The effectiveness of direct -instruction and student -centered teaching methods on students' functional understanding of plagiarism

In an attempt to improve students' functional understanding of plagiarism a variety of approaches were tried within the context of a more comprehensive information literacy program. Sessions were taught as a one hour "module" inside a required communications skills class at a small private university. Approaches taken included control sessions (a straightforward PowerPoint presentation of the material), direct instruction sessions (featuring mostly direct lecture but with some seatwork as well), and student-centered sessions (utilizing role playing and group exercises). Students were taught basic content and definitions regarding plagiarism, what circumstances or instances constitute plagiarism, where to go for help in avoiding plagiarism, and what constitutes appropriate paraphrasing and citation. Pre-test and post-test scores determined students' functional understanding primarily by their ability to recognize properly and improperly paraphrased text, content understanding by their combined total score on a multiple choice quiz, and their attitude and conceptual understanding by their ability to recognize circumstances which would constitute plagiarism. While students improved across all methods the study was unable to identify one that performed significantly better than the others. The results supported the need for more education with regard to plagiarism and suggested a need for perhaps more time on task and/or a mixed approach towards conveying the content.

The effects of student -centered and traditional models of teaching on reading skills

A pre-test, post-test, quasi-experimental design was used to examine the effects of student-centered and traditional models of reading instruction on outcomes of literal comprehension and critical thinking skills. The sample for this study consisted of 101 adult students enrolled in a high-level developmental reading course at a large, urban community college in the Southeastern United States. The experimental group consisted of 48 students, and the control group consisted of 53 students. Students in the experimental group were limited in the time spent reading a course text of basic skills, with instructors using supplemental materials such as poems, news articles, and novels. Discussions, the reading-writing connection, and student choice in material selection were also part of the student-centered curriculum. Students in the control group relied heavily on a course text and vocabulary text for reading material, with great focus placed on basic skills. Activities consisted primarily of multiple-choice questioning and quizzes. The instrument used to collect pre-test data was Descriptive Tests of Language Skills in Reading Comprehension; post-test data were taken from the Florida College Basic Skills Exit Test. A MANCOVA was used as the statistical method to determine if either model of instruction led to significantly higher gains in literal comprehension skills or critical thinking skills. A paired samples t-test was also used to compare pre-test and post-test means. The results of the MANCOVA indicated no significant difference between instructional models on scores of literal comprehension and critical thinking. Neither was there any significant difference in scores between subgroups of age (under 25 and 25 and older) and language background (native English speaker and second-language learner). The results of the t-test indicated, however, that students taught under both instructional models made significant gains in on both literal comprehension and critical thinking skills from pre-test to post-test.