <.04). Similarly, women indicated that using the strategies of formative feedback and real-world applications had significantly greater value. Also, men were significantly more inclined to view the physical setup of their classroom as hindering implementing formative feedback or initiating student-to-student discussions. There were no differences in perception of costs for any of the strategies between male and female instructors.

AB - Research indicates differences exist between male and female students regarding preferences for various pedagogical practices, such as collaborative learning. Additionally, we know that students may construe an instructor's gender as influencing their capacity to be role models, teach effectively, and produce scholarship. Less well known is how male and female instructors view specific classroom strategies, as well as how often they use those strategies. To aid understanding, the newly developed Value, Expectancy, and Cost of Testing Educational Reforms Survey (VECTERS) was applied. VECTERS was based on expectancy theory, implying instructor decisions to integrate, or not integrate, classroom strategies are based on (1) perceived value for both students and self, (2) expectation of success, and (3) perceived implementation costs (e.g., time, materials). Responses were collected from 286 engineering faculty members (207 male, 79 female) from 19 institutions. Responses indicated frequency of use, perceptions of value, expectation of success, and cost (e.g., use of TA's, materials) for these classroom strategies: 1. Formative feedback loops 2. Real-world applications 3. Facilitating student-to-student discussions Controlling for course enrollment and years of experience, several significant differences were found. Gender did not differentiate reported use of the strategies, but there were significant differences (p <.05) related to the expectation of success when integrating formative feedback and real-world applications. Women had significantly higher mean scores related to expectations of success for the implementation of formative feedback and real-world applications; however, effect sizes were small (partial eta-squared <.04). Similarly, women indicated that using the strategies of formative feedback and real-world applications had significantly greater value. Also, men were significantly more inclined to view the physical setup of their classroom as hindering implementing formative feedback or initiating student-to-student discussions. There were no differences in perception of costs for any of the strategies between male and female instructors.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84983372671&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84983372671&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Conference article

AN - SCOPUS:84983372671

VL - 2016-June

JO - ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition, Conference Proceedings

JF - ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition, Conference Proceedings

SN - 2153-5965

ER -