Our college was required to shift mid-semester to an online learning environment to respond to the COVID-19 pandemic. Within the context of the Scientist-Educator Model, we explored how this crisis (and the reaction) impacted courses and students. To understand instructor characteristics that impacted student perceptions of support, we analyzed end-ofcourse feedback from two different courses: introduction to psychology and research methods. Specific instructor factors predicted how students felt with regards to learning, emotional, and technical aspects of support. Learning support was predicted by instructor preparation, organization, deeper understanding, and respectful environments. Emotional support was predicted by deeper understanding and comfort seeking help. Technical support was predicted only by comfort seeking help. Overall course ratings were linked to learning and emotional support, but not technical support. Qualitative data supported quantitative findings: both courses shared nine themes for each question with varying frequencies reported. Using effective pedagogy, and being caring, understanding, and available were recognized by both groups as the most important qualities of a supportive instructor.

No abstract

Educational scholars continue to emphasize the confirmed value of high-impact course experiences to enhance learning (Kuh, 2008). Kuh reports that impactful experiences designed to develop diversity and global learning often include explorations of "difficult differences" that expose students to " : : : cultures, life experiences, and worldviews different from their own." Although exploration of "difficult differences" is a worthy goal, it can vary in how it is executed and, consequently, vary in strength of impact. Over the past decade, we applied the Scientist-Educator Model (SEM) in Biopsychology, Sensation and Perception, and Class, Race and Ethnicity in Society courses to design and assess high-impact learning experiences. We used SEM to design interventions that would develop Respect for Human Dignity (RFHD) and assessments to evaluate results. We drew from the literature on prejudice reduction to develop interventions, which involved face-to-face (F2F) experiences with "others" who had sensory challenges, brain/spinal cord injuries, or homelessness. SEM was useful because it guided us through systematic, iterative steps focused on improving student learning. This article discusses how we used SEM to make evidence-based decisions about developing/assessing RFHD through high-impact F2F experiences, as well as how these interventions and assessments can be adapted to other courses.

Academic institutions are now expected to engage in developing and assessing learning outcomes; however, responsibility outcomes, such as respect for human dignity (RFHD), can be particularly challenging. As part of our Biopsychology course and Sensation and Perception course over the past decade, we applied the scientist-educator model of learning and drew from the literature on prejudice reduction to develop our RFHD interventions, which involved face-to-face interactions with others who had sensory deficits or brain/spinal cord injuries. We iteratively created two pre-post measures to assess development of different aspects of RFHD: a Behavioral Tendencies Questionnaire and a 4-Factor RFHD Model Questionnaire. Recently, we modified the intervention and the assessments for adoption in our Class, Race, and Ethnicity in Society course. This paper reports findings from these three courses and a control course in engineering (n = 153). Findings support our two sets of hypotheses, regarding 1) the efficacy of the assessments to capture different likelihoods for interacting with others targeted by the interventions and changes over time in these factors, and 2) positive effects of the face-to-face intervention activities. This study demonstrates RFHD can be developed and assessed in a college course and provides new assessments for RFHD that are easily modified for a variety of types of others (e.g., individuals who are homeless versus blind or of a particular race).