Internationalising a learning environment instrument for evaluating transnational online university courses

This article describes the adaptation and validation of the Constructivist OnLine Learning Environment Survey (COLLES) for use in the transnational higher education context. As higher education becomes a more global phenomenon, ‘borderless’ education, either online or by distance education, is becoming a reality and there is a need for remote evaluation of course delivery and student learning. Curtin University of Technology is managing supported online delivery of Business Studies Degree and Diploma courses to four partner institutions of the African Virtual University, an initiative based in Nairobi, Kenya. Evaluation of students’ learning has included an online survey about the provision of resources and the quality of the learning environment in the various computer-based classrooms. Embedded in this instrument has been the adapted COLLES, providing a concomitant opportunity to test the properties and usefulness of the learning environment instrument. Problematic issues surrounding adaptation of the instrument have included the consequences of modifying the wording and establishing or confirming the meaning of the latent constructs in partially online courses and for transnational students. The process of establishing the validity and reliability of the scales is discussed.     

Where did the reference desk go? Transforming staff and space to meet user needs

ABSTRACT

A sharp decline in the number of reference queries prompted the library administration at Indiana State University to begin a project to combine the circulation, reference, and IT desks to reduce staffing at a new consolidated service point. All faculty and staff in the reference/instruction and circulation units participated in the project. The new arrangement and subsequent removal of librarians from routine desk duties have expanded instructional opportunities, consistent with the university's goals. Project participants plan further assessments to better determine the impacts of the new service arrangements.     

Aggressive versus Withdrawn Unpopular Children: Variations in Peer and Self-Perceptions in Multiple Domains

The present study examines whether subgroups of unpopular children differ in terms of competence in multiple domains. Specifically, subgroups of aggressive unpopular, withdrawn unpopular, and aggressive-withdrawn unpopular and average status children were identified on the basis of peer evaluations. The subgroups were then compared in terms of peer and self-perceptions of competence in various nonsocial and social domains. Results indicated that the 3 subgroups of unpopular children exhibited distinct profiles according to peer perceptions, with aggressive-withdrawn unpopular children being viewed as deficient in virtually every area assessed, and aggressive unpopular and withdrawn unpopular children viewed as exhibiting particular strengths and weaknesses across domains. In terms of self-perceptions, results indicated that withdrawn-unpopular children expressed more accurate, but negative self-evaluations, while children in the aggressive subgroups tended to overestimate their competencies.     

The impact of multisensory instruction on learning letter names and sounds,word reading,and spelling

The purpose of this study was to investigate whether the use of simultaneous multisensory structured language instruction promoted better letter name and sound production, word reading, and word spelling for second grade children with typical development (N = 6) or with dyslexia (N = 5) than structured language instruction alone. The use of non-English graphemes (letters) to represent two pretend languages was used to control for children’s lexical knowledge. A multiple baseline, multiple probe across subjects single-case design, with an embedded alternating treatments design, was used to compare the efficacy of multisensory and structured language interventions. Both interventions provided explicit systematic phonics instruction; however, the multisensory intervention also utilized simultaneous engagement of at least two sensory modalities (visual, auditory, and kinesthetic/tactile). Participant’s graphed data was visually analyzed, and individual Tau-U and weighted Tau-U effect sizes were calculated for the outcome variables of letter name production, letter sound production, word reading, and word spelling. The multisensory intervention did not provide an advantage over the structured intervention for participants with typical development or dyslexia. However, both interventions had an overall treatment effect for participants with typical development and dyslexia, although intervention effects varied by outcome variable.