About this paper

Appears in:
Pages: 2136-2145
Publication year: 2011
ISBN: 978-84-615-3324-4
ISSN: 2340-1095

Conference name: 4th International Conference of Education, Research and Innovation
Dates: 14-16 November, 2011
Location: Madrid, Spain

SUPPLEMENTAL INSTRUCTION: PROACTIVE VERSUS REACTIVE IMPLEMENTATIONS

E. Weeden, W. Gilmore

Rochester Institute of Technology (UNITED STATES)
Supplemental Instruction (SI) has been offered at Rochester Institute of Technology (RIT) for several years. The Information Sciences and Technologies department (IST) has utilized SI for a three-course programming sequence that students pursuing a Bachelor of Science degree in Information Technology (IT), or other IT-related computing degrees, take during their first three quarters at RIT. These courses were identified as candidates for SI due to the high rates of low or failing grades and course withdrawals.

The SI support received has been consistent with the philosophy of The International Center for Supplemental Instruction (Overview of Supplemental, 2011). This philosophy supports peer-assisted, optional study sessions led by an SI Leader, which is a student that was previously successful in completing the respective course. During weekly sessions, the SI Leader, who also attends all class sessions, facilitates and moderates student discussions focusing on course content to increase understanding and retention.

Initially, SI support was scheduled for “trailer” sections of the programming courses. A “trailer” section is when, a course is offered the quarter after it is in demand by students. For example, students typically take the first programming course in the Fall quarter. A “trailer” section would be offered in the next quarter, Winter quarter, for those students who performed poorly or withdrew from the course in the Fall and needed to repeat it. This approach to SI was reactive because it focused the support to students that have already been unsuccessful in the course.

Recently, the IST department has scheduled SI support in a more proactive manner. SI is now scheduled for the quarter that the respective programming course is in demand, in hopes of saving students that otherwise might have failed or chosen to withdraw from the course. So, for example, instead of offering SI for the first programming course in the Winter quarter, it is now offered in the Fall quarter.

This study will include a comparison of the reactive implementation of SI to the proactive implementation. The comparison will include an analysis of student participation in SI sessions under both implementations and an investigation into the impact of each implementation on student performance in the respective courses.

References:
Overview of Supplemental Instruction. (2011). Retrieved July 12, 2011, from The International Center for Supplemental Instruction, University of Missouri-Kansas City website: http://www.umkc.edu/cad/si/overview.shtml
@InProceedings{WEEDEN2011SUP,
author = {Weeden, E. and Gilmore, W.},
title = {SUPPLEMENTAL INSTRUCTION: PROACTIVE VERSUS REACTIVE IMPLEMENTATIONS},
series = {4th International Conference of Education, Research and Innovation},
booktitle = {ICERI2011 Proceedings},
isbn = {978-84-615-3324-4},
issn = {2340-1095},
publisher = {IATED},
location = {Madrid, Spain},
month = {14-16 November, 2011},
year = {2011},
pages = {2136-2145}}
TY - CONF
AU - E. Weeden AU - W. Gilmore
TI - SUPPLEMENTAL INSTRUCTION: PROACTIVE VERSUS REACTIVE IMPLEMENTATIONS
SN - 978-84-615-3324-4/2340-1095
PY - 2011
Y1 - 14-16 November, 2011
CI - Madrid, Spain
JO - 4th International Conference of Education, Research and Innovation
JA - ICERI2011 Proceedings
SP - 2136
EP - 2145
ER -
E. Weeden, W. Gilmore (2011) SUPPLEMENTAL INSTRUCTION: PROACTIVE VERSUS REACTIVE IMPLEMENTATIONS, ICERI2011 Proceedings, pp. 2136-2145.
User:
Pass: