I conducted the following analyses for my mentored teaching project that examined how different forms of communicating primary research could influence retention of lecture and assigned reading material.
Descriptive Statistics:
1. There were no significant differences in the number of correct responses on assessment 1 between the group who wrote their summaries in the style of a newspaper article vs. the traditional summary style group (t(16) = 1.14; p = 0.27).
2. There were no significant differences in the number of correct responses on assessment 2 (taken 2 weeks after the original assessment) between the group who wrote their summaries in the style of a newspaper article vs. the traditional summary style group (t(11) = 0.53; p = 0.61).
3. Overall, there was a trend that, regardless of group, scores on assessment 1 was positively correlated with scores on assessment 2 (r(13) = 0.48; p = 0.10). Within groups, assessment 1 did not predict scores on assessment 2 in the traditional group (r(5) = 0.61; p = 0.27) nor the newspaper group (r(8) = 0.52; p = 0.19).
4. There was a trend suggesting that for assessment 1, students in the tradit0onal group answered more questions about the papers they read and wrote summaries about correctly than the newspaper group (t(16) = 1.90; p = 0.07). For assessment 2, there were no significant differences in the number of questions answered correctly regarding the papers they read (t(11) = 0.23; p = 0.82).
5. Of the students in the newspaper group, self-reported length of time to complete the newspaper summary compared to the traditional summary was not associated with the number of correct responses on assessment 1 (r(8) = -0.24; p = 0.48), nor assessment 2 (r(8) = -0.15; p = 0.73).
6. Of the students in the newspaper group, self-reported preference for writing the newspaper summary compared to the traditional summary was not associated with the number of correct responses on assessment 1 (r(8) = -0.08; p = 0.82), nor assessment 2 (r(8) = 0.04; p = 0.92).
Discussion
After conducting several analyses of the data from the PSY 409 class, I have concluded that, for this course, having the students write their summaries in the format of a newspaper article, rather than their traditional style, did not improve comprehension or retention of either course material nor reading material. For some students, the different style may have been too much of an interruption to their normal assignment, and did not provide a way to better understand the material. In addition, the number of students who took assessment 1 (18) was much higher than the number of students present to take assessment 2 (11), and perhaps having the assessment online and timed would have increased the sample size. Students also did not seem to spend much more time doing the newspaper assignment compared to the traditional summary, and they had no preference over one or the other. Given the option, I would have had the other half of the class do the newspaper style for the next assignment, while the original newspaper group returned back to the traditional style to do a cross-over design to be able to analyze the entire class. Although changing the communication style was not effective to improve comprehension and retention of course material, I would still be curious to observe such effects in a larger course.
Descriptive Statistics:
- 12 students were assigned into the traditional-style summary group, and 12 students were assigned to the newspaper-style summary group
- For assessment 1, there was a sample size of 18 (7 traditional, 11 newspaper), and for assessment 2 there was a sample size of 13 (5 traditional; 8 newspaper).
- Average length of time to do the newspaper assignment vs. traditional: 4.55 (SD+/- 1.12)/7 (about equal time)
- Average preference for the newspaper assignment vs. traditional: 4.09 (SD+/-1.51/7) (about equal preference)
1. There were no significant differences in the number of correct responses on assessment 1 between the group who wrote their summaries in the style of a newspaper article vs. the traditional summary style group (t(16) = 1.14; p = 0.27).
2. There were no significant differences in the number of correct responses on assessment 2 (taken 2 weeks after the original assessment) between the group who wrote their summaries in the style of a newspaper article vs. the traditional summary style group (t(11) = 0.53; p = 0.61).
3. Overall, there was a trend that, regardless of group, scores on assessment 1 was positively correlated with scores on assessment 2 (r(13) = 0.48; p = 0.10). Within groups, assessment 1 did not predict scores on assessment 2 in the traditional group (r(5) = 0.61; p = 0.27) nor the newspaper group (r(8) = 0.52; p = 0.19).
4. There was a trend suggesting that for assessment 1, students in the tradit0onal group answered more questions about the papers they read and wrote summaries about correctly than the newspaper group (t(16) = 1.90; p = 0.07). For assessment 2, there were no significant differences in the number of questions answered correctly regarding the papers they read (t(11) = 0.23; p = 0.82).
5. Of the students in the newspaper group, self-reported length of time to complete the newspaper summary compared to the traditional summary was not associated with the number of correct responses on assessment 1 (r(8) = -0.24; p = 0.48), nor assessment 2 (r(8) = -0.15; p = 0.73).
6. Of the students in the newspaper group, self-reported preference for writing the newspaper summary compared to the traditional summary was not associated with the number of correct responses on assessment 1 (r(8) = -0.08; p = 0.82), nor assessment 2 (r(8) = 0.04; p = 0.92).
Discussion
After conducting several analyses of the data from the PSY 409 class, I have concluded that, for this course, having the students write their summaries in the format of a newspaper article, rather than their traditional style, did not improve comprehension or retention of either course material nor reading material. For some students, the different style may have been too much of an interruption to their normal assignment, and did not provide a way to better understand the material. In addition, the number of students who took assessment 1 (18) was much higher than the number of students present to take assessment 2 (11), and perhaps having the assessment online and timed would have increased the sample size. Students also did not seem to spend much more time doing the newspaper assignment compared to the traditional summary, and they had no preference over one or the other. Given the option, I would have had the other half of the class do the newspaper style for the next assignment, while the original newspaper group returned back to the traditional style to do a cross-over design to be able to analyze the entire class. Although changing the communication style was not effective to improve comprehension and retention of course material, I would still be curious to observe such effects in a larger course.