Pool area, Cheverton Residence Hall [originally East Hall], Chapman College, Orange, California

Around the pool area, Cheverton Residence Hall [originally East Hall], Chapman University, Orange, California, ca. 1978. Dedicated in 1959 and torn down in 2002.

Swimming pool, Cheverton Residence Hall [originally East Hall], Chapman College, Orange, California

Swimming pool for Cheverton Residence Hall [originally East Hall], Chapman College, Orange, California, ca. 1978. The dormitory was dedicated in 1959 as housing for women and torn down in 2002.

Chapman College Child Study Center, Orange, California

Staff and children seated outside the Chapman College Child Study Center, North Center Street, Orange, California.

Chapman College Child Study Center, Orange, California

View of the front exterior of the Chapman College Child Study Center, North Center Street, Orange, California, 1979.

Chapman College Child Study Center play area

Chapman College Child Study Center playground, with three children on a tire swing.

Chapman College Child Study Center

Garage and play area at the Chapman College Child Study Center, Orange, California.

Chapman College Child Study Center play area, Orange, California

Chapman College Child Study Center play area, Orange, California

Professor Fred Smoller, Child Study Center, Chapman College, Orange, California

Professor Fred Smoller, Child Study Center, Chapman College, Orange, California, June, 1990.

Chapman College Child Study Center

Chapman College Child Study Center, North Center Street, Orange, California, June, 1990.

Child Study Center, Chapman College, Orange, California

Professor Fred Smoller, Child Study Center, Chapman College, Orange, California, June, 1990.

Chapman College Child Study Center

Renovation work on the Chapman College Child Study Center, Orange, California, ca. 1990.

Chapman College Child Study Center

Renovation work on the Chapman College Child Study Center, Orange, California, ca. 1990.

Chapman College Child Study Center play area

Playground area for the Chapman College Child Study Center, Orange, California, June, 1990.

Learning styles and achievement in postsecondary classrooms

The purpose of this study was to investigate the relationship between learning styles and academic achievement in postsecondary education. It was the intent of the study to establish if there was a relationship between student learning style, teacher style, learner/teacher matching and/or mismatching, student gender and age, to the academic grades of students. This study was basically a replication of a study completed by Mary J. Thompson and Terrance P. O'Brien in 1991 on two campuses of a southeast community college in the United States. In the present study, 243 students and 18 teachers from two different campuses of a community college in the Province of Ontario participated in the research. All participants were administered the Gregorc Style Delineator and students identified by program, age and gender. Data were tested by two analysis of variance (ANOVA) models. In the first ANOVA model considered in this study, significant main effects were manifested in regard to the teaching style, age group and gender. With the exception of gender, these findings were very similiar to those of the original study. Duncan's multiple range test revealed that Concrete Sequential (CS) teachers assigned significantly lower grades than did teachers dominant in any of the other three learning styles. Post hoc testing revealed that students 25 years of age and older received significantly higher grades than did younger students. Female students also received significantly higher grades than did male students. In the second ANOVA model student/teacher learning style match/mismatch did emerge as a significant main effect. However, Duncan's multiple range test and Chi square analysis did not substantiate the relationship. Forty-eight references are cited.

Exploring the potential of early identification and intervention within a college of applied arts

This study probed for an answer to the question, "How do you identify as early as possible those students who are at risk of failing or dropping out of college so that intervention can take place?" by field testing two diagnostic instruments with a group of first semester Seneca College Computer ,Studies students. In some respects, the research approach was such as might be taken in a pilot study_ Because of the complexity of the issue, this study did not attempt to go beyond discovery, understanding and description. Although some inferences may be drawn from the results of the study, no attempt was made to establish any causal relationship between or among the factors or variables represented here. Both quantitative and qualitative data were gathered during four resea~ch phases: background, early identification, intervention, and evaluation. To gain a better understanding of the problem of student attrition within the School of Computer Studies at Seneca College, several methods were used, including retrospective analysis of enrollment statistics, faculty and student interviews and questionnaires, and tracking of the sample population. The significance of the problem was confirmed by the results of this study. The findings further confirmed the importance of the role of faculty in student retention and support the need to improve the quality of teacher/student interaction. As well, the need for skills assessmen~-followed by supportive counselling, and placement was supported by the findings from this study. strategies for reducing student attrition were identified by faculty and students. As part of this study, a project referred to as "A Student Alert Project" (ASAP) was undertaken at the School of Computer Studies at Seneca college. Two commercial diagnostic instruments, the Noel/Levitz College Student Inventory (CSI) and the Learning and Study Strategies Inventory (LASSI), provided quantitative data which were subsequently analyzed in Phase 4 in order to assess their usefulness as early identification tools. The findings show some support for using these instruments in a two-stage approach to early identification and intervention: the CSI as an early identification instrument and the LASSI as a counselling tool for those students who have been identified as being at risk. The findings from the preliminary attempts at intervention confirmed the need for a structured student advisement program where faculty are selected, trained, and recognized for their advisor role. Based on the finding that very few students acted on the diagnostic results and recommendations, the need for institutional intervention by way of intrusive measures was confirmed.