A Phenomenological Exploration of Comprehensive Exam Efficacy to Understand Student and Faculty Perception about Its Influence on Their Learning Outcomes and Teaching Efficacies

Literaturnachweis - Detailanzeige

Trefferliste

Autor/in	Connolly, Chris L.
Titel	A Phenomenological Exploration of Comprehensive Exam Efficacy to Understand Student and Faculty Perception about Its Influence on Their Learning Outcomes and Teaching Efficacies
Quelle	(2022), (165 Seiten) PDF als Volltext Verfügbarkeit Ed.D. Dissertation, Drexel University
Sprache	englisch
Dokumenttyp	gedruckt; online; Monographie
ISBN	979-8-4387-4767-3
Schlagwörter	Hochschulschrift; Dissertation; Student Evaluation; Military Schools; Student Attitudes; Personal Autonomy; Resilience (Psychology); Student Motivation; Teacher Attitudes; Self Efficacy; Tests; Student Centered Learning; Outcomes of Education; Graduate Study + Suchen Sie Ihr Suchwort? Thesis; Dissertations; Academic thesis; Schulnote; Studentische Bewertung; Militärschule; Schülerverhalten; Individuelle Autonomie; Schulische Motivation; Lehrerverhalten; Self-efficacy; Selbstwirksamkeit; Examination; Prüfung; Examen; Group work; Student-entered learning; Student-centred learning; Student centred learning; Schülerorientierter Unterricht; Schülerzentrierter Unterricht; Gruppenarbeit; Lernleistung; Schulerfolg; Aufbaustudium; Graduiertenstudium; Hauptstudium
Abstract	The purpose of this phenomenological study is to explore and examine the influence of a comprehensive exam assessment instrument on student learning in a professional military education (PME) program. While the U.S. Army Command and General Staff School (CGSS) has adopted a summative assessment to evaluate student learning at the end of their PME program, additional research is needed about how a comprehensive exam affects student attitudes regarding autonomy, resilience, motivation to learn, as well as faculty attitudes about self-efficacy. This research began from a pragmatic constructivist paradigm and used a phenomenological approach to examine the effects of the exam on former student and former faculty experiences, which included motivations on learning, resilience, self-efficacy, and the use of comprehensive exams as an assessment tool. Literature threads included military officer student attributes, motivations, and resilience; followed by a second thread that examined instructor self-efficacy. The final thread of the framework examined differing perspectives on the efficacy of comprehensive exams as part of assessing student learning, especially at the graduate level. Data was gathered using semi-structured interviews, observations of a study group, and a researcher's journal, followed by analysis for emergent themes and trends. The study's results indicate that misaligned initial expectations between former student participants, former faculty participants, and the purpose of the comprehensive exam have impacted motivations to learn and self-efficacy. Further, emotional reactions to various interactions within the course have shaped student perceptions and motivations, and that their judgement on the value of learning, teaching, and the exam was largely driven by how they made sense of the experience. Recommendations for practice include developing an improved method for sharing understanding of the purpose of the comprehensive exam early in the course and then cultivating emotional intelligence skills within instructors to manage student expectations. A corollary effort would be to provide students a useful assessment of their initial study skills; participants discovered their shortcomings too late in the course. As well, adding comprehensive written feedback from the comprehensive exam to student portfolios should be considered. Future research could examine how the inclusion of a comprehensive exam impacts the Army's desire for a learner-centric curriculum; as well as examination of the impact of the feedback that students receive from their oral board performance as it relates to the Army's requirement to develop life-long learners. [The dissertation citations contained here are published with the permission of ProQuest LLC. Further reproduction is prohibited without permission. Copies of dissertations may be obtained by Telephone (800) 1-800-521-0600. Web page: http://www.proquest.com/en-US/products/dissertations/individuals.shtml.] (As Provided).
Anmerkungen	ProQuest LLC. 789 East Eisenhower Parkway, P.O. Box 1346, Ann Arbor, MI 48106. Tel: 800-521-0600; Web site: http://www.proquest.com/en-US/products/dissertations/individuals.shtml
Erfasst von	ERIC (Education Resources Information Center), Washington, DC
Update	2024/1/01