The Relationship Between Students’ Perceptions of “Good Practices for Undergraduate Education” and the Paradigmatic Development of Disciplines in Course-Taking Behavior

Abstract

Our study uses data from the Wabash National Study of Liberal Arts Education to interrogate the affinity disciplines hypothesis through students’ perceptions of faculty use of six of Chickering and Gamson’s (AAHE Bull 39(7):3–7, 1987) principles of good practice for undergraduate education. We created a proportional scale based on Biglan’s (J Appl Psychol 57(3):195–203, 1973) classification of paradigmatic development (with higher scores on the scale corresponding to students taking a higher proportion of courses in ‘hard’ fields compared to ‘soft’ fields), our study tests differences by the paradigmatic development of the disciplines or fields in which students take their courses within the first year of college. Our findings suggest that as paradigmatic development increases (toward a higher proportion of courses taken in hard disciplines), student perceptions of both faculty use of prompt feedback and faculty use of high expectations/academic challenge decrease, while student perceptions of cooperative learning increase. Further, no statistically significant differences were found between the paradigmatic development of fields in which students’ take their courses and students’ perceptions of faculty use of student-faculty contact, active and collaborative learning, or teaching clarity and organization. This study replicates the findings from Braxton et al. (Res High Educ 39(3):299–318, 1998) using student-level rather than faculty-level reports of faculty use of good teaching practices.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Fig. 1

References

  1. Allison, P. D. (1999). Logistic regression using the SAS system: Theory and application. Cary: SAS Press.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Arum, R., & Roksa, J. (2011). Academically adrift: Limited learning on college campuses. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Biglan, A. (1973). The characteristics of subject matter in difference academic areas. Journal of Applied Psychology, 57(3), 195–203.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Boyer Commission on Educating Undergraduates in the Research University. (1998). Reinventing undergraduate education: A blueprint for America’s research universities. Stony Brook: The Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Braxton, J. M. (1995). Disciplines with an affinity for the improvement of undergraduate education. In N. Hativa & M. Marincovich (Eds.), New directions for teaching and learning—Disciplinary differences in teaching and learning: Implications for practice (Vol. 64, pp. 59–64).

  6. Braxton, J. M., & Hargens, L. L. (1996). Variations among academic disciplines: Analytical frameworks and research. In J. C. Smart (Ed.), Higher education: Handbook of theory and research (Vol. 11, pp. 1–46). New York: Agathon Press.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Braxton, J. M., Olsen, D., & Simmons, A. (1998). Affinity disciplines and the use of principles of good practice for undergraduate education. Research in Higher Education, 39(3), 299–318.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Campbell, T., Der, J. P., Wolf, P. G., Packenham, E., & Abd-Hamid, N. H. (2012). Scientific inquiry in the genetics laboratory: Biologists and university science teacher educators collaborating to increase engagement in science processes. Journal of College Science Teaching, 41(3), 74–81.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Chickering, A. W., & Gamson, Z. F. (1987). Seven principles for good practice in undergraduate education. AAHE Bulletin, 39(7), 3–7.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Chickering, A. W., & Reisser, L. (1993). Education and identity (2nd ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Cruce, T. M., Wolniak, G. C., Seifert, T. A., & Pascarella, E. T. (2006). Impacts of good practices on cognitive development, learning orientations, and graduate degree plans during the first year of college. Journal of College Student Development, 47(4), 365–383.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Donovan, B. M., Moreno Mateos, D., Osborne, J. F., & Bisaccio, D. J. (2014). Revising the Economic Imperative for U.S. STEM Education. PLoS Biology, 12(1), 1–5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Feldman, K. A. (2007). Identifying exemplary teachers and teaching: Evidence from student ratings. In R. P. Perry & J. C. Smart (Eds.), The scholarship of teaching and learning in higher education: An evidence-based perspective (pp. 93–143). New York: Agathon Press.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Feldman, D. C., & Turnley, W. H. (2004). Contingent employment in academic careers: Relative deprivation among adjunct faculty. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 64(2), 284–307.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Goodman, K. M., Baxter Magolda, M., Seifert, T. A., & King, P. M. (2011). Good practices for student learning: Mixed-method evidence from the Wabash National Study. About Campus, 1, 2–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Johnson, D. W., Johnson, R. T., & Smith, K. (2007). The state of cooperative learning in postsecondary and professional settings. Educational Psychological Review, 19, 15–29.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Kezar, A. (2013). New faculty workforce: Drivers, models, and outcomes. New York: TIAA-CREF Research Institute.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Kuhn, T. (1962). The structure of scientific revolutions. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Kuhn, T. S. (1970). The structure of scientific revolutions. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  20. LeClercq, T. (1999). Principle 4: Good practice gives prompt feedback. Journal of Legal Education, 49(3), 418.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Lodahl, J. B., & Gordon, G. (1972). The structure of scientific fields and the functioning of university graduate departments. American Sociological Review, 37, 57–72.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Lounsbury, M., & Pollack, S. (2001). Institutionalizing civic engagement: Shifting logics and the cultural repackaging of service-learning in U. S. higher education. Organization, 8(2), 319–339.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. McPherson, P., & Shulenburger, D. (2006). Improving student learning in higher education through better accountability and assesment. Washington, DC: National Association of State Universities and Land-Grant Colleges.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Mervis, J. (2001). Student research: What is it good for? Science, 293(5535), 1614–1615.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Millis, B. J. (2009). Becoming an effective teacher using cooperative learning: A personal odyssey. Peer Review, 11(2), 17.

    Google Scholar 

  26. Mills, B. J. (2010). Why faculty should adopt cooperative learning approaches. In B. J. Mills (Ed.), New pedagogies and practices for teaching in higher education: Cooperative learning in higher education: Across the disciplines, across the academy. Sterling: Stylus Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  27. Nelson Laird, T. F., Bridges, B. K., Morelon-Quainoo, C. L., Williams, J. M., & Holmes, M. S. (2007). African American and Hispanic student engagement at minority serving and predominantly White institutions. Journal of College Student Development, 48(1), 39–56.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Nelson Laird, T. F., & Cruce, T. M. (2009). Individual and environmental effects of part-time enrollment status on student-faculty interaction and self-reported gains. The Journal of Higher Education, 80(3), 290–314.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Padgett, R. D., Keup, J. R., & Pascarella, E. T. (2013). The impact of first-year seminars on college students’ life-long learning orientations. Journal of Student Affairs Research and Practice, 50(2), 133–151.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Pascarella, E. T., Cruce, T., Umbach, P. D., Wolniak, G. C., Kuh, G. D., Carini, R. M., et al. (2006). Institutional selectivity and good practices in undergraduate education: How strong is the link? The Journal of Higher Education, 77(2), 251–285.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Pascarella, E. T., & Terenzini, P. T. (2005). How college affects students: A third decade of research. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  32. Porter, S. R. (2011). Do college student surveys have any validity? Review of Higher Education, 35(1), 45–76.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Prince, M. J., & Felder, R. M. (2006). Inductive teaching and learning methods: Definitions, comparisons, and research bases. Journal of Engineering Education, 95(2), 123–138.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Roschelle, J., Bakia, M., Toyama, Y., & Patton, C. (2011). Eight issues for learning scientists about education and the economy. Journal of Learning Science, 20, 3–49.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Seifert, T., Goodman, K., Lindsay, N., Jorgensen, J., Wolniak, G., Pascarella, E., et al. (2008). The effects of liberal arts experiences on liberal arts outcomes. Research in Higher Education, 49(2), 107–125.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Seifert, T. A., Pascarella, E. T., Goodman, K. M., Salisbury, M. H., & Blaich, C. F. (2010). Liberal arts colleges and good practices in undergraduate education: Additional evidence. Journal of College Student Development, 51(1), 1–22.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Smith, C. (2003). Working systemically to improve the conditions of part-time/adjunct faculty. A case study of the Washington Federation of Teachers’ public and legislative campaign. WorkingUSA, 6(4), 23–31.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Sorincelli, M. D. (1991). Research findings on the seven principles. In A. W. Chickering & Z. F. Gamson (Eds.), Applying the seven principles of good practice in undergraduate educationNew directions for teaching and learning (Vol. 47, pp. 13–25).

  39. Stevens, J. P. (2002). Applied multivariate statistics for the social sciences (Vol. 4). Hillsdale: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  40. Strayhorn, T. L., & DeVita, J. M. (2010). African American males’ student engagement: A comparison of good practices by institutional type. Journal of African American Studies, 14(1), 87–105.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. U. S. Department of Education. (2006). A test of leadership: Charting the future of U.S. higher education. Washington, DC: Author.

    Google Scholar 

  42. Umbach, P. D. (2007). Faculty cultures and college teaching. In R. Perry (Ed.), The scholarship of teaching and learning in higher education: An evidence-based perspective (pp. 263–317). Dordrecht: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  43. Walberg, H. J., & Paik, S. J. (2000). Effective educational practices. Educational Practices Series, 3, 1–23.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The research on which this study was based was supported by a generous grant from the Center of Inquiry in the Liberal Arts at Wabash College to the Center for Research on Undergraduate Education at The University of Iowa.

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Cindy A. Kilgo.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Kilgo, C.A., Culver, K.C., Young, R.L. et al. The Relationship Between Students’ Perceptions of “Good Practices for Undergraduate Education” and the Paradigmatic Development of Disciplines in Course-Taking Behavior. Res High Educ 58, 430–448 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11162-016-9433-z

Download citation

Keywords

  • Good teaching practices
  • Paradigmatic development
  • Curriculum