The Impact and Feasibility of an Optional Experiential Learning Activity and Study Sessions on Student Engagement
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: With expanding class sizes, it is important to develop learning initiatives to increase student engagement. Studies have found large class size to be associated with decreased engagement – a construct strongly associated with learning and performance outcomes. Experiential learning activities and study sessions, which address the four underlying predictors of engagement identified in the literature (interest, autonomy, self-efficacy, and belonging), may effectively engage students and improve their academic performance. Objective: To examine the impact and feasibility of an optional experiential learning activity and study sessions on student course engagement and academic performance. Methods: An intervention study was conducted in two large first and second year undergraduate nutrition courses at University of Guelph, Ontario, in fall 2012 and winter 2013. All students (n = 980) were invited to participate in an out-of-class optional experiential learning activity and study sessions. The experiential learning activity involved completion of, and reflection on, a 3-day food record, a tour of a health assessment research lab, and body composition (% body fat) assessment. Study sessions were instructor-led and addressed study/ test-taking strategies difficult course content, and review of practice questions. To examine impact on student engagement and academic performance, baseline and follow-up Classroom Survey of Student Engagement scores and %tile ranks, respectively, were compared. Participation rates and results from satisfaction surveys were used to examine feasibility. Results: There was an increase from baseline to follow-up in both student engagement (Active and Collaborative Learning 22.1% increase, p < .001; Student-Faculty Interaction 11.2%, p = .038; Level of Academic Challenge 15.6%, p < .001) and performance (%tile rank ΔM = 7.63). One hundred seventy-two (17.6%) students participated in the experiential learning activity, and attendance per study session ranged from 4 to 29 students. Satisfaction survey results indicate students became more interested in the course after participating in the experiential learning activity. Students appreciated the instructors’ support in offering study sessions. No further conclusions about study sessions can be made due to low attendance. Conclusion: Results suggest an experiential learning activity can generate interest and increase engagement and performance in large undergraduate nutrition courses.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.008 | 0.018 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".