2019
DOI: 10.21125/iceri.2019.2495
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Developing Embedded Program Evaluation and Research Training in Scholarly Learning: An Overview of the Research Assistant Peer Leaders Program as a Model for Undergraduate Research

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

0
1
0

Publication Types

Select...
1

Relationship

0
1

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 1 publication
(1 citation statement)
references
References 0 publications
0
1
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Therefore, we emphasized the analysis of the think-aloud problem-solving interviews rather than merely considering course grades. Second, although χ 2 analysis revealed a significant difference in the ages of PLTL and cPLTL students, we recognize the appeal of “PLTL in pajamas”, wherein students could participate in workshops from anywhere with a reliable Internet connection rather than travel to campus. Finally, while the sample size of interviewees was relatively small, the maximum diversity sampling approach enabled us to uncover critical differences in learning approaches and the meaningfulness of the EPF symbolism among the high-, average-, and low-performing PLTL and cPLTL participants that will inform instructors for their development of curricula, learning activities, and assessments.…”
Section: Limitationsmentioning
confidence: 83%
“…Therefore, we emphasized the analysis of the think-aloud problem-solving interviews rather than merely considering course grades. Second, although χ 2 analysis revealed a significant difference in the ages of PLTL and cPLTL students, we recognize the appeal of “PLTL in pajamas”, wherein students could participate in workshops from anywhere with a reliable Internet connection rather than travel to campus. Finally, while the sample size of interviewees was relatively small, the maximum diversity sampling approach enabled us to uncover critical differences in learning approaches and the meaningfulness of the EPF symbolism among the high-, average-, and low-performing PLTL and cPLTL participants that will inform instructors for their development of curricula, learning activities, and assessments.…”
Section: Limitationsmentioning
confidence: 83%